BULLETIN 361 BULLETN 1965 361OCTOBER Il1rLiITIOAS (0f ILLOTMEVI'S on optiliuin FilrmI Or-giiziatioii and Supply Rel'ationshiips in Two Alahaitia Areas AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION AUBURN E. V. Smith, Director UNIVERSITY. Auburn, Alabama iL SUMMARY The study reported in this bulletin was designed to provide guidelines for use by farm policy makers in considering policy alternatives and by those who are affected by policy changes. The objectives were to determine the profit maximizing combinations of enterprises for several resource situations in the Limestone Valleys and Wiregrass of Alabama under alternative levels of prices and acreage allotments for cotton and peanuts; to determine the aggregate effects of the adoption of such adjustments; and to compare results of this study with those obtained for these areas when no allotment restrictions were placed on cotton or peanuts. Optimum combinations of enterprises at the selected cotton allotment levels and price ranges were determined for four representative farm resource situations in both the Limestone Valleys and Wiregrass. In addition, optimum combinations of enterprises at selected peanut allotment levels and price ranges were determined for the four representative farms in the Wiregrass. The resulting optimum farm programs were then expanded by selected aggregation models under 1959 and projected 1975 farm size distributions to determine the aggregate effects of these adjustments. Cotton and peanut production estimates from the aggregate data represent conditionally predictive cotton and peanut supply curves for the areas. These supply curves were compared with estimated free market supply curves for the same areas. Finally, net return targets were set for each area and cotton and peanut price requirements for iso-net returns were computed. In the Limestone Valleys, the optimum farm organizations included all allotted acreages of cotton on the small farm when the price was at or above 23.5 cents per pound of lint, on the medium farm when the cotton price was at or above 24.5 cents, and on the large and extra large farms at all cotton prices programmed. In the Wiregrass, with peanut acreage restricted to the 1963 allotment level, the optimum programs included all the allotted acreages of cotton when the price was at 20.01 cents or above for the small farm, at 21.1 cents or above for the medium farm, and at all prices programmed for the large and extra large farms. Also, in the Wiregrass with cotton acreage restricted to the 1963 allotment level, the optimum programs included all the allotted acreages of peanuts when the price was $104.50 per ton or above for the small farm, $110.50 or above for the medium farm, and at all prices programmed for the large and extra large farms. In comparison with the free market supply curves, all cotton allotment levels used in this study placed restrictions on aggregate cotton production at prices above 19.1 cents per pound of lint in the Limestone Valleys and 21.1 cents in the Wiregrass. For peanuts in the Wiregrass, all allotment levels were restrictive when compared with the free market supply curve at prices above $119.50 per ton. For the iso-net return analysis, the target aggregate net return was obtained with the 85 per cent allotment level and a 31.2cent cotton price in the Limestone Valleys and 30.0-cent cotton in the Wiregrass. When the allotment acreage was reduced from the 85 to the 55 per cent level, the target net return level would be maintained with a cotton price of at least 38.7 cents in the Limestone Valleys and 35.3 cents in the Wiregrass. Conversely, with an allotment increase from the 85 to the 115 per cent level, the target net returns would be maintained with a cotton price of at least 27.9 cents in the Limestone Valleys and 27.5 cents in the Wiregrass. With no allotment restrictions, the cotton price would still have to be above 25.2 cents in the Limestone Valleys and 24.2 cents in the Wiregrass to maintain the target net return level. The target aggregate return for peanuts was that obtained with the 85 per cent allotment level and a price of $210 per ton. When the allotment level was decreased from 85 to the 70 per cent, a peanut price of at least $233.18 was required for farmers to obtain the net return target. However, an equal increase in allotments from the 85 to the 100 per cent level would allow the peanut price to drop no further than $198.48 and still yield the net return target. With no allotment restrictions on peanuts, the peanut price would have to be in excess of $145.95 per ton to meet the net return target. CONTENTS Page SU M M AR Y - --- - - -- - -- - - ---- - -- - - - - - - --- - -- - - - - - - - - 2 IN TRODU CTION .------- ----------- -------------- 5 Review of Regional Project6 Ob jective s - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 7 Description of Areas-- ----------- --- - -8 Farm and Area Supply Response-10 ---- - - A SSU M PTIO N S ------ --- ------ - ---- - -- ---- -- --- - -- - - - 10 La n d - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 1 Ca pita l -- - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - 12 -12 Enterprise Activities -----------------Representative Farms ----------13 Resource and Product Prices and Allotment Levels 15 OPTIMUM FARM ORGANIZATION ------------------------- 16 ------------------------------ 16 Wiregrass A rea------------------------------------17 Limestone Valley Area AGGREGATE AREA SUPPLY RESPONSE --------------------- 18 A ggregate M odels----------------------------------19 A ggregate D ata------------------------------------20 Iso-N et Return Analysis ----------------------------- 21 ----------------. C ON CLU SIO NS ------------------------- 30 RE FER E NC E S - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - -- 32 A PP END IX - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -33 ACKNOW LEDGM ENT-------------------------------------58 FIRST PRINTING 3M, OCTOBER 1965 IMPLICATIONS of ALLOTMENTS on Optimum Farm Organization and Supply Relationships in Two Alabama Areas NEIL R. MARTIN, JR.,* EARL J. PARTENHEIMER,** and P. LEO STRICKLAND, JR.*** INTRODUCTION THE United States has experienced a period of prosperity with high incomes, relatively high employment, and vast growth since the depression of the 1930's. Recessions have been mild and severe depressions have been avoided. While the general economy has experienced the most prosperous period in history, the agricultural segment has not been as prosperous. During this period, except for the years of World War II, agriculture has encountered problems of declining real incomes and relatively low rates of return on resources. Income problems of farmers have led to government farm programs with an objective to help the farmer attain a more equitable income. Some farm programs administered today are designed to support agricultural prices and bring production into a more favorable balance with demand. Among commodities included in the programs, only cotton and peanuts are grown * Formerly Graduate Assistant, Department of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn University, and presently, Agricultural Economist, Farm Production Economics Division, Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. ** Associate Professor, Department of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn University, resigned. *** Agricultural Economist, Farm Production Economics Division, Economics Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. 6 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION extensively in Alabama. Programs on these two commodities have supported prices and controlled production through acreage allotments. Although cotton acreage has been cut by more than one-third since the 1930's, yield per acre has continued to increase; thus total production has remained at a high level. Carryover stocks of cotton for the past decade have been above 50 per cent of the annual cotton production. The high level of domestic cotton prices has also caused some difficulties. The United States has been losing some of its export markets, and the synthetic fibers industry has expanded and made vast technological advances. Peanut acreage has also been cut substantially by acreage allotment programs, but both production and carryover stocks remain at high levels. Approximately 20 per cent of annual production is purchased by the Commodity Credit Corporation at the price support level. Since farm incomes and returns to agricultural resources remain generally below the nonfarm economy, alternative farm programs are being considered and discussed. Thus, it should prove helpful to provide more economic guidelines for use by persons responsible for formulating future farm programs. One such economic guideline would be information on the response of farmers to alternative levels of prices and allotments for a given commodity. REVIEW OF REGIONAL PROJECT The study reported here is a part of Regional Research Project S-42, "An Economic Appraisal of Farming Adjustment Opportunities in the Southern Region to Meet Changing Conditions." The Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station is one of 12 State Experiment Stations contributing to the project in cooperation with the Economic Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Various parts of this project have been completed and others are presently being conducted. A brief review of the contributing studies that have been completed in Alabama will serve as an illustration of work in the entire region since the other states are applying similar analysis to areas in these states. Two areas were selected in Alabama for intensive study. Land resources, base allotment levels, and farm size distributions were obtained using Soil Conservation Service, Agricultural Stabiliza- ALLOTMENT IMPLICATIONS ON FARM ORGANIZATION 7 tion and Conservation Service, Census, and other data. Input and price coefficients were obtained from production scientists, farmers, farm supply dealers, and experiment station publications. Enterprise budgets were constructed for major enterprises under various resource situations using both current and improved production practices (3,4,6,7). Linear programming and price mapping procedures were used to determine the profit maximizing enterprise organizations over a range of prices for cotton and peanuts. Free markets and partial equilibrium in an intermediate time period were assumed. Effects of other input prices at 30 per cent above and below estimated free market prices were alsordetermined. Finally, optimum programs were expanded by aggregation models to attain projected area production and resource use without acreage controls under each set of assumptions (8,10). In this study, various levels of allotment restrictions for cotton and peanuts were introduced ,into the analysis. Free markets were assumed for all input and other product markets. Also, the partial equilibrium and intermediate length of run assumptions were retained. The resulting data from these studies in all the major cottonand peanut-producing areas of the country will be analyzed on a regional basis. Equilibrium price and quantity combinations will be determined by comparing these regional supply data with approximate demand schedules. This analysis should provide some of the information needed to determine the effects of various policy proposals. OBJECTIVES The general purpose of this study was to determine optimum enterprise combinations and aggregate area production under alternative prices and acreage allotments for cotton and peanuts in the Limestone Valley and Wiregrass areas of Alabama. The specific objectives were: (1) To determine the most profitable combinations, of enterprises for several resource situations under various alternative cotton prices and acreage allotment situations in the Limestone Valleys. (2) To determine the most profitable combinations of enterprises for several resource situations under various alternative 8 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION cotton and peanut prices and acreage allotment situations in the Wiregrass. (3) To determine the effects of these price and allotment situations on aggregate supplies of the major crops and livestock and on net income levels of farmers in the two areas. (4) To compare the results of this study with results obtained for the same areas when no allotment restrictions were placed on cotton or peanuts. DESCRIPTION OF AREAS - This study applies to two major farming areas in the State Limestone Valleys and the Wiregrass. Limestone Valleys The farming area designated in this study as the Limestone Valley consists of the Tennessee Valley Area plus irregular valleys and flood plains in several other northeastern Alabama counties (Figure 1). The soils of these areas are above average in natural fertility as compared with other soils in the State. The nearly level to gently rolling topography of the area is adaptable to mechanization. A large percentage of the land is open and cultivation is intensive. The area receives an annual rainfall ranging from 50 to 56 inches. This rainfall, however, is usually distributed so that it is relatively dry in late spring and early fall. The growing season ranges from 200 to 220 days (5). Cotton, the leading cash crop of the State, is also the most important crop in the area. Forty-seven per cent of Alabama's cotton production, or 2.2 per cent of the United States' cotton production, was produced in the Limestone Valleys in 1962. Other major crops in the area include corn and hay crops. Wiregrass The Wiregrass is a 12-county area in southeastern Alabama and occupies the eastern portion of the State's Lower Coastal Plain (Figure 1). The southeastern portion of the Wiregrass is a nearly level to rolling plain, whereas the northern edge and the western third have more irregular topography. Forest land comprises a relatively large portion of the western third. Soils in the area are slightly acid and range in texture from sandy loam to ALLOTMENT IMPLICATIONS ON FARM ORGANIZATION 9 ? f{":;;: LAORDI;:f2 xf' ~ JAKO Limestone Vlly Alabama. Wiregross FIG. 1. Area of study, Limestone Valleys and Wiregrass. 