.rte ;: x ,. ,, .. M r . a + 1 ' " . ... ......... . . ..o.. ... .... . " ., 1 .- . x ," t 1 .... 4 . ... . , ,. .<. . ' $s ' 'Y'OTI .. CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION .................................................. 3 Study Area................................ ........... 4 6 OBJECTIVES AND METHODOLOGY................................ ANALYSIS.......................................................14 Group One: Early Spring Crops Broccoli............................................ .......................... 14 14 15 19 20 23 23 24 25 25 26 28 Turnip Greens ..................................... Cabbage........................................... Group Two: Yellow and White Sweet Corn................. Group Three: Late Spring, Summer Crops................. Snap Beans ....................... :................ Zucchini Squash .................................... Yellow Squash...................................... Cucumbers........................................ Collards........................................... Watermelons....................................... Group Four: Full Season Crops .......... ............... Tomatoes.......................................... Okra.............................................. Bell Peppers....................................... Group Five: Irish and Sweet Potatoes ..................... Group Six: Fall Crops .................................. Fall Tomatoes....................................... 28 29 31 32 33 36 36 Yellow and Zucchini Squash .......................... Snap Beans 38 41 ........................................ Cucumbers........................................ Watermelons....................................... Collards and Turnip Greens .......................... Broccoli ........................................... Cabbage........................................... CONCLUSIONS 41 42 42 43 43 43 49 .................................................. LITERATURE CITED............................................. APPENDIX ...................................................... 50 FIRST PRINTING, 3M, JULY 1987 Information contained herein is available to all persons without regard to race, color, sex, or national origin. Wholesale Market Potential For Fresh Vegetables Grown in North Alabama* M.E. Zwingli, J.L. Adrian, W.E. Hardy, and W.J. Free** INTRODUCTION DEPRESSED prices for many traditional agricultural crops have caused some Alabama farmers to consider alternative farming enterprises. As farmers in Alabama evaluate nontraditional crop alternatives, many are attracted to fresh vegetable crop production because of the potential for high net income. While net income is an important measure of feasibility, producers also must evaluate alternative fresh vegetable enterprises in terms of the potential risks. From a production standpoint, vegetable crops are plagued by a variety of insect, disease, weed, and weather related problems. Fresh vegetable production also tends to be labor intensive, with many vegetable crops requiring a readily available labor force for production and harvesting. Once produced and harvested, certain fresh vegetables can require a number of post-harvest functions such as washing, sorting, grading, packing, and cooling. These activities may necessitate purchase of capital items such as a hydrocooler, cold storage facilities, and packing and grading equipment. In addition to the production, harvesting, and packing activities, the producer must arrange for sale and sometimes transportation of the product. Beyond these factors, over which the producer may exercise some controls, are risks inherent in the marketplace, i.e., vagaries in supply and demand conditions. These are generally more pronounced for yegetable crops than for the more traditional crops produced in Alabama. *This study was supported by State and Federal funds under Hatch Project Alabama 586 (S-178) and by funds provided by the Tennessee Valley Authority. The authors gratefully acknowledge the contributions to this study made by Dr. Mason E. Marvel and Jack L. Turner. Their technical expertise and advice were invaluable. **Graduate Research Assistant, Professor, and Professor of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, and Agricultural Economist, Agricultural Institute, Tennessee Valley Authority. 4 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION Given these factors, fresh vegetable production can be characterized as "intensive production" because it requires a high level of management ability for success. Related to the identified factors is a high level of risk associated with yield and price variability. Also, barriers to successful market entrance, such as sufficient volume and quality, can be encountered by producers. Potential producers must recognize the importance of marketing activities. To this date, few marketing studies have been undertaken to evaluate the potential for Alabama grown fresh vegetable crops which are marketed at the wholesale level. Results of this study will provide information to current and potential vegetable crop farmers to better enable them to make informed decisions relative