10 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION loamy sand. Although deficiencies in calcium and potash are common, improved management practices can produce good crop yields. The area receives an average annual rainfall of 52 to 58 inches. However, this rainfall is usually distributed so that it is relatively dry in late spring and late fall. The growing season ranges from 240 to 255 days (5). Cotton and peanuts, the two most important crops in the Wiregrass, contributed approximately the same amounts in cash receipts to area farmers in 1962. That year the area produced 17 and 96 per cent of the State's cotton and peanut production respectively. This amounted to 0.8 per cent of national cotton production and 10.5 per cent of national peanut production in 1962. Other major crops in the area include corn and hay crops. FARM AND AREA SUPPLY RESPONSE If optimum farm organizations are computed for increasing prices of one product, a partial equilibrium supply schedule can be ascertained for that product on the farm. Since land, resident labor, allotments, and certain machinery items are assumed fixed, the supply schedule would apply to an intermediate time period. If a further assumption of pure competition is made, then an aggregate area supply schedule could be computed by horizontally summing the supply schedules of each farm in the area (9). In this study, certain assumptions must be stated that affect farm supply schedules. Additional assumptions must also be made as to which farms in an area will respond to the various adjustment opportunities. A conditionally predictive supply schedule reflects expectations under a specific set of assumptions. All aggregate figures in this study are subject to certain assumptions and, therefore, are conditionally predictive. ASSUMPTIONS Input-output budgets used in this study were based on improved management practices, which assume use of the best technology available and a high level of managerial ability. Separate budgets were constructed for each size farm, since machinery and labor coefficients varied with size. Yields and production rates were assumed the same on all farm sizes. They represent ALLOTMENT IMPLICATIONS ON FARM. ORGANIZATION TABLE 1. ASSUMED CROP YIELDS PER ACRE, LIMESTONE VALLEYS AND WIREGRASS, ALABAMA Crop Unit Limestone Valleys Wiregrass 625.0 ,000 .0 11 1 C otton, lint ----------------------- Lb.-------------700.0 Pean u ts ----------------------------L b. -------------------2 C orn --------------------------- Bu. 65.0 Oats ---------------------------------- Bu.------------------7 0.0 Grain sorghum ----------------- Bu.----------45.0 Alfalfa .-------Ton ---------------------4.5 ' Lespedeza------Ton--------------------- -2.0= Soybeans------Bu.---------------22.0 W heat --------------------------- Bu.----- -28.0 C oasta l ------------------------------ To n -- ---- ---- --- ---- ----Corn silage-----Ton .---------------12.0310.01 1 Less 3 55.0 60.0 40.0 22.0 5.0 0.9 ton for weather loss per acre. 2 Less 0.2 ton for weather loss per acre. Less 2.4 tons for seepage and spoilage loss per acre. 4 Less 2.0 tons for seepage and spoilage loss per acre. the output that might be expected under the assumed level of management practices and average weather conditions (Table 1). LAND The acreages of land and their use capabilities, as used in this study, were based on'Soil Conservation Service data. Only open land from which crops or pasture could be harvested was considered in the analysis. An assumption was made that all land in Soil Conservation Service Capability Classes I through IV, which was being used for cropland or pasture in 1961, could be adjusted to its best alternative use. Therefore, all land in these categories was' defined as open landsuitable for row crops year I and II (Appendix Table 1). Class land was considered as Classes 'I1e and I, all Class II, and 12 of Class after year. 111w were considered suitable for row crops 1 year out of 2. Therefore, total available row cropland was all Class The remaining one-half of the Class IJIe and sidered as plowable land not suitable for row crops. All Class IV land was designated as nonplowable land suitable only for permanent sod crops. There were 1,607,890 acres in the Limestone Valley that met the definition for open land (Table 2). Of this, 69 per cent could be classified as row cropland, 21 per cent plowable land Mle and .111w 111w cropland and pasture. land was con- able for row crops, and 10 per cent as suitable only for permanent sod crops. In the Wiregrass, 1,712,378 acres were classified as not. suit- 12 TABLE 2. ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT' STATION SOIL BASE ACREAGE, BY CLASSIFICATION USED IN STUDY, VALLEYS AND WIREGRASS, ALABAMA LIMESTONE Classification Limestone Valleys Open land Soil Conservation Service capability classes Acreage Class I through IV cropland and pasture Plowable land ._______________ II and III Class I, cropland and pasture Row cropland_____________ Class I, II and '/2 Class Ille and IIIw cropland and pasture Wiregrass Open land Class I through IV cropland and pasture Plowable land................ Class I, II and III cropland and pasture Row cropland ............ Class I, II and Class IIe 1/2 1,607,890 1,454,506 1,115,397 1,712,378 1,469,034 987,450 and IIIw cropland and pasture open land. Row crops could be planted on 58 per cent of this land. Plowable, nonrow cropland comprised 28 per cent of this open land, and 14 per cent was nonplowable open land. CAPITAL Other than for land, interest at 6 per cent was charged on all operating capital and investment capital required in the farm programs. Operating capital included expenditures that would be recovered in less than 1 year. Interest on operating capital was charged for the time between actual expenditure and recovery of the capital. No interest was charged on expenditures that would be recovered in less than 30 days. Investment capital was expenditures that would be invested for more than 1 year. Interest on investment capital, other than for land, was charged on the average value during life of the capital equipment or input, rather than on its new cost. Interest on investments in land was not charged as an expense in programming the representative farms. Therefore, returns were stated as net return to operator's labor, management, and land in the individual farm results. ENTERPRISE ACTIVITIES The enterprises used in the programming model were all land based activities. "Land based" means that the enterprise would require use of some quantity of open land as defined in this study for production of the commodity. ALLOTMENT IMPLICATIONS ON FARM ORGANIZATION 13 Cotton, corn for sale, corn for feed, oats, soybeans, grain sorghum, and hog enterprises were included as alternatives on all sizes of farms in the Limestone Valleys. Because of the small acreage of land on the small and medium farms, certain enterprises considered on the larger farms would not be feasible. Alfalfa hay, lespedeza hay, and steer enterprises were added to the list of alternatives for the medium, large, and extra large farms; a beef cow enterprise was included for the large and extra large farms. Cotton, peanuts, corn for sale, corn for feed, oats, wheat, soybeans, grain sorghum, oats and grain sorghum (double cropped), hogs on good pasture, and hogs on poor pasture were included as alternatives for all farm sizes in the Wiregrass. As in the Limestone Valleys, the small acreages of land on the small and medium farms prevented some enterprises from being feasible that were included on the larger farms. Steers were added to the list of alternatives for the medium, large, and extra large farms; and beef cows were added to the large and extra large farms. Several enterprises were not considered for various reasons. Production of vegetables, fruits, or nuts is possible in both areas studied. However, specialized management, labor, and other resources required and lack of stable marketing possibilities limit the consideration of these enterprises. Grade A milk production can be profitable in the areas. However, the overall supply and marketing situation is such that limited opportunity exists for entrance into Grade A milk production. Poultry production now exists in both areas, but does not require use of open land. Poultry enterprises as alternatives on a farm would be determined by available labor and capital rather than land. Coastal bermudagrass hay production was limited to that used on the farm since the local market for selling hay is relatively limited. These excluded activities could be profitable adjustment alternatives for individual farmers. Because of limited possibilities for general adoption, they were not considered as aggregate area adjustment alternatives. REPRESENTATIVE FARMS Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service farm records, Census of Agriculture, and other data were used to construct farm size distributions for each area. From these data, the farms in each area were divided into five major groups by amounts of 14 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION open land. The first group, farms with less than 10 acres of open land, was classified as nonfarm rural residences and was not considered in this study. A representative resource situation was determined for the remaining four groups in each farming area. Although the percentage of land composition of row cropland, plowable land, and nonplowable land varied among individual farms, no appreciable differences in the average composition were found between the size groups. Row cropland and plowable land, as percentages of open land, were assumed identical for each representative resource situation. Furthermore, there was no appreciable difference in the cotton or peanut allotments as a percentage of open land between size groups. Therefore, cotton or peanut allotments, as a percentage of open land, were also identical for each representative resource situation. Land resources available and current allotments on representative farms in the Limestone Valleys and the Wiregrass are presented in Appendix Table 2. Machinery coefficients were based on 2-row equipment for the small and medium farms, and on.4-row equipment for the large and extra large farms. No harvesting equipment was owned on the small farms, and only hay harvesting equipment was owned on the medium farms when hay crops entered the programs. The large farm operator in the Wiregrass owned all necessary harvesting equipment except a cotton picker. The large farm operator in the Limestone Valleys and the extra large farm operators of both areas owned harvesting equipment for all crops included in the optimum programs. Crops on all farms were assumed to be mechanically harvested. Crop harvesting on farms where equipment was not owned by the operator was custom hired. It was assumed that resident labor, either operator or full-time hired men, would perform most of the productive chores. However, some odd jobs would require hiring seasonal labor at a rate of 90 cents per hour. Small farms in both the Limestone Valleys and the Wiregrass were defined as part-time operations, with the operators working 40 hours per week off the farm. Resident labor supply on the medium and large farms of both areas consisted of a full-time operator. On the extra large farms, the resident labor consisted of a full-time operator and two full-time hired men in the Lime- ALLOTMENT IMPLICATIONS ON FARM ORGANIZATION 15 stone Valleys, and a full-time operator and one full-time hired man in the Wiregrass. The monthly labor distributions by farm size are given in Appendix Table 2. RESOURCE AND PRODUCT PRICES AND ALLOTMENT LEVELS All input prices and product prices for nonallotment crops were set at expected equilibrium levels.' These prices were given in previous publications (8,10). Prices for allotment crops, cotton and peanuts, varied with the levels of allotment used. Effects of cotton prices between 20.8 and 36.4 cents per pound of lint in the Limestone Valleys and 20.0 and 35.0 cents in the Wiregrass were analyzed. Effects of peanut prices between $96 and $256 per ton in the Wiregrass were analyzed. Effects of cotton allotments were analyzed at four levels in each area. The levels were set at 55, 85, 100, and 115 per cent of the 1963 cotton allotments in the respective areas. When analysis for varying cotton allotments was being made in the Wiregrass, the peanut allotment was set at 100 per cent of the 1963 allotment in the area and the peanut price was set at $210 per ton. The various acreage allotments included in the analysis on cotton in the Limestone Valleys and the Wiregrass are presented in Table 3. TABLE 3. FARM ASSUMED CURRENT COTTON ALLOTMENT LEVELS FOR REPRESENTATIVE SIZES, LIMESTONE VALLEYS AND WIREGRASS, ALABAMA Size of representative farm Allotment level, percentage of the 1963 level (open land acreage) Limestone Valleys Small (32 acres) Medium (80 acres)-.............. Large (210 acres) -20.8 Extra large ( 635 acres) Wiregrass Sm all (31 acres)_......... ....... Medium (81 acres) Large (184 acres) Extra large (438 acres) 55 85 Acres 100 115 3.2 7.9 62.9 1.9 4.9 11.1 26.4 4.9 12.2 32.1 97.2 2.9 7.6 17.2 40.8 5.8 14.4 37.8 114.3 3.4 8.9 20.2 48.1 6.6 16.6 43.5 131.4 3.9 10.2 23.2 55.3 SThese prices were determined by members of the S-42 Technical Committee, composed of representatives from each of 12 cooperating State Experiment Stations and from the Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. The basic price assumptions were used by each cooperating state, but modifications were made to reflect normal transportation and quality differentials. 16 TABLE 4. ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION ASSUMED CURRENT PEANUT ALLOTMENT LEVELS FOR REPRESENTATIVE FARM SIZES, WIREGRASS, ALABAMA Size of representative farm Small Medium Large Extra large Allotment level, percentage of the 1963 level 70 85 100 115 130 2.7 7.1 16.0 38.2 3.3 8.6 19.5 46.4 Acres 3.9 10.1 22.9 54.6 4.4 11.6 26.4 62.7 5.0 13.1 29.8 70.9 Effects of peanut allotments were analyzed at five levels in the Wiregrass. The levels were set at 70, 85, 100, 115, and 130 per cent of the 1963 peanut allotments in the area. When analysis for varying peanut allotments was being made, the cotton allotment was set at the 100 per cent level and the cotton price was set at 30 cents per pound of lint. The various acreage allotments included in the analysis on peanuts are presented in Table 4. OPTIMUM FARM ORGANIZATION Profit maximization was the objective for determining the optimum farm organizations. Personal preferences of individual farmers were not considered. Optimum programs for each cotton and peanut allotment situation were computed for each representative farm covering the specified range of prices. LIMESTONE VALLEY AREA Cotton was the only crop subject to acreage allotments on representative farms of the Limestone Valleys. Prices of other products were held constant so that changes in cotton acreages resulting from various allotment and price combinations could be analyzed. The ranges of cotton prices analyzed were 31.2 to 36.4 cents per pound of lint for the 55 per cent allotment level, 26.0 to 36.4 cents for the 85 per cent level, 20.8 to 36.4 for the 100 per cent level, and 20.8 to 31.2 cents for the 115 per cent level. On the small farmn, the entire allotted acreage of cotton entered the optimum programs at the 55 and 85 per cent allotment levels for all cotton prices considered (Appendix Table 3). When the cotton allotment was increased to the 100 and 115 per cent levels and effects of lower cotton prices were analyzed, the optimum programs included only a part of the allotted acreage at cotton ALLOTMENT IMPLICATIONS ON FARM ORGANIZATION 17 prices below 23.5 cents per pound of lint. With cotton prices at 23.5 cents and above, the entire allotted acreage of cotton was included in the optimum programs. On the medium farm the entire allotted acreage of cotton was included at all prices investigated with allotments at the 55 and the 85 per cent levels (Appendix Table 4). With allotments at the 100 and 115 per cent levels, no cotton entered the optimum program at prices below 24.2 cents, and the entire allotments were included at all prices above this level. On the large and extra large farms, the acreage allotted for cotton entered the optimum programs for all prices and allotment combinations analyzed (Appendix Tables 5 and 6). As cotton acreage increased on all farms studied in the Limestone Valleys, the corn and hog enterprises decreased and the oats enterprise increased. Furthermore, the grain sorghum enterprise on the small farm and the alfalfa enterprise on the large and extra large farms decreased as cotton acreage increased. WIREGRASS AREA Cotton and peanuts were subject to acreage allotments on representative farms in the Wiregrass. When adjustments to varying levels of cotton allotments were analyzed, the peanut allotment and price were set at the 1963 level and $210, per ton, respectively. The ranges of cotton prices analyzed were 30 to 35 cents per pound of lint for the 55 per cent allotment level, 25 to 35 cents for 85 per cent level, 20 to 35 cents for 100 per cent level, and 20 to 30 cents for 115 per cent level. When adjustments to varying levels of peanut allotments were analyzed, the cotton allotment and price were set at the 1968 level and 30 cents, respectively. The peanut prices analyzed were $256 per ton for the 70 per cent allotment level, $192 to $256 for 85 per cent level, $160 to $224 dollars for 100 per cent level, $128 to $192 for 115 per cent level, and $96 to $128 for 130 per cent level. Cotton The entire allotted acreage of cotton entered the optimum small and medium farm programs at the 55 and 85 per cent allotment levels for all cotton prices considered (Appendix Tables 7 and 8). When the cotton allotments were increased to 100 and 18 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION 115 per cent levels and effects of lower cotton prices were analyzed, no cotton entered the optimum program at prices below 20.01 and 21.1 cents per pound of lint on the small and medium farms, respectively. The entire allotments were included at all prices above these levels. On the large and extra large farms, allotted acreages of cotton entered the optimum programs for all price and allotment combinations analyzed (Appendix Tables 9 and 10). Increases in cotton acreage were accompanied by decreases in the corn, hog, and steer enterprises and increases in the oats enterprise on farms in the Wiregrass. On large and extra large farms, the beef cow enterprise increased along with increases in cotton acreage. Peanuts On the small and medium farms, allotted acreages of peanuts entered the optimum programs at the 70, 85, 100, and 115 per cent allotment levels for the ranges of peanut prices considered (Appendix Tables 11 and 12). When the peanut allotments were increased to the 130 per cent level and effects of lower peanut prices were analyzed, no peanuts entered the optimum programs at prices below $104.50 and $110.50 per ton on the small and medium farms, respectively. The entire allotments were included at all prices above these levels. On the large and extra large farms, allotted acreages of peanuts entered the optimum programs for all price and allotment levels analyzed (Appendix Tables 13 and 14). As peanut acreage increased, there were decreases in the corn, hog, and steer enterprises but increases in the oats enterprise on farms in the Wiregrass. On the large and extra large farms, the beef cow enterprise increased along with increases in peanut acreage. AGGREGATE AREA SUPPLY RESPONSE Other objectives of the study were: (1) to determine aggregate area response to the various price and allotment combinations presented in the previous section, and (2) to compare the aggregate area supply responses for cotton and peanuts obtained from ALLOTMENT IMPLICATIONS ON FARM ORGANIZATION 19 this study with estimated area supply response under free market conditions for cotton and peanuts. AGGREGATION MODELS A number of assumptions can be made as to the groups of farmers who would actually make the adjustments. In this study it was assumed that farming adjustments as specified by the optimum farm programs would be made on all farms and acreages other than those specialized in dairy, vegetables, or fruit and nut trees and those classified as nonfarm rural residences. The aggregation models used to expand the optimum farm programs were the same as those derived for use in earlier studies in which aggregate area data were obtained for free market conditions for cotton and peanuts (8,10). Two farm size distributions, representing 1959 and projected 1975 conditions, were used so that variations in the aggregate estimates because of changes in farm sizes could be shown. The base acreage and soil classifications were previously given (Table 2). Before the base acreages were distributed to the four farm size groups of each farming area, the excluded acreages were subtracted (Table 5). The remaining base acreages were then divided into the four farm size groups for each area. The number of representative farms in each group was determined by dividing the total acreage in that group by the open land acreage on the representative farm for that size group (Table 6). The resulting farm numbers were. used to expand the optimum farm organizations to obtain the aggregate area data. This procedure was followed for both the 1959 and the 1975 farm size distributions. TABLE 5. EXCLUDED ACREAGES OF OPEN LAND, BY TYPE OF FARM, VALLEYS AND WIREGRASS, ALABAMA LIMESTONE Item Farm size distribution 1959 1975 Acres Limestone Valleys Dairy, vegetables, fruits, and nuts....... Nonfarm rural residences__ Total exclusions-.................... Wiregrass Dairy, vegetables, fruits, and nuts....... Nonfarm rural residences -37,502 Total exclusions 62,000 9,265 71,265 27,900 9,602 62,000 16,365 78,365 31,500 12,828 44,328 20 20 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION TABLE 6. ESTIMATED ACREAGES OF OPEN LAND FOR AGGREGATION AND MAXIMUM NUMBER OF REPRESENTATIVE FARMS, BY SIZE GROUPS, LIMESTONE VALLEYS AND WIREGRASS, ALABAMA Open land acreage Size groups (open land acreage) Representative farms 1959 1975 Farm Size distribution.Farm size distribution 1959 1975 Acres Limestone Valleys Small (10-49.9) 345,600 216,000 Medium (50-124.9) 449,600 170,000 Large (125-299.9) 325,500 600,600 Extra large (300 and over).____ 415,925 542,9255 Total ._______________________________ 1,529,525 _____1,536,625 Wiregrass Small (10-49.9) 207,700 173,600 Medium (50-149.9)__________________ 703,080 457,650 Large (150-249.9) 466.256 651,360 Extra large (250 and over)------ 297,840 385,440 Total .