to the viability of alternative vegetable crop enterprises. STUDY AREA As a region, Sand Mountain is comprised of DeKalb and Blount counties, the southeast two-thirds of Marshall County, the northwest one-third of Etowah County, and the eastern two-thirds of Cullman County, figure 1. Elevation in the Sand Mountain area is typically above 500 feet, with approximately one-third of the area above 1,000 feet. Topography ranges from rolling plateaus to rugged mountains and soil type is primarily sandy. Because deep sand deposits are fairly uncommon, the soil drains well and crops respond well to commercial fertilizer (1). Average total precipitation in the area is 55.8 inches per year. The growing season for vegetables in the region runs from March to October during which time 64 percent of the total annual rainfall occurs (3). 1 While the total is adequate for the production of a wide variety of vegetable crops, the variability and timing of the rainfall can be a problem. Thus, availability of irrigation for production of high valued crops is desirable. The average size farm on Sand Mountain ranges from 133 acres in Cullman County to 205 acres in Blount County. Of 2,519 farms in the region, 405 are involved in some sort of vegetable production; 136 of the 405 farms produce $10,000 or more revenue from produce (12). Total acreage in the four counties in vegetables (including sweet corn and melons) is 3,925. Given the favorable climatic condition, suitable soil type, generally abundant supply of water for irrigation, and relatively close proximity to several Southern and Midwestern wholesale markets, the north Alabama region is well suited to vegetable crop production. 'For this report, the term vegetables includes sweet corn, sweet potatoes, irish potatoes, and watermelons, plus the enterprises which are generally identified in this manner. WHOLESALE MARKET POTENTIAL FOR FRESH VEGETABLES 5 Sand Mountain s::::: Tennessee Valley FIG. 1. Sand Mountain and Tennessee Valley areas of Alabama. 6 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION OBJECTIVES AND METHODOLOGY The broad objective of this study is to provide information to farmers in north Alabama relative to the wholesale market potential of a variety of fresh vegetables suitable for production in the region. While the study focuses on the Sand Mountain region, the results are also valid for production in the Tennessee Valley area and much of the northern one-third of the State. Specifically, the objectives are to: 1. Determine those fresh vegetable crops which are capable of being commercially produced in the region along with feasible harvest and/or marketing periods; 2. Estimate all pre- and post-harvest costs for the selected crops; 3. Determine the timing of "market windows" and analyze the relative market potential of the chosen crops at six national wholesale markets (Atlanta, Baltimore, Chicago, Cincinnati, New Orleans, and St. Louis); 2 and 4. Compare the relative levels of average per acre net income and analyze the risk associated with price and yield variability as they affect average per acre net income of the selected crops. In line with the objectives of this study, 15 vegetable crops were deemed to be sufficiently suitable to deserve detailed analysis for feasibility.3 Of the 15 selected crops, 10 were capable of being produced during both the spring and fall seasons. Planting and harvest/marketing periods were determined for these chosen crops, table 1. To facilitate the analysis, harvest dates were converted to weeks (1-52) using the dates and corresponding weeks presented in table 2. Harvest weeks used for the study are presented in table 3. Enterprise budgets were developed for the selected crops (Appendix tables 1 through 18) and costs of production and break-even costs/ prices were calculated, tables 4-6. 4 Calculations were made for 100 and 70 percent yields. 5 Since irrigation is vital for yield maximization, timing of harvest, and reduction of risks resulting from insufficient rainfall, all budgets included irrigation expenses. Weekly wholesale price data were collected at six terminal markets (Atlanta, Baltimore, Chicago, Cincinnati, New Orleans, and St. 2 The term "market window" is defined as that period of time for a given crop and market during which prices are generally at or above the producer's break-even or "at market" cost. Thus, it would define a feasible marketing point for the area. 3 Viability of the alternative enterprises was determined by discussions with research and extension personnel in the Horticulture and Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology departments of Auburn University. Also, input for several current producers was used. 4 Break-even cost-price refers to the per unit price that will just offset the per unit cost; there is no economic profit. 