____________________________________ 1,674,876 1,668,050 AGGREGATE DATA Number 5,620 1,550 6,750 2,125 2,860 -----------------------10,800 ------------------- ----------------- 18,625 12,590 5,600 -----------------------6,700 8,680 ------------------- 2,534 680 18,594 5,650 3,540 880 15,670 The aggregation model for the Limestone Valleys was used to determine aggregate area production and resource use covering a range of cotton prices and allotment levels for the two farm size distributions (Appendix Tables 15 and 16). The model for the Wiregrass was first used to determine aggregate area production and resource use for a range of cotton prices and allotment levels for the two farm size distributions (Appendix Tables 17 and 18). This was done with the peanut allotment set at the 100 per cent level and the peanut price set at $210 per ton. Second, a set of aggregate area data was obtained for a range of peanut prices and allotment levels for the two farm size distributions (Appendix Tables 19 and 20). This was done with cotton acreage allotments set at the 100 per cent level and cotton price set at 30 cents per pound of lint. Area response As allotments were increased with a fixed price for all products, the acreage of corn and the number of hogs decreased in both areas, studied. The acreage of oats increased along with increasing allotments in both areas. Also, in the Limestone Valleys the acreage of grain sorghum and alfalfa hay decreased as cotton allotments increased, and in the Wiregrass the number of steers ALLOTMENT IMPLICATIONS ON FARM ORGANIZATION 21 decreased as cotton or peanut allotments increased. Although requirements for capital and labor resources fluctuated as allotments varied in either area, the only significant change was in the Wiregrass where operating capital decreased as allotments increased. At any given price programmed in either area, the net return to operator labor and management increased as allotments increased. Cotton and peanut supply response The aggregate production of cotton or peanuts, for increasing prices of these two crops, represents points on a conditionally predictive cotton or peanut area supply schedule. Thus, a supply curve for cotton and peanuts for each allotment level in the respective areas can be plotted graphically from the production data in Appendix Tables 15 through 20. Corresponding supply data for free market conditions in the same areas are given in Appendix Tables 21, 22, and 23. Conditionally predictive cotton supply curves for the Limestone Valleys (Figures 2 and 3) and the Wiregrass (Figures 4 and 5), illustrating the effects of alternative allotment levels and free market conditions on cotton production, were constructed from the foregoing data. Similar peanut supply curves were also constructed (Figures 6 and 7). Comparison of the allotment and the free market supply curves indicated that the 55 per cent cotton allotment level restricted cotton production at cotton prices above 18 cents in the Limestone Valleys and above 20 cents in the Wiregrass. The 85 per cent cotton allotment level also placed some restriction on production at 18-cent cotton in the Limestone Valleys and at 20 cents in the Wiregrass. All cotton allotment levels were restrictive at cotton prices above 19.1 cents in the Limestone Valleys and above 21.1 cents in the Wiregrass. For peanuts in the Wiregrass, the 70, 85, and 100 per cent allotment levels were restrictive at peanut prices above $114.80 per ton, the 115 per cent level was restrictive above $115.40 per ton, and the 130 per cent level was restrictive above $119.50 per ton. Iso-NET RETURN ANALYSIS An analysis was made to determine the level of cotton prices required at each cotton allotment situation to yield equal net 22 22 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION Cents per pound of lintr 404 38 1 ! 363432302826I .1 I o 1" 2422- 20i8 - -"--- 55 % Allotment level 85 % Allotment level IO0% Allotment level II 5% Allotment level No allotment restriction -------- Net return = $65,018,800 0 I 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 II Hundred thousand bales FIG. 2. Estimated cotton production and iso-net return curves at a range of cotton prices and specified allotment situations, 1959 farm size distribution, Limestone Valleys, Alabama. ALLOTMENT IMPLICATIONS ON FARM ORGANIZATION 23 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 J - II- - - -I - -- I ----------- 55% Allotment level 85% Allotment level 00%Allotment level II 5%Allotment level No allotment restriction Net return= $64,737,930 I 0 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II Hundred thousand bales FIG. 3. Estimated cotton production and iso-net return curves at a range of cotton prices and specified allotment situations, 1975 farm size distribution, Limestone Valleys, Alabama. 24 24 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION Cents per pound of lint 361 1 1 1 1 1 1 " 34 3230 1 1 1 i 2624- I t I 2220,_ 1816U) U 55 % Allotment level 85 % Allotment l evel I00% Allotment level 115 % Allotment level No allotment restriction Net return = $ 57, 491,775 I 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IL 9 10 II Hundred thousand boles FIG. 4. Estimated aggregate cotton production and iso-net return curves at a range of cotton prices and specified allotment situations, 1959 form size distribution, Wiregrass, Alabama. (See page 29.) ALLOTMENT IMPLICATIONS ON FARM ORGANIZATION 25 2 Cents per pound of lint 36 I I SI . 34 32 30 32 ~ :'I l I 28 26 24" 22 20 JVK . 1 55 18 85 100% 16 14------ % Allotment %Allotment level level Allotment level -" - 1 15 % Allotment level No allotment restriction Net return= $57,862,123 6 7 8 9 10 I 0 I 2 3 4 5 Hundred thousand bales FIG. 5. Estimated cotton production and iso-net return curves at a ronge of cotton prices and specified allotment situations, 1975 farm size distribution, Wiregrass, Alabama. (See page 29.) 26 26 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION Dollars per ton 255 - 700 Allotment level I % 1 240 225 0 j I 85% Allotment level ------210 195 195 -1level -""" 00 / 0 Allotment level I j --- ~ 115% Allotment """-1 130%O/ Allotme level level ntI I iN I " I 180 165 No allotment restriction -°- Net return 150 '35 120 I 1 $ 55,798,194 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 Ten thousand tons 27 30 FIG. 6. Estimated aggregate peanut production and iso-net return curves at a range of peanut prices and specified allotment situations, 1959 farm size distribution, Wiregrass, Alabama. (See page 30.) ALLOTMENT IMPLICATIONS ON FARM ORGANIZATION 27 2 255 240 -- 70% Allotment level -"- 85% Allotment level -- 225 210 100%/Allotment level -"--"-115%/aAllotment 195 180-""--3 level 0 %Allotment levelI 165150 135 120 105 No allotment restriction --- -- -- -- Net return:= $ 5629491912 ~ 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 Ten thousand tons FIG. 7. Estimated aggregate peanut production at a range of peanut prices and specified allotment situations, 1975 farm size distribution, Wiregrass, Alabama. (See page 30.) 28 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION returns to operator labor and management. 2 In the Limestone Valleys, the net return target was set at the aggregate net return obtained with the 85 per cent allotment level and a cotton price of 31.2 cents per pound of lint. The net return target for the Wiregrass was the aggregate net return at the 85 per cent allotment level and a cotton price of 30 cents.3 Using these targets, iso-net return schedules were computed for each allotment level and free market situation (Table 7). These iso-net return schedules have also been plotted on the supply schedules previously discussed (Figures 2, 3, 4, and 5). These iso-net return schedules indicate what change will be required in the cotton price with specified changes in cotton allotment levels if farmers are to receive an equal aggregate net return. TABLE 7. COTTON AND PEANUT PRICES REQUIRED AT THE SPECIFIED ALLOTMENT 1 1959 AND 1975 FARM SIZE LEVELS TO YIELD AN EQUAL NET RETURN, DISTRIBUTIONS, LIMESTONE VALLEYS AND WIREGRASS, ALABAMA Allotment leveP Wiregrass Limestone Valleys 1959 1975 1959 1975 Cents per pounds of lint 838.7 31.2 29.4 28.2 25.7 40.5 31.2 29.2 27.9 25.2 35.3 35.4 30.0 30.0 28.5 28.5 27.5 27.5 24.5 24.3 Dollars per ton 233.18 210.00 193.87 182.03 172.84 148.61 233.68 210.00 193.48 181.34 171.93 145.95 Cotton 55----------------85 100 115 Free market Peanuts 70 85 100 115.. 130 Free market 1 The net return level is the aggregate net return to operator's labor and management obtained at the 85 per cent allotment level with 31.2 cent cotton in the Limestone Valleys and 30 cent cotton and $210 peanuts in the Wiregrass. 2 Percentage of 1963 acreage allotment for the area. 2Net return to operator labor and management was obtained by subtracting a charge for investment in land from the net return to operator labor, management, and land. The charge was $10 per acre of open land for the Limestone Valleys and $5.25 per acre of open land for the Wiregrass. The S-42 Technical Committee estimated that, with the yields associated with improved practices in the S-42 study, the belt-wide production for the 85 per cent allotment level would approximate present production. Furthermore, 30 cents per pound of lint was assumed to be the belt-wide support price level. Since the grade of northern Alabama cotton is usually above national average, the assumed current support price for the Limestone Valleys was set at 31.2 cents per pound of lint. ALLOTMENT IMPLICATIONS ON FARM ORGANIZATION 29 These prices are the minimum change that could be made since the net returns were calculated on the basis that farm enterprises had been adjusted to the most profitable organization for the given allotment situation. Using the 1959 farm size distribution, a reduction in the Limestone Valleys allotments from the 85 to the 55 per cent level would require a 7.5 cent increase in cotton price to give the farmers an equal net return. The corresponding figure for the 1975 farm size distribution is 9.3 cents. On the other hand, an increase in allotments from the 85 to, the 115 per cent level would allow only a 3.0 and 3.3 cent price decrease for the respective farm size distributions to yield the equal net returns. If farmers were allowed to grow all the cotton that could be profitably produced, they would have to receive a cotton price in excess of 25 cents for either farm size distribution to obtain net returns equal to the net return target. In the Wiregrass a reduction in cotton allotments from the 85 to the 55 per cent level would require price increases of only 5.3 cents and 5.4 cents for the 1959 and 1975 farm size distributions, respectively, to attain equal net returns. If allotments were increased from the 85 to the 115 per cent level, prices would decrease 2.5 cents for both farm size distributions. With free market production, the price of cotton would have to be about 24.5 cents for farmers to receive net returns equal to the net return target. However, in comparing data for the free market with those for allotment situations, one should consider that the free market curve was computed with peanuts unrestricted and at a price of $160 per ton. In contrast, the allotment situations were computed with peanuts restricted to the 1963 allotment level and priced at $210 per ton. Following the same procedure used for cotton, peanut price requirements for equal net returns to operator labor and management in the Wiregrass were found for each peanut allotment situation. Again, the 85 per cent allotment level was used to set the income targets because of increased yields under the assumptions of the study. A peanut price of $210 per ton was used.4 Using this target, iso-net return schedules were computed for each allotment level and the free market situations (Table 7). A peanut price of $210 per ton was set for acreage control conditions in the Wiregrass by the S-42 Technical Committee. 30 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION These schedules have also been plotted on the peanut supply schedules previously discussed (Figures 6 and 7). A reduction in peanut allotments from the 85 to the 70 per cent level would require an increase in the peanut price in excess of $23 per ton for both 1959 and 1975 farm size distributions. If peanut allotments were increased from the 85 to the 100 per cent level, the peanut price required to yield equal net returns would be decreased less than $17. If the farmers of the area are allowed to produce peanuts free of allotment restrictions, they would have to receive a peanut price of $148.61 and $145.95 for the 1959 and the 1975 farm size. distributions, respectively, to obtain the net return target. However, in comparing data for the free market with those for allotment situations, one should consider that the free market curve was computed with cotton also unrestricted and priced at 25 cents per pound of lint, whereas the allotment situations were computed with cotton restricted to the 1963 allotment level and priced at 30 cents per pound of lint. CONCLUSIONS Using improved management practices for all enterprises as assumed in this analysis, cotton and peanuts would be the most profitable enterprises even at prices considerably below their current support levels. Thus, elimination of allotment restrictions on these commodities would result in increased production. However, even with this increased production, prices would have to be above current world price for farmers to obtain the same income as available with the allotment situation assumed as current for this analysis. Decreases in production by lowering allotments below current levels would require price increases above the current support level to maintain the same producer income. Thus, it seems that reductions in the allotment levels in the areas studied would probably cause decreased farm incomes, increased government costs, or both. It would appear that the objectives of lower prices, decreased surpluses, increased farmer incomes, and lower government expenditures cannot be obtained in one program. Policy alternatives, however, need to be considered in light of the present trend for cotton and peanuts to a less competitive price position in comparison with foreign and substitute products. If demand schedules could be constructed for specific produc- ALLOTMENT IMPLICATIONS ON FARM ORGANIZATION 31 ing areas, the cost of suggested policy alternatives could be estimated for any level of net returns to farmers in the specified areas. However, cotton and peanuts are both storable and essentially homogeneous. Therefore, national demand cannot be broken down into separate demand schedules for cotton or peanuts produced in an individual area. For that reason, analyses of equilibrium price and quantity combinations were not included in this study. When the results of this study are combined with similar studies for other areas that are being conducted under Southern Regional Research Project S-42, demand data will be introduced and analysis of equilibrium conditions will be made. 32 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION REFERENCES (1) (2) ALABAMA CONSERVATION NEEDS COMMITTEE. Alabama Soil and Water Conservation Needs Inventory. State Soil Conser. Com. 1961. ALABAMA CROP AND LIVESTOCK REPORTING SERVICE. Alabama Agri- cultural Statistics. Ala. Dept. of Agr. and Indus. and Statis. Reptg. Ser., U. S. Dept. of Agr. Bul. 11. 1962. W., AND PARTENHEIMER, EARL J. Costs and Returns from Crop Production in the Wiregrass Area, Lower Coastal Plain, Alabama. Ala. Agr. Expt. Sta. in cooperation with Farm Econ. Res. Div., Econ. Res. Ser., U. S. Dept. of Agr. Litho. Rept. 1961. CLARK, GEORGE ELLIS, THEO H., AND PARTENHEIMER, EARL J. Costs and Returns from Livestock Production in the Limestone Valley Areas of Alabama. Ala. Agr. Expt. Sta. in cooperation with Farm Econ. Res. Div., Agr. Res. Ser., U. S. Dept. of Agr. Litho. Rept. 1960. (3) (4) (5) LANHAM, BEN T., JR., YEAGER, J. H., AND ALVORD, BEN F. Alabama Agriculture, Its Characteristics and Farming Area. Ala. Agr. Expt. Sta. Bul. 286. 1953. PARTENHEIMER, EARL (6) J., AND CLARK, GEORGE W. Costs and Returns from Livestock Production in the Wiregrass Area, Lower Coastal Plain, Alabama. Ala. Agr. Expt. Sta. in cooperation with Farm Econ. Div., Econ. Res. Ser., U. S. Dept. of Agr. Litho. Rept. 1961. (7) PARTENHEIMER, EARL J., AND ELLIS, THEO H. Costs and Returns from Crop Production in the Limestone Valley Area of Alabama. Ala. Agr. Expt. Sta. in cooperation with Farm Econ. Res. Div., Agr. Res. Ser., U. S. Dept. of Agr. Litho. Rept. 1960. PARTENHEIMER, EARL J., AND STRICKLAND, P. L., JR. (8) Optimum Farm Organization and Aggregate Area Production in the Wiregrass Area of Alabama. Ala. Agr. Expt. Sta. in cooperation with Farm Prod. Econ. Div., Econ. Res. Ser., U.S. Dept. of Agr. Econ. Agr. Series 8. 1964. (9) GEORGE E. The Supply of Fluid Milk in the Detroit Milkshed as Affected by Costs of Production. Mich. State Univ. Agr. Expt. Sta. Tech. Bul. 259. 1957. SCHUH, (10) STRICKLAND, P. L., JR., AND PARTENHEIMER, EARL J. Optimum Farm Organization and Aggregate Area Production in the Limestone Valley Areas of Alabama. Ala. Agr. Expt. Sta. in cooperation with Farm Prod. Econ. Div., Econ. Res. Ser., U. S. Dept. of Agr. Agr. Econ. Series 1. 1963. YEARBOOK STATISTICAL COMMITTEE. (11) Agricultural Statistics. U. S. Dept. of Agr. 1963. ALLOTMENT IMPLICATIONS ON FARM ORGANIZATION 33 3 APPENDIX APPENDIX TABLE 1. SOIL BASE ACREAGE, BY CURRENT USE AND CAPABILITY CLASS, LIMESTONE VALLEYS AND WIREGRASS, ALABAMA' Soil Conservation Service capability class Limestone Valleys _-----------_ __--_-- _--- ------I Current use Cropland Acres 114,925 543,673 40,859 239,097 26,898 Pasture IIe__________ - -- - - - - - - - - 1 1 w -- - - - - - - - I lls 104,022 8,593 93,734 20,168 - -- --- -- --- -- --- -- -- - 42,511 156,467 63,559 43,518 I Ve -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 50,526 27,667 1,215,725 151,804 461,967 ~IIe -- ________-- -- -- -Il/e __ -- -- -- -- -- --- -- -Wiregrass II's ___________ -----w---------- ---I T O TAL ----------------- 31,673 392,165 26,525 86,405 3,065 10,600 109,352 50,926 15,634 sw - -II~w- - - - - - - -I~ I IS - - - e- -- - -- ---- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- --- -- -- 18,222 26,472 258,711 228,268 21,083 44,468 105,674 TOTAL ---------------------------------------- 2,272 1,318,941 36,492 47,012 7,426 393,437 use and capability classes were determined from county work sheets 1Current for: Alabama Conservation Needs Committee, Alabama Soil and Water Conservation Needs Inventory published by the State Soil Conservation Committee, 1961. w APPENDIX TABLE 2. RESOURCES AVAILABLE BY FARM SIZE, LIMESTONE VALLEYS AND WIREG.RASS, ALABAMA Resource O pen land - - -- ----- -- -Plowable land --Row cropland-- - - - -- Cotton allotment'____ Peanut allotment' W inter labor -----------------M arch labor Unit Acre Acre Acre Acre Acre Hour Hour Hour Hour Hour Hour Hour Hour Hour Hour Hour Limestone Valleys Small 32.0 29.0 22.2 7.3 100.0 40.0 39.0 66.0 64.0 64.0 66.0 64.0 40.0 33.0 576.0 Medium 80.0 72.4 55.5 16.2 606.0 239.0 231.0 266.0 257.0 257.0 266.0 257.0 239.0 199.0 2,817.0 Large 210.0 190.0 145.7 32.1 606.0 239.0 231.0 266.0 257.0 257.0 266.0 257.0 239.0 199.0 2,817.0 Extra large 635.0 574.4 440.7 133.4 1,818.0 717.0 693.0 798.0 771.0 771.0 798.0 771.0 717.0 597.0 8,451.0 Small 31.0 26.6 17.9 3.4 3.9 100.0 40.0 39.0 66.0 64.0 64.0 66.0 64.0 40.0 33.0 576.0 Wiregrass Medium 81.0 69.5 46.7 8.9 10.1 606.0 239.0 231.0 266.0 257.0 257.0 266.0 257.0 239.0 199.0 2,817.0 Large 184.0 157.9 106.6 20.2 22.9 606.0 239.0 231.0 266.0 257.0 257.0 266.0 257.0 239.0 199.0 2,817.0 Extra large 438.0 375.8 252.6 48.1 54.6 1,151.0 454.0 439.0 505.0 488.0 488.0 505.0 488.0 454.0 378.0 5,350.0 i la o ---------------Ap ----------- ------- M ay labor----------------- ---Jun e labor----------------- ---July labor --------------------August labor-------------- ----September labor________________ October labor --------------November labor TOTAL LABOR 1 Cotton 2Peanut C C m m m - - --- - allotment at 100 per cent of the 1963 level. allotment at 100 per cent of the 1963 level. z z 0 APPENDIX TABLE 3. OPTIMUM SMALL FARM PROGRAM, LIMESTONE VALLEYS, ALABAMA PRICES AND ALLOTMENTS FOR COTTON-BASE PRICES FOR OTHER PRODUCTS-PART-TIME LABOR SUPPLY-ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY) (SPECIFIED z Cotton allotment, percentage of 1963 level (cotton price, cents per pound of Enterprise Unit lint) __ 55 (31.2-36.4) 85 (26.0-36.4) (20.8-23.5) 100 (28.5-36.4) (20.8-23.5) 115 (23.5-36.4) 6.6 10.2 5.9 4.4 1.9 3.0 3.9 n z 0 Cotton Corn for feed OatsGrain sorghum Pasture Idle open - --------land---__- Acre Acre Acre Acre Acre Acre Sow s.--------Net No. Dol. Dol. Dol. Hour Hour revenue 3.2 12.6 0.0 5.2 2.4 8.6 4.8 1,350.52' 841.07 571.21 427.8 41.2 4.9 11.7 5.7 4.5 2.2 3.0 4.4 1,493.731 815.15 679.75 447.1 47.8 4.5 12.0 5.7 4.5 2.3 3.0 4.6 1,144.262 5.8 10.9 5.7 4.5 2.1 3.0 4.2 1,539.981 787.41 674.31 437.4 49.7 4.5 12.0 5.7 4.5 2.3 3.0 4.6 1,144.262 Z ZF 1,584.441 759.67 668.87 428.0 51.6 Capital: Investment-___ Operating----Resident labor -- _ Seasonal labor--- 827.43 682.15 451.4 46.9 827.43 682.15 451.4 46.9 'Net revenue is based on a cotton price of 31.2 cents per pound of lint so that net revenue changes because of varying allotment levels can be analyzed. Net revenue is based on a cotton price of 20.8 cents per pound of lint. 2 w ON APPENDIX TABLE 4. OPTIMUM MEDIUM FARM PROGRAM, LIMESTONE VALLEYS, ALABAMA (SPECIFIED FOR COTTON-BASE PRICES FOR OTHER PRODUCTS-ONE-MAN LABOR SUPPLY-ADVANCED PRICES AND ALLOTMENTS TECHNOLOGY) Enterprise Unit 55 (31.2-36.4) 85 Cotton allotment, percentage of 1963 level (cotton prices, cents per pound of 100 lint) 115 (24.2-36.4) 16.6 (26.0-36.4) (20.8-24.2) (24.2-86.4) 14.4 (20.8-24.2) 0.0 Cotton -------------------------------------Acre 7.9 12.2 0.0 Corn for feed__________________________ Acre 43.4 39.5 50.7 Oats ---------------------------------------Acre 12.8 13.1 12.1 Pasture_________________________________ Acre 8.3 7.6 9.6 Idle open land________________________ Acre 7.6 7.6 7.6 Sows ---------------------------------------No. 16.6 15.1 19.3 Net revenue____________________________ Dol. 4,346.301 4,557.661. 3,958.80' Capital:C Investment_____________ Dol. 2,729.00 2,519.26 3,113.51 37.5 13.3 50.7 12.1 35.5 13.5 7.2 7.6 14.3 9.6 7.6 19.3 6.8 7.6 13.6 4,663.341 3,958.80° 3,113.51 2,082.57 1,400.4 86.9 4,769.021 2,309.54M 1,952.46r 1,188.4 124.7 m Operating -.------------Dol. 2,020.34 Resident labor------------Hour 1,299.0 Seasonal labor------------Hour 105.0 1 2,414.40 1,969.43 1,216.1 119.8 1,986.41 1,243.7 114.9 2,082.57 1,400.4 86.9 x o Net revenue is based on a cotton price of 31.2 cents per pound of lint so that net revenue changes because of varying allotment levels can be analyzed. 2 Net revenue is independent of cotton prices since no cotton entered the optimum programs. Z .1 -4 -4 M 0 ALLOTMENT IMPLICATIONS ON FARM ORGANIZATION APPENDIX TABLE 5. OPTIMUM LARGE FARM PROGRAM, LIMESTONE VALLEYS5, ALABAMA PRICES AND ALLOTMENTS FOR COTTON-BASE PRICES FOR OTHER PRODUCTS-ONE-MAN LABOR SUPPLY-ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY) 37 3 (SPECIFIED Cotton allotment, 'percentage of (cotton price, cents per pound of Enterprise Unit 55 20.8 28.4 74.6 37.2 14.8 14.2 20.0 28.4 9,830.88 85 32.1 26.5 73.0 37.3 7.2 13.9 20.0 27.8 11,738.7 1963 level lint) 115 43.5 23.0 69.4 37.7 3.2 13.2 20.0 26.5 12,787.33 100 (31.2-36.4) (26.0-36.4) (20.8-36.4) (20.8-31.2) Cotton-Corn for sale Corn for feed Oats -- - - - - Alfalfa Pasture-------Idle open land--Sow s --------- Net revenue1 ----- Acre Acre Acre Acre Acre Acre Acre No. Dol. Dol. Dol. Hour Hour 37.8 25.5 72.2 37.4 3.3 13.8 20.0 27.5 12,314.24 9,379.77 9,234.99 9,330.48 9,044.02 4,651.36 4,631.91 4,571.15 4,449.62 2,561.3 2,548.0 2,571.4 2,502.0 Resident labor--497.1 509.7 538.6 510.9 Seasonal labor 1 Net revenue is based on a cotton price of 31.2 cents per pound of lint so that net revenue changes because of varying allotment levels can be analyzed. Operating.--APPENDIX TABLE 6. OPTIMUM EXTRA LARGE FARM PROGRAM, LIMESTONE PRICES AND ALLOTMENTS FOR VALLEYS, ALABAMA PRICES FOR OTHER PRODUCTS-THREE MAN LABOR SUPPLY-ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY) Capital: Investment--- BASE (SPECIFIED COTrON- Cotton allotment, percentage of 1963 level (cotton price, cents per pound of Enterprise Unit 55 lint) 85 100 15 131.4 76.1 212.9 113.4 0.0 40.6 60.6 81.2 0.0 34,704.76 22,258.86 14,122.47 7,496.3 1,473.2 (31.2-36.4) (26.0-36.4) (20.8-36.4) (20.8-31.2) Cotton -------Corn for sale Corn for feed--Oats --------- Alfalfa Pasture .------- Idle open land-- Sow s ---------- Beef cows.----. 1 Net revenue Acre Acre Acre Acre Acre Acre Acre No. No. Dot. 62.9 99.1 216.2 113.1 41.9 101.8 0.0 82.5 26.5 27,698.80 97.2 93.3 211.5 113.5 18.6 100.9 0.0 80.7 26.5 31,225.46 114.3 90.4 209.1 113.8 7.0 100.4 0.0 79.8 26.5 32,987.76 28,780.34 14,106.71 7,553.7 1,597.7 28,467.64 Dol. 27,841.86 --13,923.03 Dol. 13,555.44 Operating ---7,521.3 Hour 7,456.7 Resident labor--1,639.6 Hour 1.722x.4 Seasonal labor.-1 Net revenue is based on a cotton price of 31.2 cents net revenue changes because of varying allotment levels Investment Capital: per pound of lint so that can be analyzed. APPENDIX TABLE 7. OPTIMUM SMALL FARM PROGRAM, WIREGRASS, ALABAMA (SPECIFIED PRICES AND ALLOTMENTS COTTON-BASE PRICES FOR OTHER PRODUCTS-PART-TIME LABOR SUPPLY-ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY) FOR Cotton allotment, percentage of 1963 level (cotton price, cents per pound of lint) Enterprise Unit 55 (30.0-35.0) 85 (25.0-35.0) 100 (20.0-20.01) (20.01-35.0) (20.0-20.01) 115 (20.01-30.0) 3.9 3.9 10.1 5.1 (Ia 0.0 2.9 1.9 Cotton.__________________________________. Acre 3.9 3.9 3.9 Acre Peanuts .---------------------14.0 11.1 12.1 Acre Corn for feed 3.6 4.7 4.3 A cre O ats --------------------------------------5.1 4.0 Acre Pasture ___________________________________ 4.4 3.4 3.9 10.6 4.9 0.0 3.9 14.0 3.6 -------------------------Acre 4.4 4.4 PF 3.8 4.4 5.1 4.4 3.6 4.4 )-I 0 a Idle open land-----------Sows 4.4 ------------------- Net revenue______________ Capital: Investment------------- No. Dol. Dol. Dol. 3.8 9447' 2,930.70 695.61 340.8 26.5 3.5L 1,008.38' 2,874.25 682.49 325.8 28.6 4.4 827.99' 3,034.19 719.66 368.3 22.8 3.3 1,040.21' 2,846.02 675.94 318.3 29.6 4.4 827.99' 3,034.19 719.66 368.3 22.8 3.2 1,071.59' 2,817.80 669.38 310.8 30.6 c- C I- Operating -------------Resident Seasonal labor labor ------------ ------------ Hour Hour m x z -I 0 ' Net revenue is based on a cotton price of 30.0 cents per pound of lint so that net revenue changes because of varying allotment levels can be analyzed. 