5 Yields of 100 percent assume use of best management practices, recommended varieties, and irrigation. WHOLESALE MARKET POTENTIAL FOR FRESH VEGETABLES 7 TABLE 1. PLANTING AND HARVEST DATES FOR SELECTED VEGETABLE CROPS GROWN IN THE SAND MOUNTAIN REGION OF ALABAMA Season and crop Spring Beans, snap...................... Broccoli......................... Cabbage ......................... Collards ......................... Corn, sweet...................... Cucumbers....................... Okra.............................. Peppers, bell...................... Potatoes, irish ..................... Potatoes, sweet ..................... Squash, yellow..................... Squash, zucchini................... Planting date 4/1 3/1 Harvest date' 5/20 4/22 4/27 5/24 6/1 - -4/15 -3/10 2/15 - 3/31 2/ 15 - 2/28 3/7 - 4/30 4/ - 4/30 10 5/1 - 5/15 4/15 - 5/31 3/1 -3/20 5/1 -7/24 -7/31 6/25 5/20 5/24 8/20 5/9 - 7/18 6/24 - 9/30 7/1 -9/30 6/8 -5/15 Tomatoes .......................... Turnip greens...................... Watermelons ...... a............ Fal Beans, snap................ Broccoli.............................. 4/15 - 5/10 4/15 - 5/10 4/15 - 5/10 3/1 -4/15 - .... .......... 5/1 8/7 5/15 8/21 8/7 6/4 5/25 7/7 4/1 7/20 10/5 10/1 10/17 9/15 9/15 7/20 7/ 10 8/25 9/1 8/ 15 -9/15 - 7/31 - 7/20 - 9/25 -5/31 - 8/3 - 8/10 - 8/20 - Cabbage............................ Cucumbers .......................... Collards.............................. Squash, yellow....................... Squash, zucchini ..................... Tomatoes............................. Turnip greens ........................ Watermelons.......................... 'Harvest dates vary according to planting date 8/7 - 8/21 7/15 - 8/20 6/15 - 7/31 6/1 - 8/15 .6/1 - 8/15 6/7 - 6/21 8/1 - 9/7 6/15 - 7/7 and variety. 10/31 11/11 11/11 10/25 11/15 10/25 10/25 10/25 11/7 9/25 TABLE 2. WEEKS AND CORRESPONDING DATES USED TO RECORD DATA Week 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 ,ea113. 311aU. .. Date ...... Jan.7 .............. Jan. 14 .. ............ Jan. 21 ............... .... Jan. 28 ... . ......... .... Feb.4 ........ ....... eb. 11 .............. Feb. 18 ....... Feb. 25 ...... .... .......... ....Mar.4 Mar. 11 ............ ............ Mar. 18 ............ Mar. 25 ...... Apr. . . .......... . . . . . . . ......... Apr.8 ...... ....... Apr. 15 ...... ....... Apr. 22 Apr. 29 .. . . ........ May6 ...... ....... May 13 ...... ....... May 20 ....... May 27 ...... June 3 ... . . . .. ........ ........... June 10 ............ June 17 ............ June 24 .. . . . . . . ......... Julyl1 ............ Week Date July8 27 .. July 15 28 29 .............July 22 30 .............July 29 31 . . . . . . . . . .Aug. 5 32 . . . .. . . . . .Aug. 12 33 . . . .. . . . . .Aug. 19 34 . . . . . . . . . Aug. 26 35 . . . .. . . . . . Sept. 2 36 . . . . . . . . . .Sept9 . Sept. 16 37 38 . . . . . . . . . Sept. 23 39 . . . . . . . . . Sept. 30 40 . . . . . . . . . .O ct.7 .Oct. 14 41 42 . . . .. . . . . . Oct. 21 43 . . . .. . . . . .Oct. 28 44 . . . . . . . . . .Nov. 4 45 . . . . . . . .. .Nov. 11 46 . ... . . . .Nov. 18 47 . . . .. . . . . .Nov. 25 48 . . . . . . . . . .D ec.2 49 . . . . . . . . . .Dec.9 50 . . . .. . . . . .Dec. 16 51 . . . .. . . . . .Dec. 23 . . . .. . . . . .Dec. 30 52 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . Source: Mizelle, Vegetable Economics, a PlanningGuide For 1983. 8 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION TABLE 3. TYPICAL HARVEST WEEKS BY SEASON FOR SELECTED VEGETABLE CROPS GROWN IN THE SAND MOUNTAIN REGION OF ALABAMA' Crop Beans, snap................................20-262 Broccoli ................................... Cabbage ................................... Collards................................... Corn, sweet ............................... Cucumbers ................................ Okra ..................................... Peppers, bell .............................. Potatoes, irish .............................. Potatoes, sweet ............................ Squash, yellow ............................. Squash, zucchini ........................... Tom atoes .................................. Turnip greens ........................... W atermelons .............................. 2 Harvest season Spring Fall Weeks 16-20 17-24 21-33 22-30 23-29 26-39 25-39 23-30 32-52 22-30 21-29 27-39 13-22 28-32 Weeks 39-44 39-45 41-45 37-46 - 37-43 - 28-43 28-43 35-43 35-45 34-39 'Harvest dates vary according to planting date and variety. Harvest week should be interpreted as a chronological week during the year. For example, snap beans produced on Sand Mountain in the spring would be typically harvested about the middle of May through the end of June, see table 2. Louis) for the years 1979-1983 (6,7,8,9,10,11).6 Since these data represent the price which the wholesale buyer receives for sale of a commodity, it was necessary to reduce this price by a marketing margin of 15 percent to estimate the price producers receive. 