2Net revenue is independent of cotton prices since no cotton entered the optimum programs. z 0 m APPENDIX TABLE 8. OPTIMUM MEDIUM FARM PROGRAM, WIREGRASS, ALABAMA (SPECIFIED PRICES AND ALLOTMENTS FOR COTTON-BASE PRICES FOR OTHER PRODUCTS-ONE-MAN LABOR SUPPLY-ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY) Cotton allotment, percentage of 1963 level (cotton price, cents per pound of z lint) Enterprise Unit 55 (30.0-35.0) 85 (25.0-35.0) (20.0-21.1) 100 (21.1-35.0) (20.0-21.1) 115 8.9 10.1 20.2 15.3 7.5 19.0 (21.1-35.0) 10.2 10.1 19.3 16.2 7.1 18.1 0 0.0 7.6 4.9 -_________________________________ Acre 10.1 10.1 10.1 Acre Peanuts_________________________________ 26.7 21.2 23.2 Acre Corn for feed_________________________ 9.2 14.4 12.6 Acre Oats ---------------------------------------9.9 7.8 8.5 Acre Corn silage 25.1 19.9 21.7 Acre Pasture and hay 0.0 0.0 0.0 Acre Idle open lancd____________---------41.8 33.2 36.2 No. Steers___________________ 2,819.672 3,239.891 3,091.841 Net revenue______________ Dol. Cotton 0.0 10.1 26.7 9.2 9.9 25.1 z 0 -------------------------------------------------- z 0.0 31.6 3,314.471 4,972.41 5,211.58 627.5 157.5 0.0 41.8 2,819.672 5,684.17 63629.91 0.0 30.1 3,388.491 4,865.92 5,038.29 620.4 157.0 z Investment-------------Operating ------ ------Resident labor------------Seasonal labor ------------ Capital: Nz ZI Dol. Dot. Hour Hour 5,292.66 5,732.76 648.7 159.1 5,079.69 5,386.18 634.6 158.0 5,684.17 6,36991 674.7 161.0 674.7 161.0 1Net revenue is based on a cotton price of 30.0 cents per pound of lint so that net revenue changes because of varying allotment levels can be analyzed. 2 Net revenue is independent of cotton prices since no cotton entered the optimum programs. w 40 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION 40 ALABAA AGRICULTURLEPRMN TTO APPENDIX TABLE 9. OPTIMUM LARGE FARM PROGRAM, WIREGRASS, ALABAMA (SPECIFIED PRICES AND ALLOTMENTS FOR COTTON-BASE PRICES FOR OTHER PRODUCTS-ONE-MAN LABOR SUPPLY-ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY) Cotton allotment, percentage of 1963 level (cotton price, cents per pound of lint) Enterprise Unit 55 85 100 115 (30.0-35.0) (25.0-35.0) (20.0-35.0) (20.0-30.0) 11.1 17.2 Acre Acre 22.9 22.9 Peanuts ------------------------48.2 Acre 52.7 Corn for feed 17.8 Acre 19.4 Corn silage 77.9 Acre 77.9 Pasture and hay___________ Idle open land. Acre 0.0 0.0 19.5 22.4 No. Beef cows 82.3 75.4 Steers.__________________________. No. 7,415.67 7,796.90 Dol. Net revenue'---------------Cotton ------------------------- ----------------------- --------------- 20.2 22.9 46.0 17.0 23.2 22.9 43.8 16.2 77.9 0.0 23.8 77.9 0.0 25.2 --------------------- 71.9 7,987.52 68.4 8,178.14 Capital: Investment ___________ Operating 18,485.97 18,508.02 Dol. Dol. 13.075.32 12,30999 ------------1,334.6 Hour 1,361.4 Resident labor ------------Seasonal labor 18,519.04 11,92732 1,321.2 18,530.07 11.54466 1,307.7 ---------Hour 416.7 398.1 388.8 379.5 1 Net revenue is based on a cotton price of 30.0 cents per pound of lint so that net revenue changes because of varying allotment levels can be analyzed. APPENDIX TABLE 10. OPTIMUM EXTRA LARGE FARM PROGRAM, WIREGRASS ALABAMA (SPECIFIED PRICES AND ALLOTMENTS FOR COTTON-BASE PRICES FOR OTHER PRODUCTS-TWO-MAN LABOR SUPPLY-ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY) Cotton allotment, percentage of 1963 level Enterprise Unit (cotton price, cents per pound of lint) 55 85 100 115 (30.0-35.0) (25.0-35.0) (20.0-35.0) (20.0-30.0) Cotton_____________ Acre Acre 26.4 54.6 40.8 54.6 48.1 54.6 55.3 54.6 Peanuts------------Corn for feed________ Corn silage.________. Pasture and hay______ Idle open land_______ Beef cows___________ Net revenue'1_________ Capital: Investment________ Operating_________ Resident Steers -------------- Acre Acre Acre Acre No. No. 125.4 46.2 185.4 0.0 46.4 195.9 114.8 42.4 185.4 0.0 53.2 179.5 109.5 40.4 185.4 0.0 56.5 171.2 104.3 38.4 185.4 0.0 59.9 163.0 Dol. Dol. Dol. Hour 16,114.20 36,434.12 29,666.92 3,183.7 17,105.09 38,381.26 27,968.73 3,144.6 17,600.54 39,354.83 27,119.64 3,125.1 18,095.99 40,328.40 26,270.55 3,105.6 labor ------- Seasonal labor------1 Hour 1,036.4 1,008.3 994.3 980.3 Net revenue is based on a cotton price of 30.0 cents per pound of lint so that net revenue changes because of varying allotment levels can be analyzed. *o 0 -I z -4 APPENDIX TABLE 11. OPTIMUM SMALL FARM PROGRAM, WIREGRASS, ALABAMA (SPECIFIED PRICES AND ALLOTMENTS PEANUTS-BASE PRICES FOR OTHER PRODUCTS-PART-TIME LABOR SUPPLY-ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY) FOR r* m Peanut allotment, percentage of 1963 level (peanut price, dollars per ton) Enterprise Unit 70 (256.0) 85 (192.0-256.0) 100 115 3.4 4.4 10.1 130 (96.0-104.5) (104.5-128.0) I (160.0-224.0) (128.0-192.0) -------------------------Cotton Peanuts.------------------Corn for feed Acre Acre Acre 3.4 2.7 11.8 3.4 3.3 11.2 3.4 3.9 10.6 3.4 0.0 14.5 3.4 5.0 9.5 z I- . Oats .................... ----........ Pasture--------------------------------Idle open land - A cre Acre Acre 4.5 4.2 4.4 3.7 No. Sows-------------------782.821 Dol. Net revenue Capital: 2,764.42 3,117.55 2,805.22 2,846.02 2,886.82 2,927.62 Dol. Investment 652.12 755.18 664.03 675.94 687.84 699.75 Dol. Operating 298.3 385.1 308.3 318.3 328.4 338.4 Resident labor -Hour 29.5 30.1 29.5 29.6 29.7 29.8 Hour Seasonal labor 1 Net revenue is based on a peanut price of $160 per ton so that net revenue changes because of varying allotment levels can be analyzed. 2 Net revenue is independent of peanut prices since no peanuts entered the optimum programs. 4.7 4.0 4.4 3.5 815.021 4.9 3.8 4.4 3.3 847.211 5.1 3.6 4.4 3.1 879.401 3.5 5.2 4.4 4.5 632.962 5.3 3.4 4.4 3.0 911.641 -TI z APPENDIX TABLE 12. OPTIMUM MEDIUM FARM PROGRAM, WIREGRASS, ALABAMA (SPECIFIED PRICES AND ALLOTMENTS FOR PEANUTS-BASE PRICES FOR OTHER PRODUCTS-ONE-MAN LABOR SUPPLY-ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY) Peanut allotment, percentage of 1963 level (peanut price, dollars per 100 115 ton) Enterprise Unit 70 (256.0) __5 130 105180 (192.0-256.0) (160.0-224.0)(2.-9.)(60105 r- Acre Cotton_____________________ ________ Peanuts_______________________________ Acre Acre Corn for feed ._________________________ 8.9 7.1 22.5 13.2 8.3 8.9 8.6 21.4 14.3 7.9 8.9 10.1 20.3 15.3 7.5 8.9 11.6 19.1 16.3 7.1 8.9 0.0 27.6 8.4 10.2 8.9 13.1 18.0 17.4 6.7 Oats.-------------------Corn silage --------------- Acre Acre G) Acre Pasture ____________________________________ 21.0 -_____________________ 0.0 Acre Idle open land 19.9 0.0 33.4 18.9 0.0 31.6 2,809.97' 4,972.41 5,211.58 18.0 0.0 29.9 2,884.69' 4,861.09 5,003.25 25.9 0.0 43.2 2,310.78' 5,716.27 6,603.66 16.9 0.0 28.2 2,949.381 4,749.76 4,794.92 X Steers Net revenue______________ No. Dol. Dol. Dol. 35.1 2,660.07' 5,195.79 5,629.62 2,735.27 5,083.73 5,419.91 Capital: Investment ------------Operating______________ m m m Resident labor____________ Seasonal 1 labor ------------- Hour Hour 649.3 165.2 638.4 161.3 627.5 157.5 616.6 153.7 700.1 183.0 605.8 149.9 Net reve~nue is based on a peanut price of $160 per ton so that net revenue changes because of varying allotment levels can be analyzed. 2Net revenue is independent of peanut prices since no peanuts entered the optimum programs. z -I z ALLOTMENT IMPLICATIONS ON FARM ORGANIZATION 43 4 APPENDIX TABLE 13. OPTIMUM LARGE FARM PROGRAM, WIREGRASS, ALABAMA (SPEGIFIED PRIGES AND ALLOTMENTS FOR PEANUTS-BASE PRIGES FOR OTHER PRODUTS-ONE-MAN LABOR SUPPLY-ADVANCED TEGHNOLOGY) Peanut allotment, percentage of 1963 level Enterprise Unit 70 (256) (peanut price, dollars per ton) 85 100 115 180 (192-256) (160-224) (128-192) (96-128) 20.2 19.5 48.5 17.9 77.9 0.0 22.2 75.8 6,614.40 18,350.01 12,398.47 1,340.9 397.8 20.2 22.9 Cotton_________________Peanuts Corn for feed------Corn silage----------. Pasture and hay__. Idle open land----Beef cows____________ Steers______________ 16.0 Acre ---------------Acre Acre Acre Acre No. No. 51.1 18.8 77.9 0.0 20.5 79.8 Acre 20.2 20.2 26.4 20.2 29.8 46.0 17.0 77.9 0.0 43.5 16.0 77.9 0.0 25.4 68.0 7,068.00 18,687.59 11,457.55 41.0 15.1 77.9 0.0 27.0 64.0 7,295.13 18,856.63 10,986.40 23.8 71.9 6,841.53 18,519.05 11,927.32 1,321.2 388.8 6,387.26 Net revenue'________ Dot. Capital: 18,180.97 Investment------- Dot. 12,869.62 _Dol. Operating 1,360.6 Resident labor------ Hour Hour 406.8 Seasonal labor 1 Net revenue is based on a peanut changes because of varying allotment ----- 1,301.5 397.8 1,281.7 370.9 price of $160 per ton so that net revenue levels can be analyzed. APPENDIX TABLE 14. OPTIMUM EXTRA LARGE FARM PROGRAM, WIREGRASS, ALABAMA (SPECIFIED PRICES AND ALLOTMENTS FOR PEANUTS-BASE PRICES FOR OTHER PRODUCTS-TWO-MAN LABOR SUPPLY-ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY) Enterprise Unit Peanut allotment, percentage of 1963 level (peanut price, dollars per 70 85 100 115 130 ton) __________________ (256) (192-256) (160-224) (128-192) (96-128) Cotton_________ Peanuts________ Corn for feed---Corn silage-----Pasture and hay__ Idle open land___ Beef Acre Acre Acre Acre Acre Acre No. 48.1 38.2 121.5 44.8 185.4 0.0 48.9 48.1 46.4 115.5 42.6 185.4 0.0 52.7 48.1 54.6 109.5 40.4 185.4 0.0 56.5 48.1 62.7 103.6 38.2 185.4 0.0 60.4 48.1 70.9 97.6 36.0 185.4 0.01 48.1 cows------- Steers._________ Net revenue'---Capital : Investment---Operating .-Resident labor--. Seasonal labor No. Dot. 189.9 13,813.99 180.6 14,343.52 171.2 14,873.03 161.9 15,407.56 152.5 15,932.72 Dot. 38,405.44 38,880.14 39,354.83 39,829.51 40,304.78 Dot. 29,220.09 28,170.25 27,119.64 26,069.03 25,017.15 3,039.7 3,125.1 3,082.4 3,167.8 Hour 3,210.5 950.4 972.4 994.3 1,038.2 1,016.3 Hour 1 Net revenue is based on a peanut price of $160 per ton so that net revenue changes because of varying allotment levels can be analyzed. 44 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION 44 ALABAMA AGRICULTUA XEIMN TTO APPENDIX TABLE 15. AGGREGATES FOR SPECIFIED ITEMS, LIMESTONE VALLEY AREAS, ALABAMA (1959 FARM DISTRIBUTION-VARYING ALLOTMENTS FOR COTTON-COTTON PRICE AT POINT OF CHANCE IN OPTIMUM PROGRAMS-BASE PRICES FOR OTHER PRODUCTS) Cotton allotment, percentage of 1963 level (cotton price, cents per pound of Item Unit 55 ;(31.2)1 85 (26.0)1 (20.8)1 100 lint) (23.5) Cotton__________________________ Acre 152,398 Corn for sale________________ Acre 108,930 Corn for feed____________ Acre 637,229 Oats____________________________ Acre 203,677 Grain sorghum_____________ Acre 56,160 Alfalfa hay___________________ Acre 50,384 Pasture_________________________ Acre 161,255 234,905 102,187 600,032 267,340 48,600 23,343 154,106 182,057 Idle open land_____________ Acre 166,592 106,112 Total open land------- Acre 1,536,625 1,536,625 Sows______________________ -____ No. 243,190 228,330 Cows ---------------------------No. 17,358 17,358 17,358 Cotton allotment---------- Acre 152,398 234,905 277,024 Investment capital------- Dol. 56,675,185 55,922,400 59,747,537 Operating capital-------- Dol. 33,297,449 34,709,791 35,490,619 2 Resident lahor used __ Hour 20,682,858 20,694,590 21,678,712 Seasonal labor hired-- Hour 2,998,717 3,027,811 2,811,896 Cotton_____________ Bale 213,357 328,867 254,880 Corn for sale________ Bu. 7,080,450 6,642,155 6,417,905 Corn for feed -_______ Bu. 41,419,885 39,002,080 43,121,260 Oats_______________ Bu. 14,257,390 18,713,800 18,344,970 Grain 98,737 663,404 262,071 48,600 9,700 165,944 106,112 1,536,625 253,040 651,524 262,071 48,600 9,700 163,784 106,112 1,536,625 248,720 17,358 196,097 98,737 Alfalfa hay__________ Market hogs sold-----Fat calves solcL Return to operator lahor, management and land__________ Return to operator lahor and sorghum------- 277,024 59,315,321 35,405,947 21,527,512 3,027,034 274,536 6,417,905 42,349,060 18,344,970 2,187,000 Bu. 2,527,200 2,187,000 Ton No. -_____ No. Dol. 2,187,000 181,382 3,769,445 13,018 84,035 3,539,115 13,018 34,920 3,922,120 13,018 65,584,886 50,218,636 -7 34,920 3,855,160 13,018 69,018,207 53,651.957 -31-)- 72,392,400 71,834,508 56,468,258 ---- management ------57,026,150 Dol. . - ALLOTMENT IMPLICATIONS ON FARM ORGANIZATION APPENDIX TABLE 45 4 15. Continued Item Unit Cotton allotment, percentage of 1963 level (cotton price, cents per pound of 100 115 lint) (24.2) (20.8)' 202,092 85,496 661,553 262,274 48,600 4,960 113,481 158.169 1,536,625 252,407 (23.5) (24.2) Acre Cotton-------------------------Acre Corn for sale Acre Corn for feed Oats___________________________ Acre Acre Grain sorghum Acre Alfalfa hay___________________ Pasture_________________________ Acre Acre Idle open land------------- --------------------------------------- Acre 1,536,625 Total open land No. Sows ____________________________ 220,620 Cow s----------------------------- No. 17,358 Cotton allotment Acre 277,024 Investment capital Dot. 55,386,323 Operating capital Dot. 34,770,100 2 Hour 20,491,746 Resident labor used __-Seasonal labor hired-__ Hour 3,027,034 Cotton_________________________ Bale 387,835 Corn for sale------------Bu. 6,417,905 Corn for feed-_______ Bu. 37,527,100 Oats ________________Bu. 18, 817,050 Bu. 2,187,000 Grain sorghum._-_--_ ----- 277,025 98,737 577,340 268,815 48,600 9,700 150,296 106,112 224,772 85,496 642,113 318,064 85,496 556,689 264,434 47,520 272,302 47,520 4,960 121,525 145.805 1,536,625 4,960 105,789 145.805 1,536,625 244,847 318,064 212,813 318,064 ------------- -------- Alfalfa hay ---------sold ------ 318,064 55,552,367 35,531,089 21,625,460 2,749,879 282,929 5,557,240 43,000,945 18,359,180 2,187,000 17,856 54,820,559 35,387,665 50,302,248 34,656,447 21,372,740 20,181,300 2,800,639 314,681 5,557,240 41,737,345 18,510,380 2,138,400 17,856 2,749,879 445,290 5,557,240 36,184,785 19,061,140 2,138,400 17,856 Market hogs Fat Calves sold----- Ton 34,920 No. No. 3,419,610 13,018 3,912,667 3,795,128 --------- 3,298,139' Return to operator labor, management and land__________ Return to operator labor and 2 Dot. Dot. 70,230,375 65,985,699 69,814,841 71,443,272 management ------1Lowest 54,864.125 50,619.449 54,448,591 56,077,022 price programmed for the specified allotment level. 2 Resident labor available is 31,954,095 hours. 3Return to operator labor, management, and land less a charge of $10 per acre of open land. 46 46 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION APPENDIX TABLE 16. AGGREGATES FOR SPECIFIED ITEMS, LIMESTONE VALLEY AREAS, ALABAMA (1975 FARM DISTRIBUTION-VARYING ALLOTMENTS FOR COTTON-COTTON PRICE AT POINT OF CHANGE IN OPTIMUM PROGRAMS-BASE PRICES FOR OTHER PRODUCTS) Cotton allotment, percentage of 1963 level (cotton price, cents per pound of Item Unit (31.2)1 85 100 lint) (26.0)1 (20.8)1 (23.5) Cotton________________________ Acre Corn for sale______________ _ Acre Corn for feed_______------ Acre 151,655 165,955 575,482 233,912 155,562 552,525 236,210 Oats______________________________ Acre 230,292 Grain sorghum_____________ Acre 35,100 Alfalfa hay_____________-----Acre 78,153 Pasture Acre 161,488 Idle open land____--Acre 131,400 Total open land------- Acre 1,529,525 Sows__________________________ No. 219,436 Beef cows 150,222 574,010 244,985 150,222 566,585 -----------------------161,235 -------------------No. 22,658 22,658 Acre Dol. Dol. 151,655 233,912 22,658 270,033 30,375 36,495 157,023 93,600 1,529,525 210,294 268,450 30,375 15,423 268,450 30,375 15,423 159,885 93,600 1,529,525 218,942 93,600 1,529,525 216,242 22,658 Cotton allotment--------. Investment capital----Operating capital--------. Resident labor used 2 __ Seasonal labor hired__ Cotton_____________ Corn for sale________ Corn for teed-------- 61,147,035 61,607,594 32,464,704 33,787,113 Hour Hour Bale Bu. Bu. Bu. 19,179,224 19,379,637 3,515,128. 3,429,845 212,317 327,477 10,787,075 37,406,330 16,120,440 275,585 275,585 63,493,725 63,223,590 34,338,473 34,285,553 19,835,418 19,740,918 3,288,977 3,307,877 330,694 342,979 9,764,430 37,310,650 18,791,500 10,111,530 35,914,125 18,902,310 9,764,430 36,828,025 18,791,500 Oats---------------Grain sorghum_______ Alfalfa hay__________ Market hogs sold----Fat calves sold_______ Bu. Ton No. No. Dol. 1,579,500 281,351 3,401,258 16,994 70,150,688 1,366,875 131,382 3,259,557 16,994 71,518,778 1,366,875 , 55,523 3,393,601 16,994 64,574,715 1,366,875 55,523 3,351,751 16,994 69,013,421 Return to operator labor, management and lancL_________ Return to operator labor and management 3 _____I . II I-I Dol. 54.855,438 56,223,528 49 279,465 53,718,171 ALLOTMENT IMPLICATIONS ON FARM ORGANIZATION APPENDIX TABLE 16. 47 4 Continued Cotton allotment, percentage of 1963 level (cotton price, cents per pound of Item Unit lint) 100 (24.2) (20.8)2 267,132 130,846 275,585 150,222 115 (23.5) 281,307 (24.2) 316,582 Cotton -----------Corn for sale Corn for feedO ats -- - - - - - - - - Grain sorghum Alfalfa hay-Pasture -- - - -- - - Idle open land Total open land Sow s _---- ---- --- -Be ef cows--Cotton allotment Investment capital Operating capital 2 Resident laborused Seasonal labor hired-C otton.--------- --Coin for sale.------Corn for feed-------- Acre Acre Acre Acre Acre Acre Acre Acre Acre No. No. Acre Dol. Dol. Hour Hour Bale Bu. Bu. Ru. Bu. Ton No. No. 538,535 569,251 130,846 557,101l 130,846 524, 801 271,000 30,375 15,423 154,785 93,600 268,966 30,375 9,152 108,390 145,413 270,316 29,700 9,152 105,690 145,413 273,291 29,700 9,152 99,740 145,413 O ats - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Alfalfa Grain sorghum------- hay---------- Market hogs sold----Fat calves sold------Return to operator labor, management 1,529,525 1,529,525 217,278 205,616 22, 658 316,582 275,585 61,737,981 58,058,829 34,045,131 34,407,575 19,349,280 19,757,454 3,218,566 3,377,790 373, 985 385,819 8,504,990 9,764,430 35,004,775 37,001,315 18,970,000 18, 827, 620 1,366,875 1,366,875 32,947 55,523 3,367,809 3,187,048 16,994 65,148,376 49,853,126 1,529,525 212,554 316,582 57,601,449 1,529,525 200,441 316,582 55,893,013 34,041,451 19,149,004 3,330,616 34,3171935 19,599,504 3,250,291 443,215 393,830 8,504,990 8,504,990 36,211,565 34,112,065 18,922,120 19,130,370 1,336,500 1,366,500 32,947 32,947 3,294,587 3,106,836 Return to operator 1Lowest and land------- --- Dol. Dol. 70,365,477 55.070,227 70,203,170 54,907,920 71,910,982 labor and 3 management ------ 56,615,732 price programmed for the specified allotment level. 2Resident labor available is 25,156,350 hours. 3Return to operator labor, management and land less a charge of $10 per acre of open land. 48 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION 48 ALABAMA AGRICULTUA XEIMN TTO APPENDIX TABLE 17. AGGREGATES FOE SPECIFIED ITEMS, W1REGRASS AREA, ALABAMA (1959 FARM DISTRIBUTION-VARYING ALLOTMENTS FOR COTTON-COTTON PRICE AT POINT OF CHANGE PROGRAMS--BASE PRICES FOR OTHER PRODUCTS) IN OPTIMUM Cotton allotment, percentage of 1963 level (cotton price, cents per pound of Item Cotton-Peanuts--Corn Unit 55 (30.0)' i lint) 85 100 i (25.0)1 - (20.0)1 . i (20.01) - - - for feed O ats-- - - - - Corn silage Pasture and hay Idle- open land Total open land Sows-- - - - Beef cows Steers- - - - - Cotton allotment Investment capital Operating Acre Acre Acre Acre Acre Acre Acre Resident labor used--Seasonal labor hired-. Cotton ------------Peanuts-----------Corn for feed-------O ats - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - capital sold----_ Market steers sold---Market hogs Fat calves sold------Return to operator Acre No. No. No. 655,976 Acre 156,727 101,341 183,927 183,927 Dol. 137,194,628 136,347,764 143,356,200 142,095,461 Dol. 107,727,310 101,536,976 108,777,725 108,484,801 Hour 13,528,780 13,211,392 13,796,995 13,461,995 Hour 3,257,489 3,211,583 3,319,208 3,257,143 Bale 126,676 195,909 104,869 133,344 Ton 208,955 208,955 208,955 208,955 Bu. 27,569,300 25,222,395 28,411,190 27,159,000 Bu. 829,068 9,388,920 6,238,560 6,761,160 No. 394,630 363,475 456,940 342,705 No. 60,724 69,704 74,047 74,047 No. 655,976 601,300 661,435 661,435 101,341 208,955 501,260 138,178 154,356 541,306 29,480 1,674,876 25,460 80,965 156,727 208,955 458,589 156,482 141,641 523,002 29,480 1,674,876 23,450 92,939 601,300 83,895 208,955 516,580 103,976 156,482 575,508 29,480 1,674,876 29,480 98,729 661,435 106,675 208,955 493,800 112,686 156,482 566,798 29,480 1,674,876 22,110 98,729 661,435 labor, management Return and land------- --- Dol. to operator Dol. 62,915,692 54,122,593 61,387,175 52,594076 56,990,883 4,197,74 56,996,123 48,03,02 labor and management------- Dol. 5412,9 52,9407 48,17,78 48,203,02 ALLOTMENT IMPLICATIONS ON FARM ORGANIZATION APPENDIX TABLE 49 4 17. Continued Item Unit Cotton allotment, percentage of 1963 level (cotton price, cents per pound of 100 115 lint) (21.1) (20.0)1 (20.01) (21.1) 211,059 122,523 96,393 Acre 183,927 Cotton__________________________ 208,955 208,955 208,955 Acre 208,955 Peanuts 481,339 417,107 437,380 507,469 Corn for feed__________--Acre 174,786 114,026 103,976 165,634 Acre Oats 128,791 153,095 135,650 153,095 Acre Corn silage_________________ 504,698 565,458 513,850 575,508 Pasture and hay___________ Acre 29,480 29,480 29,480 29,480 Idle open land____________ Acre 1,674,876 1,674,876 1,674,876 1,674,876 Total open land------- Acre 21,440 21,440 29,480 No. Sows_____________________________ 22,110 104,589 104,589 104,589 No. 98,729 Beef cows_____________________ 545,434 646,990 646,990 No. 572,899 Steers__________________________ 211,059 211,059 211,059 183,927 Acre Cotton allotment--Investment capital------- Dot. 135,917,384 144,046,178 142,596,365 135,493,955 98,430,496 107,230,683 106,893,807 95,335,346 Operating capital--------. Dot. Resident labor used'---- Hour 13,052,299 13,749,526 13,364,276 12,892,952 3,196,037 3,178,497 3,230,757 3,226,763 Seasonal labor hired---- Hour 263,824 153,154 120,491 229,909 Bale Cotton 208,955 208,955 208,955 208,955 Ton Peanuts_____________ R_______ u. 24,055,900 27,910,795 26,473,645 22,940,885 Corn for feed ------------------------- ----------------------------- ------------------------u. 9,938,040 Oats_________R______ No. Market hogs sold_____ No. Fat calves sold_______ No. Market steers sold---Return to operator labor, management -_________ Dot. and land Return to operator labor and Dot. management 3_____1'Lowest 342,705 74,047 572,899 6,238,560 456,940 78,442 646,990 6,841,560, 332.320 78,442 646,990 10,487,160 332.320 78,442 545,434 57,724,228 48,931,129 57,024,503 48,231,404 57,034,530 48,241,431 57,866,832 49,073,733 price programmed for the specified allotment level. 2 Resident labor available is 39,087,038 hours. 3 Return to operator labor, management and land less a charge of $5.25 per acre of open land. 50 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION APPENDIX TABLE 18. AGGREGATES FOR SPECIFIED ITEMS, WIREGBASS AREA, ALABAMA FARM DISTRIBUTION-VARYING ALLOTMENTS FOR COTTON-COTTON PRICE AT POINT OF CHANGE IN OPTIMUM PROGRAMS-BASE PRICES FOR OTHER PRODUCTS) (1975 Item Unit - Cotton allotment, Percentage of 1963 Level (cotton price, cents per pound of 55 85 100 (25.0)1 (20.0)1 (20.01) (30.0)1 lint) Cotton- Peanuts-Corn for Oats- - - - Corn silage Pasture and hay open land Total open feed Idle Acre Acre Acre Acre Acre Acre Acre Acre 100,851 208,019 155,972 208,019 118,836 208,019 132,876 208,019 495,750 95,270 157,357 586,163 453,592 107,680 144,394 573,753 488,455 72,140 151,667 609,293 469,415 79,420 151,667 602,013 24,640 1,668,050 24,640 1,668,050 24,640 1,668,050 24,640 1,668,050 land Dol. Dol. Hour Resident labor used -Seasonal labor hired__ Hour Bale C otton --I----------Peanuts .----------Ton Bu. Corn for feed-------Oa ts-------------- - Bu. Market hogs sold----- No. Fat calves sold-_---_. No. No. Market steers sold --Return to operator Sows-- - - - - - - Beef cows Steers - - Cotton allotment _ Investment -- No. No. No. Acre capital Operating capital 19,600 24,640 18,480 126,112 133,972 133,972 612,456 641,352 641,352 100,851 155,972 183,161 183,161 143,817,808 144,089,948 149,296,676 148,242,924 108,679,032 102,443,708 106,108,084 105,863,252 21,280 109,862 668,264 13,194,647 12,901,702 13,301,671 13,021,671 3,434,465 126,064 3,349,348 194,965 3,288,666 142,295 3,326,746 166,905 208,019 208,019 208,019 27,266,250 24,947,560 26,865,025 5,716,200 6,460,800 4,328,400 329,840 303,800 381,920 82,396 94,584 100,479 668,264 612,456 641,352 63,191,241 54.433.977' rl ~UI.~/ 61,745,260 52,987,998 I'I L1 57,221,856 48,464,593 208,019 25,817,825 4,765,200 286,440 100,479 641,352 57,228,965 48,471,702 labor, management and land.