7 Alabama does not have a tradition as a major supplier of fresh vegetables; therefore, wholesale prices for Alabama grown produce are difficult to obtain. For this reason, prices used were frequently for produce supplied by other Southeastern States, such as Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina. This is especially true during the spring and fall seasons, with prices during the summer representing production regions more local to the markets. To evaluate the relative profitability potential of the crops identified, average per acre net incomes were calculated during the relevant harvest period for a given crop at a given market. The net incomes were then compared and ranked within each market. Average net income was also examined to determine if any seasonal trends existed, with the most profitable seasons being identified. Average income can be used to evaluate potential for vegetable crops, but it is frequently a poor measure when used alone because its variability is extremely important from a risk perspective. Many times one or two price quotes during the harvest season in a given 6 Data for 5 years were used in the anlaysis to provide a longer term view of prices for the respective markets and crops and to lessen the impacts of "abnormal" conditions influencing the markets. 7The 15 percent marketing margin was based on discussions with vegetable brokers. WHOLESALE MARKET POTENTIAL FOR FRESH VEGETABLES 9 year will "pull" the average up and not truly reflect the lower prices seen during other years. For this reason, individual weekly price quotations were examined and potential was measured as the percentage of weekly price quotations taken during the relevant harvest period which were at or above the producers "at market cost or break-even price" for a given crop at a given market (4,5). For quotations below the "at market cost," an analysis was made to determine if they occurred during specific years or weeks. The timing of the quotations below "at market cost" indicated the number of years which a producer might expect to realize positive net returns. This "market window" analysis was performed using "at market costs" calculated at the 100 percent yield level (yield a good producer might expect to obtain by using irrigation and recommended production practices and crop varieties). Analyses were also made at 70 percent production levels. It should be noted that there is a high probability that most inexperienced producers will operate at the reduced (70 percent) production yield level. In fact, a recent statewide survey indicated that most producers produce at or below this level. Risks associated with price variability were measured overall (between weeks and years) and within season (between weeks). Overall price variability was measured by the coefficient of variation, with seasonal variability being measured by the standard deviation of the first differences between weekly price quotations as a percentage of the mean price. While price variability is an important measure of risk, ultimately the producer will be concerned with the effect of price variability on net income. For this reason, price quotations were translated into per acre net income and the variability in per acre net income was then measured by the coefficient of variation. Given equal price variability between two crops, the crop with the greater cost per unit would have a greater risk associated with price related income variability. Of course, this risk would be influenced by the timing of costs. For example, strawberries would involve greater relative costs early in production than would watermelons, whereas watermelons involve a major cost outlay for labor at harvest. Thus, strawberries would involve more inherent risk than watermelons. As with price variability, yield variations can adversely affect per acre net income. Production risk, or risk associated with yield declines, was measured as the percentage decrease in average per acre net income resulting from a 30 percent decrease in yield. 8 For those 8Similar results can accrue from reductions in "marketable" product due to problems with product quality. TABLE 4. ESTIMATED PER ACRE COSTS AND YIELDS FOR SELECTED FRESH VECETABLE CROPS GROWN IN THE SAND MOUNTAIN REGION OF ALABAMA, CALCULATED AT THE 100 PERCENT YIELD LEVEL Season and crop Unit Pre-harvest variable cost Preharvest fixed colt Harvest and packing cost 100% Total cost' yield Units 200 Dol. Beans, snap ........................ Bu. carton Broccoli ............................. Carton 14's-18's Cabbage ............................ 50-lb. carton 1 19-bu. carton Collards (bunched) Collards (loose) ....................... 11/9-bu. carton Corn, sweet.......................4.5-5 doz. carton Spring 296 328 408 454 458 365 375 Dol. 110 103 118 146 153 135 112 Dol. 690 Dol. 1,096 657 553 546 62811,239 1,088 1,079 1,146 a- 325 350 300 400 r .................. 600 833 1,100 1,320 250 225 a 0C I- Cucumbers........................ Peppers, bell 11/9-bu. carton 11/9-bu. carton Okra...............................5/9-bu. carton Potatoes, irish......................100-lb. bag Potatoes, irish......................50-lb. bag Potatoes, sweet.....................50-lb. carton Squash, yellow.... ................. 1-bu. carton Squash, yellow.....................5/9-bu. carton 5/9-bu. carton Squash, zucchini .................... Tomatoes ....................... 298 671 97 172 1,361 1,066 1,756 1,909 360 360 ......................... 25-30-lb. carton 1,672 648 648 544 339 339 326 220 116 116 121 105 105 100 258 1,610 628 321 439 825 540 623 623 135 3,540 1,085 1,203 1,490 984 1,067 1,049 938 170 340 250 200 360 360 700 r Turnip greens (loose)................. 