------ --r Return to operator Dol. labor and management' IIP l II 1 I 1 Dol. ----1111 ALLOTMENT IMPLICATIONS ON FARM ORGANIZATION APPENDIX TABLE 51 18. Continued Cotton allotment, percentage of 1963 level (cotton price, cents per pound of Item Unit 100 115 lint) (21.1) Cotton________________________ Acre 183,161 Peanuts Acre 208,019 Corn for feed_________-----Acre 432,690 Oats______________________________ 113,885 Acre Corn silage_________________ Acre 138,107 Pasture and hay________ Acre 567,548 Idle open land____________ Acre 24,640 (20.0)1 130,792 208,019 476,091 72,140 147,075 609,293 24,640 (20.01) 152,632 208,019 (21.1) 210,262 208,019 ------------------------- 454,251 80,540 147,075 600,893 24,640 412,441 120,090 131,255 561,343 24,640 1,668,050 1,668,050 1,668,050 Acre 1,668,050 Total open land------17,920 17,920 No. 18,480 24,640 Sows 141,920 133,972 141,920 141,920 Beef cows _______________ No. 621,746 621,746 555,641 No. Steers____________________________ 583,722 210,262 210,262 Acre 183,161 210,262 Cotton allotment Investment capital------- Dol. 144,221,481 150,192,464 148,980,680 144,357,568 99,318,687 104,006,268 103,724,700 96,201,047 Operating capital--------- Dot. Resident labor used=---- Hour 12,754,991 13,236,721 12,914,721 12,607,926 3,306,971 3,243,424 3,287,104 3,264,504 Seasonal labor hired--- -Hour Cotton Bale 228,951 163,490 190,790 262,828 ---------------------------- --------Ton 208,019 Peanuts------------Corn for feed________ Oats_______________ Market bogs sold----Fat calves sold_______ Market steers sold ____ Return to operator labor, management and ------------------------208,019 208,019 208,019 Bu. Bu. No. No. No. 23,797,950 6,833,100 286,440 100,479 583,722 26,185,055 4,328,400 381,920 106,440 621,746 24,983,805 4,832,400 277,760 106,440 621,746 22,684,255 7,205,400 277,760 106,440 555,641 land ---------- Dol. 58,135,335 Return to operator labor and 3 management1 Lowest 157,265,687 48.508,424 57,273,865 58,315,020 ----- Dot. 49.378.072 48,516,602 49,557,758 price programmed for the specified allotment level. J Resident labor available is 33,821,830 hours. 3Return to operator labor, management and land less a charge of $5.25 per acre of open land. 52 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION 52 ALABAMA AGRICULTUA XEIMN TTO APPENDIX TABLE 19. AGGREGATES FOR SPECIFIED ITEMS, WIREGRASS AREA, ALABAMA (1959 FARM DISTRIBUTION-VARYING ALLOTMENTS FOR PEANUTS-PEANUT PRICE AT POINT OF CHANGE IN OPTIMUM PROGRAMS-BASE PRICES FOR OTHER PRODUCTS) Peanut allotment, percentage of 1963 level (peanut price, dollars per Item ton) Unit 70 (256)1 85 (192)1 100 (160)' 183,927 208,887 438,316 135,650 165,634 115 (128)1 CottonPeanutsCorn for feed Corn silage Oats- - - - PastureandhayIdle open - Acre Acre Acre Acre - 183,927 146,238 486,467 150,147 144,726 183,927 177,723 462,231 142,899 155,614 Acre 533,891 523,002 512,982 29,480 29,480 29,480 1,674,876 1,674,876 1,674,876 Total open land 24,790 23,450 22,110 Sows .- - - No. 85,199 92,091 98,729 Beef cows--------No. 636,013 604,797 572,899 Steers------------Acre 146,238 177,723 208,887 Peanut allotment-_-Dol. 136,900,788 136,405,891 135,917,410 Investment capital-Dol. 106,034,705 102,226,840 98,430,496 Operating capital--Hour 13,534,104 13,293,537 13,052,299 Resident labor used?Hour 3,370,403 3,298,183 3,226,763 Seasonal labor hired. C otton ---------- -Bale 229,909 229,909 299,909 Ton 146,238 177,723 .208,887 Peanuts -------- --Bu. 26,755,685 25,422,705 24,107,380 Corn for feed----___ Bu. 8,683,560 Oats .- - - - - - - - - - - - 9,336,840 9,938,040 Market hogs sold---_ No. 384,245 363,475 342,705 No. Fat calves sold ----63,899 69,068 74,047 No. 636,013 Market steers sold--604,797 572,899 land Acre Acre Acre No. 183,927 239,702 414,135 128,148 175,654 503,830 29,480 1,674,876 20,770 105,436 541,936; 239,702 135,427,655 94,637,583 12,811,731 3,155,411 299,909 239,702 22,777,425 10,539,240 321,935 79,077 541,936 51,639,430 Return to operator labor. mnagement and land Return to operator labor and management'------ --------------Dol. 67,927,726 Dot. 59.134,627 61,392,279 57,516,944 52,599,180 48,723,845 42,846,331 ALLOTMENT IMPLICATIONS ON FARM ORGANIZATION APPENDIX TABLE 19. Continued Peanut allotment, percentage of 1963 level (peanut price, dollars per 130 53 5 Item Unit ton) (96)1 (104.5) (110.5) 183,927 183,927 183,927 Cotton -----------------------------Acre 123,725 157,225 Peanuts___________________________ Acre Corn for feed__________________ Acre 506,980 473,480 Corn silage________________________ Acre 151,279 151,279 Oats___________________________________ 96,362 Acre 108,422 Acre 583,123 571,063 Pasture and hay_______________ 29,480 Acre 29,480 Idle open land Total open land. Acre 1,674,876 1,674,876 20,100 No. 30,150 Sows ----------------------------------Beef cows --------No. 101,126 101,126 Steers_______________________ No. 640,852 640,852 Peanut allotment Acre 270,933 270,933 Investment capital____________ Dot. 145,694,759 143,328,788 Operating capital 2 Dol. 107,230,674 106,540,172 Resident labor used ______ Hour 13,971,862 13,390,302 Seasonal labor hired--------Hour 3,376,243 3,372,223 Cotton ------------------------- 229,909 Bale 229,909 Peanuts_______________ Ton 123,725 157,225 ------------------- 270,933 390,152 120,899 186,542 492,943 29,480 1,674,876 20,100 ----------- ---------------- 101,126 510,652 270,933 -------------- ----------Bu. 134,939,482 90,840,309 12,571,778 3,084,915 229,909 feed----------Oats __________________. Market hogs sold-------Corn for 270,933 21,458,360 27,883,900 26,041,400 Bu. No. 5,781,720 467,325~ 6,505,320 311,550 11,192,520 311,550 Fat calves sold_________ Market steers sold Return to operator -----No. Dol. Dot. No. 75,844 640,852 75,844 640,852 75,844 510,652 labor, management and land------------- 45,700,850 46,752,514 47,700,574 Return to operator labor and 3 management 1 Lowest --------- 36.907,751 37,959,415 38,907,475 price programmed for the specified allotment level. 2Resident labor available is 39,087,038 hours. Return to operator labor, management and land less a charge of $5.25 per acre of open land. 54 54 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION APPENDIX TABLE 20. AGGREGATES FOB SPECIFIED ITEMS, WIREGRASS AREA, ALABAMA (1975 FARM DISTRIBUTION-VARYING ALLOTMENTS FOR PEANUTS-PEANUT PRICE AT POINT OF CHANCE IN OPTIMUM PROGRAMS-BASE PRICES FOR OTHER PRODUCTS) Peanut allotment, percentage of 1963 level (peanut price, dollars per Item Cotton_____________________ Peanuts ----------------------Corn for feed________ Corn silage Unit 70 (256)1 85 (192)1 100 (160)1 ton) 115 (128)1 -----------------Acre 152,871 Acre Acre Acre Acre Acre Acre 183,161 145,491 481,019 183,161 176,932 456,960 145,489 188,161 208,019 183,161 238,812 433,343 138,107 409,633 130,371 Oats_________________________ Pasture and hay___________ Idle open land -----------Acre 1,668,050 99,780 581,088 24,640 107,115 573,753 24,640 113,885 566,983 24,640 120,655 560,778 24,640 Total open land-----Sows 1,668,050 1,668,050 1,668,050 17,360 ----------------------------18,480 No. 20,720 19,600 Beef cows--------------------No. 115,602 Steers __________________________ 647,919 No. Peanut allotment Acre 145,491 Investment capital------- Dot. 143,908,306 Operating capital Dol. 106,998,087 Resident labor used'-Hour 13,205,349 Seasonal labor hired-- Hour 3,453,948 Cotton_____________ Bale 228,951 --------- 124,964 133,972 143,068 615,970 583,722 552,127 176,932 208,019 238,812 144,062,825 144,221,516 144,378,428 103,154,799 99,318,687 95,487,404 12,980,458 12,754,991 12,530,092 3,380,221 3,306,971 3,233,809 Peanuts------------- 228,951 93,723 Ton 145,491 176,932 228,951 208.019 228,951 238,812 Corn for feed________ Oats ________________ Market hogs sold----Fat calves soldMarket steers Return to operator sold ---No. Dot. Dot. Bu. Bu. No. No. 26,456,045 25,132,800 23,833,865 22,529,815 5,986,800 321,160 86,702 647,919 6,426,900 303,800 615,970 6,833,100 286,440 100,479 583,722 7,239,300 269,080 107,301 552,127 alar anagement_______ 68,138,588 61,707,175 57,927,989 52,153,722 Return to operator labor and management'______ 59.281 325 52.949,912 49.170,727 43,396,460 ALLOTMENT IMPLICATIONS ON FARM ORGANIZATION APPENDIX TABLE 5 55 20. Continued Peanut allotment, percentage of 1963 level __ (peanut price, dollars per Item Unit (96)1 ton) 130 (104.5) 183,161 (110.5) 183,161 ---------------Peanuts----- -- - - Corn for feed Corn silage-O ats -- - - - - -- - - - - - Pasture and hay Idle open land Total open land Sows ------------Beef cows----Steers --- --- --- - -Peanut allotment Investment capital Cotton capital Resident labor labor hired-- Acre 183,161 Acre Acre Acre Acre Acre Acre Acre -No. 167, 884 468,168 142,764 67,060 614,373 24,640 1,668,050 25,200 137,908 604,840 269,899 151,975,882 102,446,635 13,324,279 3,351,848 228,951 167,884 25,749,240 4,023,600 390,600 103,431 604,840 45,702,600 195, 884 440,168 142,764 77,140 604,293 24,640 1,668,050 16, 800 137,908 604,840 269,899 149,998,354 101,869,499 12,838,199 3,348,488 228,951 195,884 24,209,240 4,628,400 260,400 103,431 604,840 47,129,614 Operating Seasonal used'-- No. No. Acre Dol. Dol. Hour Hour *Bole Ton C otton ------------Peanuts------------Corn for feed-------Oats -- - - - - - - - - - - - - Market hogs sold----- Fat calves sold _--Market steers sold---Return to operator, labor, management and land------- --Return to operator labor and management1Lowest Bu. Bu. No. No. _=No. Dol. 269, 899 385,928 122,989 127,990 553,443 24,640 1,668,050 16,800 137,908 520,90 269,899 144,537,573 91,650,118 12,305,404 3,161,473 228,951 269,899 21,226,040 7,679,400 260,400 103,431 520,090 48,310,783 39,553,520 Dol. 36.945,338 38,372,352 price programmed for the specified allotment level. 2 Resident labor available is 33,821,830 hours. ----- of open land. Return to operator labor, management and land less a charge of $5.25 per acre 56 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION APPENDIX TABLE 21. AGGREGATE SUPPLY OF COTTON, LIMESTONE VALLEYS, ALLOTMENT RESTRICTION FOR COTTON-COTTON ALABAMA PRICE AT POINT OF CHANGE IN OPTIMUM PROGRAMSBASE PRICES FOR OTHER PRODUCTS) (No APPENI Cotton price Farm size distribution 1975 per pound of lint 1959 Bales 114,245.1 118,921.8 205,163.8 264,563.8 273,419.8 323,226.0 331,906.0 433,142.8 440,806.3 465,853.0 468,148.3 540,508.3 723,045.9 732,717.9 742,032.0 831,888.0 949,570.8 975,083.8 1,003,417.8 1,043,674.1 1,075,077.1 1,110,717.1 1,164,331.9 1,165,757.9~ Il~u IIY I Cents 16.51 16.62 16.70 18.04 18.42 19.08 20.63 20.68 21.32 21.96 22.85 23.52 24.20 24.25 24.27 25.00 25.73 26.25 26.58 26.79 27.14 27.66 28.48 30.85 I ~ uc- 149,129.1 155,233.8 314,364.2 351,489.2 357,024.2 422,038.4 438,054.4 570,203.2 580,206.7 626,481.5 630,657.1 675,882.1 744,902.1 762,748.5 774,906.6 831,066.6 875,564.1 922,639.7 974,920.5 1,027,468.8 1,085,412.4 1,107,687.4 1,127,959.9 1,130,591.1 ALLOTMENT IMPLICATIONS ON FARM ORGANIZATION APPENDIX TABLE 22. AGGREGATE SUPPLY OF COTTON, WIREGRASS, ALABAMA FOR COTTON-COTTON 57 (No ALLOTMENT RESTRICTIONS PRICE AT POINT OF CHANGE IN OPTIMUM PROGRAMS-BASE PRICE FOR OTHER PRODUCTS) Cotton price per pound of lint Cents 17.82 19.07 19.81 20.01 21.09 21.26 21.35 21.66 21.77 22.16 22.70 22.94 23.27 31.01 31.13 32.04 32.75 34.99 Farm size distribution 1959 Bales 15,496 39,685 122,535 191,210 346,843 476,594 505,363 507,176 583,734 623,132 626,026 687,634 784,796 797,633 840,217 858,281 886,155 908,265 20,053 53,846 161,064 218,464 319,768 501,030 525,077 527,423 577,256 628,241 632,284 718,348 781,595 792,324 820.043 843,419 882,359 900,839 1975 APPENDIX TABLE 23. AGGREGATE SUPPLY OF PEANUTS, WIREGRASS, ALABAMA (No ALLOTMENT RESTRICTIONS FOR PEANUTS-PEANUT PRICE AT POINT OF CHANGE IN OPTIMUM PROGRAMS-BASE PRICE FOR OTHER PRODUCTS) Peanut price Farm size distribution per ton Dollars 100.32 100.23 103.18 103.61 104.50 110.06 114.80 115.43 119.53 124.73 125.46 1959 Tons 7,276 19,186 53,458 106,925 113,625 135,735 233,819 258,146 273,854 311,178 322,568 1975 9,416 26,054 70,406 145,100 150,700 169,180 233,025 267,009 287,337 311,632 321,152 58 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION ACKNOWLEDGMENT This publication is based on a part of Southern Regional Research Project S-42, "An Economic Appraisal of Farming Adjustment Opportunities in the Southern Region to Meet Changing Conditions." This regional project is partially financed by Research and Marketing Act funds. It is a cooperative effort of the Departments of Agricultural Economics of the State Agricultural Experiment Stations in Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia; and the Farm Production Economics Division, Economic Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Dr. John W. White, Vice-president for Agriculture, University of Arkansas, is the administrative advisor, and Dr. James H. White, University of Arkansas, is chairman of the Regional Committee. The Southern Farm Management Research Committee, sponsored by the Farm Foundation and the Southern Agricultural Experiment Stations, was helpful in development of the regional project. The overall purposes of the project are (1) to provide guides to farmers when choosing alternative production opportunities, especially as those opportunities are affected by changes in prices and technology, and (2) to provide guides to persons engaged in developing and administering public agricultural programs.