11/9-bu. carton 90 400 Watermelons......................Hundredweight Table 4 Continued on page 11 439 83 657 250 Co -a 0 z TABLE 4 (CONTINUED). ESTIMATED PER ACRE COSTS AND YIELDS FOR SELECTED FRESH VEGETABLE CROPS GROWN IN THE SAND MOUNTAIN REGION OF ALABAMA, CALCULATED AT THE 100 PERCENT YIELD LEVEL Season and crop Unit Pre-harvest variable costcost Dol. Preharvest fixed Dol. 110 103 118 146 146 112 105 105 105 258 90 85 Harvest and packing cost Dol. 690 657 553 546 Total100% cost Dol. 1,101 1,089 1,114 1,146 1,229 1,325 990 1,073 1,073 3,568 955 667 level Units 200 325 350 300 400 225 200 360 360 700 400 250 Fall Beans, snap ......................... Broccoli ............................. Cabbage ............................ Collards (bunched) ................... Collards (loose) ....................... Cucumbers .......................... Squash, yellow ....................... Squash, yellow ....................... Squash, zucchini ..................... Tomatoes............................ Turnip greens (loose) .................. Watermelons ........................ Bu. carton Carton 14's-18's 50-lb. carton 1 1/9-bu. carton 1 1/9-bu. carton 1 1/9-bu. carton 1-bu. carton 5/9-bu. carton 5/9-bu. carton 25-30-lb. carton 1 1/9-bu. carton Hundredweight 301 329 443 454 455 380 345 345 345 1,700 237 447 628 833 540 623 623 1,610 628 135 'Less transportation cost. 2The 100 percent yield level represents the output of an operation using good management practices, recommended varieties, and irrigation. These levels are based on information provided by research and extension personnel in Horticulture and Agricultural Economics departments at Auburn University and other published sources. Source: Enterprise budgets in Appendix tables 1-18. Budgets for fall crops were not included in the Appendix because, except for irrigation and insecticide costs, there was little difference from the spring budgets. 12 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION TABLE 5. ESTIMATED PER UNIT TRANSPORTATION COSTS FROM SAND MOUNTAIN REGION TO THE SELECTED MARKETS' Crop Unit Cost/unit, by selected markets Atlanta Cincinnati St. Louis Dol. 0.20 .24 .30 .24 .30 .33 .12 .24 .60 .30 .30 .24 .12 .18 .60 Dol. 0.57 .67 .87 .70 .87 .96 .35 .70 1.74 .87 .87 .70 .35 .52 1.74 Dol. 0.55 .68 .85 .68 .85 .94 .34 .68 1.70 .85 .85 .68 .34 .51 1.70 Beans, snap.................... Bu. carton Broccoli ..................... Cartop 14's-18's Cabbage ...................... 50-lb. carton Collards and turnip greens ....... 1 1/9-bu. carton Corn, sweet .................. .4.5-5-doz. carton Cucumbers .................... 1 1/9-bu. carton Okra ........................ 5/9-bu. carton Peppers, bell .................. 1 1/9-bu. carton Potatoes, irish. ................ .100-lb. bag Potatoes, irish. ................. 50-lb. bag Potatoes, sweet. ............... .50-lb. carton Squash, yellow ............... 1-bu. carton Squash, yellow and zucchini..... .5/9-bu. carton Tomatoes ................... 25-30-lb. carton Watermelons .................. Hundredweight 'Based on a 40,000-pound load at a rate of $1.60 per mile with no back haul. Source: The truck rate was determined from a personal interview with a commercial carrier based out of Knoxville, Tennessee. crops with a higher per unit pre-harvest cost, the decrease in net income resulting from a yield decrease would be greater than for a crop with lower pre-harvest cost. Both price (seasonal and overall) and income variability are measures of positive and negative fluctuations. While producers are concerned primarily with negative variability in expected price or income below some target level, the measures used in this study indicate which crops tend to have the greatest risk of negative net returns during some years. It should be noted that a coefficient of variation greater than 100 would indicate a high probability of negative net returns during some years. To facilitate the analysis, crops were separated into five groups based on similarity of market periods and production practices. Group one consisted of early spring crops, such as broccoli, cabbage, and turnip greens. Yellow and white sweet corn were analyzed together in group two. Group three contained late spring-summer crops such as collards, cucumbers, snap beans, yellow squash, zucchini squash, and watermelons. The full season crops (bell peppers, okra, and tomatoes) were analyzed in group four. Group five contained irish and sweet potatoes. Group six consisted of fall crops such as broccoli, snap beans, collards, turnip greens, cucumbers, tomatoes, cabbage, watermelons, and yellow and zucchini squash. Evaluation of individual crop's market potential was done mainly within groups. However, due to the overlapping nature of harvest pe- WHOLESALE MARKET POTENTIAL FOR FRESH VEGETABLES 13 riods, some cross group analysis was necessary primarily between the late spring-summer crops (groups two and three) and the full season crops (group four). While six markets were examined, the following results focus on the three primary markets (Atlanta, Cincinnati, and St. Louis). The primary markets were designated as such due to the quality and consistency of data and proximity to the study region. The remaining three markets (Baltimore, Chicago, and New Orleans) are discussed when important relationships are identified. In summary, the potential for the 15 identified crops was evaluated using six criteria: (1) average net income per acre, (2) percentage of TABLE 6. PER UNIT BREAK-EVEN PRICE-COST CALCULATED AT THE 100 AND 70 PERCENT YIELD LEVELS AT THE SELECTED MARKETS Season and crop Unit Break-even price, by market and yield level St. Louis Cincinnati Atlanta 100% 70% 100% 70% 100% 70% yield yield yield yield yield yield level level level level level level Dol. Dol. Dol. Dol. Dol. Dol. 5.67 3.58 3.38 4.14 3.33 4.69 6.19 8.41 5.54 6.98 3.83 6.26 5.16 3.08 3.03 5.23 2.58 3.22 5.70 3.58 3.48 4.06 3.31 6.21 5.19 3.10 3.10 5.27 2.62 3.26 6.54 4.15 4.02 5.03 3.99 5.55 7.11 9.25 6.54 8.90 4.79 7.40 6.11 3.61 3.54 6.41 2.92 4.12 6.58 4.15 4.16 4.91 3.95 7.15 6.15 3.64 3.64 6.47 2.98 4.18 6.04 4.04 3.95 4.60 3.79 5.26 6.81 8.86 5.99 8.12 4.40 6.83 5.61 3.31 3.26 5.57 3.04 4.36 6.07 4.04 4.05 4.51 3.76 6.84 5.64 3.33 3.33 5.61 3.08 4.40 6.91 4.61 4.59 5.49 4.45 6.12 7.74 9.71 7.00 10.04 5.36 7.97 6.57 3.84 3.76 6.76 3.37 5.26 6.95 4.61 4.73 5.37 4.41 7.77 6.61 3.86 3.86 6.81 3.43 5.32 6.03 4.02 3.93 4.58 3.77 5.24 6.79 8.85 5.98 8.08 4.38 6.81 5.60 3.30 3.25 5.56 3.02 4.32 6.06 4.02 4.03 4.50 3.75 6.82 5.63 3.32 3.32 5.60 3.06 4.36 6.90 4.59 4.57 5.47 4.43 6.10 7.72 9.69 6.98 10.01 5.34 7.95 6.55 3.83 3.76 6.74 3.36 5.22 6.94 4.59 4.71 5.35 4.39 7.75 6.59 3.86 3.86 6.80 3.42 5.28 Spring Beans, snap .............. Bu. carton Broccoli ................. Carton 14's-18's Cabbage ............... .50-lb. carton Collards (bunched) ........ 11/9-bu. carton Collards (loose) ......... 1..1/9-bu. carton Corn, sweet ............ .4.5-5-doz. carton Cucumbers .............. 1 1/9-bu. carton Okra. ................... 1-bu. carton Peppers, bell ............ 1 1/9-bu. carton Potatoes, irish........... .100-lb. bag Potatoes, irish............ 50-lb. bag Potatoes, sweet...........50-lb. carton Squash, yellow ........... 1-bu. carton Squash, yellow ........... 5/9-bu. carton 5/9-bu. carton Squash, zucchini ......... Tomatoes................ 25-30-lb. carton Turnip greens (loose) ...... 1 1/9-bu. carton Watermelons ............ Hundredweight Fall Beans, snap.............. Bu. carton Broccoli.................Carton 14's-18's Cabbage ................ 50-lb. carton Collards (bunched)........ 1 1/9-bu. carton Collards (loose)........... 1 1/9-bu. carton Cucumbers .............. 1 1/9-bu. carton Squash, yellow ............ 1-bu. carton Squash, yellow ........... 5/9-bu. carton Squash, zucchini ......... 5/9-bu. carton Tomatoes................ 25-30-lb. carton Turnip greens (loose) ...... 1 1/9-bu. carton Watermelons ............ Hundredweight Source: Break-even costs were calculated using production, harvesting, packing, and transportation costs in tables 4 and 5. 14 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION weekly price quotations above the calculated "at market cost or break-even price" (price-cost criterion) for the 100 and 70 percent yield levels, (3) sensitivity of average per acre net income to a 30 percent reduction in yield, (4) overall variability (between weeks and years) in weekly average prices, (5) within-season variability (between weeks) in weekly average prices, and (6) overall variability (between weeks and years) in six groupings with potential evaluated from the spring through to the fall season at six terminal markets. ANALYSIS The "market window" portion of this study, which compared individual weekly price quotations received at the six wholesale markets with the producers break-even costs, identified the crops that had the most favorable price-cost relationships based on historical prices received. Used in conjunction with the "market window" analysis, the risk analysis indicated which crops showed the greatest profit potential and the risks associated with yield and price-related income variability. GROUP ONE: EARLY SPRING CROPS Broccoli Of the early spring crops (broccoli, cabbage, and turnip greens), broccoli showed the greatest market potential based on both a pricecost (break-even) criterion and average per acre net income, tables 7 and 8. All broccoli price quotations were above the break-even pricecost in the three primary markets and at both yield levels, table 8. Broccoli also showed low risk related to both yield and price related income variability, tables 9, 10, and 11. On average, producers would benefit by the earliest possible entry into the spring broccoli market (weeks 16 through 20), with mean prices declining an average of $1.52 during that period, figure 2. While good market potential may be indicated, it is noted that broccoli prices at all six markets were those received by California producers (California supplies approximately 98 percent of all broccoli shipped into terminal markets) and may be approximately 30 percent higher than Alabama producers could expect to receive. As other producing regions outside of California recognize and react to the potential that is indicated for broccoli production, both prices and price stability could be adversely affected and thus lessen the attractiveness of broccoli production. Because broccoli has not been traditionally produced in Alabama WHOLESALE MARKET POTENTIAL FOR FRESH VEGETABLES TABLE 7. AVERAGE PER ACRE NET INCOME FOR SELECTED SPRING VEGETABLE CROPS AT ALTERNATIVE MARKETS AND YIELD LEVELS, RANKED BY CROP WITHIN MARKET, NORTH l ALABAMA 15 Crop Net income/acre, by markets and yield levels Atlanta Cincinnati St. Louis 100% 70% 100% 70% 100% 70% yield yield yield yield yield yield level level level level level level Dol. 271(9) Dol. Beanm snap ..... s, 561(10)2 Brocc soli ........ 1,561(1) Cabb age ....... 683(7) Colla rds ........ 3 513(11) Corn,, sweet (Y) 194(16) 4 Corn,, sweet (W) 567(9) Cucu mbers ..... 502(12) Okra ........... 590(8) Pepp ers, bell ... 851(3) Potat oes, irish... 756(5) Potat oes, sweet 350(13) 340(14) Squa sh, yellow.. Squassh, zucchini 750(6) 5 Toma toes ...... 1,292(2) Turni p greens... 790(4) Wate rmelons ... 266(15) 963(1) 320(6) 171(12) -15(16) 247(10) 206(11) 296(8) 344(4) 300(7) 45(14) 105(13) 397(3) 326(5) 460(2) 30(15) Dol. 740(8) 1,698(1) 880(4) 357(15) 200(16) 555(12) 657(10) 1,113(2) 740(7) 488(13) 468(14) 744(6) 737(9) 988(3) 756(5) 598(11) Dol. 396(5) 1,060(1) 459(3) 66(15) -9(16) 240(11) 315(8) 661(2) 265(9) 113(13) 128(12) 387(7) 388(6) 112(14) 436(4) 262(10) Dol. 886(4) 1,409(1) 518(10) -34(16) Dol. 499(3) 858(1) 205(9) -207(16) 48(15) 450(12) 589(9) 1,258(2) 771(5) 379(14) 459(11) 592(8) 709(7) 902(3) 415(13) 750(6) -116(15) 166(11) 267(8) 762(2) 287(6) 37(14) 122(12) 281(7) 369(4) 52(13) 197(10) 368(5) 'Analyses were conducted based on price data for 1979-83 and cost data for 1985. 2 lowest average per acre net income. 3Yellow sweet corn. 4 White sweet corn. 5 Based on limited data. Numbers in parentheses are ranking of crops in ascending order from the highest to the or the Southeast, information concerning production problems and characteristics and appropriate varieties may not be available for some time. Broccoli also has special harvest and packing requirements, such as immediate cooling after harvest, which may require the purchase of specialized equipment such as a hydrocooler. Given the uncertainties of production, caution should be exercised when considering broccoli as an alternative crop. Turnip Greens Turnip greens showed good market potential, with prices being above the break-even price-cost at both yield levels 100 percent of the time in all but the St. Louis market, table 8. Average per acre net income was approximately equal to that of spring cabbage in both the Cincinnati and St. Louis markets, where turnip green prices were slightly lower than in the Atlanta market, table 7. Turnip greens showed no generally definable trend in average price levels during the spring harvest season (weeks 13 through 22), figure 3. Prices rose and then declined during the market period, but did 16 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION TABLE 8. PERCENTAGE OF WEEKLY PRICE QUOTATIONS WHICH ARE ABOVE THE BREAK-EVEN PRICE-COST AT ALTERNATIVE MARKETS AND YIELD LEVELS FOR SELECTED SPRING VEGETABLE CROPS RANKED BY CROP WITHIN MARKET, NORTH ALABAMA' Atlanta Crop 100% yield level Pct. 100(1)2 100(1) 95(7) 100(1) 72(16) 95(7) 91(10) 87(12) 95(7) 82(12) 75(14) 91(10) 100(1) 100(1) 100(1) 75(14) Income/acre, by markets and yield levels Cincinnati St. Louis 70% 100% 70% 100% 70% yield yield yield yield yield level level level level level Pct. 100(1) 100(1) 100(1) 83(13) 70(16) 92(12) 100(1) 100(1) 95(10) 78(14) 75(15) 100(1) 100(1) 94(11) 100(1) 100(1) Pct. 97(6) 100(1) 89(7) 67(11) 45(16) 76(9) 71(10) 100(1) 58(13) 51(15) 58(14) 100(1) 100(1) 63(12) 100(1) 80(8) Pct. 100(1) 100(1) 77(11) 32(16) 53(15) 85(9) 94(6) 100(1) 81(10) 73(13) 72(14) 88(7) 87(8) 76(12) 95(4) 95(4) Pct. 97(3) 100(1) 47(12) 14(16) 28(15) 69(9) 80(7) 100(1) 61(10) 47(13) 60(11) 83(6) 84(5) 44(14) 90(4) 80(8) Beans, snap..... Broccoli ........ Cabbage ....... Collards ........ Corn, sweet (Y)34 Corn, sweet (W) Cucumbers ..... Okra........... Peppers, bell ... Potatoes, irish... Potatoes, sweet Squash, yellow.. Squash, zucchini . Tomatoes 5 . . . . . Turnip greens... Watermelons ... 2 Pct. 100(1) 100(1) 65(12) 76(8) 38(16) 86(5) 57(15) 83(6) 83(6) 71(10) 58(14) 71(10) 97(4) 76(8) 100(1) 60(13) 'Analyses were conducted based on price data for 1979-83 and cost data for 1985. Numbers in parentheses are rankings of crops in descending order from the greatest percentage of price quotations above the break-even cost to the least. 3 Yellow sweet corn. 4 White sweet corn. 5 Based on limited data. TABLE 9. SENSITIVITY OF AVERAGE PER ACRE NET INCOME TO A 30 PERCENT DECREASE IN YIELD FOR SELECTED SPRING VEGETABLE CROPS AT SELECTED MARKETS, NORTH ALABAMA' Crop Net income decrease, by alternative markets Atlanta Cincinnati St. Louis Pct. 51.6 38.3 53.1 66.7 107.5 56.5 58.9 49.9 59.7 60.0 87.0 69.3 47.0 67.6 41.8 88.7 Pct. 46.5 37.6 47.8 81.5 104.5 56.8 52.1 40.6 64.2 76.8 72.6 48.0 47.3 88.7 42.3 56.2 Pct. 43.7 39.1 60.4 -514.82 343.8 63.2 54.7 39.4 62.8 90.3 73.4 52.6 48.0 94.2 52.4 50.9 Beans, snap....................... Broccoli.......................... Cabbage ......................... Collards.......................... . 3. Corn, sweet (Y)4 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . Corn, sweet (W) Cucumbers....................... Okra............................. Peppers, bell ..................... Potatoes, irish..................... Potatoes, sweet.................... Squash, yellow.................... Squash, zucchini . .................. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tomatoes5 . . . Turnip greens..................... W atermelons ..................... 2 'Analyses were conducted based on price data for 1979-83 and cost data for 1985. A negative number indicates negative average per acre income at both yield levels. 3 Yellow sweet corn. aWhite sweet corn. 5 Based on limited data. TABLE 10. AVERAGE WEEKLY PRICE, COEFFICIENT OF VARIATION, AND PERCENT SEASONAL VARIATION IN PRICE FOR SELECTED SPRING VEGETABLE CROPS RANKED BY CROP WITHIN ALTERNATIVE MARKETS, NORTH ALABAMA' Atlanta Crop Unit Price per unit Dol. 8.48 8.39 5.33 5.85 5 .4 7 6 .9 6 Cincinnati Seasonal variation Pct. 22.17(11) 9.54(5) 17.45(8) 6.15(2) 1 9 .2 0 (1 0 ) 1 5 .8 0 (7 ) St. Louis Seasonal variation Pct. 22.28(15) 6.69(2) 16.38(11) 6.82(3) 1 6 .9 7 ( 12 ) 1 8 .9 6 ( 13 ) Coefficient of variation Pct. 19.86(5)2 20.73(7) 45.83(15) 17.88(1) ) 2 1.6 6 ( 1 0 1 9 .8 6 (4 ) Price per unit Dol. 9.74 9.27 6.47 4.69 6 .0 7 7 .4 9 Coefficient of variation Pct. 23.24(12) 18.29(7) 39.63(16) 17.50(5) Beans, snap........ 1-bu. carton Broccoli........... Carton 14's-18's Cabbage......... . .50-lb. carton Collards . . . . . .4 . . . .1 .5 -5 - d o z.carton 1/9-bu. ca r to n 4 Corn, sweet (Y) ... .4 .5 - 5 - d o z. ca r to n Corn, sweet (W)' .. Cucumbers ........ 1 1/9-bu. carton Okra6 . . . . . . . . . . . . .5/9-bu. carton Peppers, bell 7...... 11/9-bu. carton Potatoes, irish . .. . 50-lb. bag Potatoes, sweet.....50-lb. carton Squash, yellow 8 . ... 5/9-bu. carton Squash, zucchini ... 5/9-bu. carton Turnip greens ......1/9-bu. carton 1 Watermelons ...... Hundredweight 1 9. 14 (9 ) 2 2. 3 7 ( 1 1) Price per unit Dol. 10.46 8.36 5.41 3.69 5 .4 4 7 .0 5 Coefficient of variation Pct. 21.01(5) 22.81(7) 40.02(15) 16.50(2) 2 2 .0 9 (6 ) 2 3 .6 6 (8 ) Seasonal variation Pct. 22.94(10) 10.29(2) 25.51(13) 15.71(6) 2 23.17(11) 13.84(5) 18.72(9) 13.29(4) 9.36(1) 12.53(3) 29.89(14) 16.26(7) 37.93(15) 3 .3 5 (1 2 ) 18 .0 1 (8 ) 8.42 11.36 7.91 6.06 7.66 6.86 5.12 4.56 4.29 27.49(13) 19.52(2) 20.77(8) 27.58(12) 23.12(11) 23.24(12) 21.34(9) 19.64(3) 33.68(14) 30.17(15) 17.69(9) 15.68(6) 7.10(3) 6.14(1) 27.11(14) 24.61(13) 7.46(4) 24.00(12) 9.74 9.38 8.05 5.84 8.70 5.38 5.31 4.69 6.76 23.37(13) 16.80(2) 21.91(10) 27.59(15) 25.10(14) 17.96(6) 16.90(3) 9.73(1) 18.43(8) 29.47(16) 13.54(6) 15.53(8) 11.13(5) 8.52(4) 15.80(9) 16.20(10) 6.61(1) 19.82(14) 9.41 9.83 8.12 10.31 8.65 4.95 5.22 4.06 7.33 18.62(4) 15.89(1) 28.38(11) 29.19(13) 27.06(10) 25.13(9) 31.16(14) 18.26(3) 28.53(12) 'Analyses were conducted based on price data for 1979-83 and cost data for 1985. 'Numbers in parentheses are ranking of crops in descending order from most variable to the least variable. 3 Prices for collards are for loose greens in the Cincinnati and St. Louis markets and for bunched greens in the Atlanta market. 4Yellow sweet corn 5 6White sweet corn. Price for okra in the Atlanta market is for 1-bushel carton. 7 Price for irish potatoes in the St. Louis market is for a 100-pound bag. "Price for yellow squash in the Atlanta market is for a 1-bushel carton. TABLE 11. COEFFICIENT OF VARIATION AND PLUS AND MINUS ONE STANDARD DEVIATION DEV.) IN AVERAGE PER ACRE NET INCOME FOR SELECTED SPRING VECETABLE CROPS BANKED BY CROP WITHIN ALTERNATIVE MARKETS, NORTH ALABAMA' (STD. Atlanta Crop Coefficient of variation Net income/acre + One -One Std. deV. Std. deV. Dol. Dol. 224 898 2,126 995 1,538 -172 827 199 490 -102 912 221 1,023 -19 Coefficient of variation Cincinnati Net income/acre + One - One Std. dev. Std. dev. Dol. Dol. 1,193 287 2,249 1,147 1,777 -17 685 29 491 -90 955 155 1,169 145 Coefficient of variation St. Louis Net income/acre + One Std. dev. Dol. 1,326 2,029 1,277 210 348 867 983 -One Std. dev. Dol. 447 789 -240 -278 -253 33 195 763 -59 Pct. Pct. Pct. Beans, snap.. 61.21(7) 49.61(3) 60.02(4)2 Broccoli .......... 36.23(1) 32.44(2) 43.99(2) Cabbage .......... 125.26(13) 101.92(13) 146.26(14) Collards ......... 3 61.25(5) 91.80(12) -724.70(16) Corn, sweet (Y)4 .... 152.84(16) 145.11(16) 630.16(15) Corn, sweet (W) .. . 61.01(5) 72.08(8) 92.57(9) 103.80(12) 77.95(9) 66.93(4) Cucumbers... 75.07(9) 1,035 147 44.89(4) 1,613 613 39.37(1) Okra............ Peppers, bell.. 104 107.69(10) 69.45(8) 1,443 260 85.89(10) 1,)375 75.15(9) 1,324 188 112.32(14) 1,035 -60 135.10(13) Potatoes, irish.. 126.54(14) 792 -93 116.69(15) 1,014 -78 127.55(12) Potatoes, sweet. 93.72(11) 659 21 46.72(5) 396 75.62(7) Squash.......... Squash, zucchini .. . 52.42(3) 1,143 357 43.84(3) 414 82.61(8) Turnip greens.. 45.34(2) 1,148 432 25.41(1) 948 564 71.57(6) Watermelons.. 135. 79(15) 628 -95 52. 09(6) 909 286 69. 72(5) 'Analyses were conducted based on price data for 1979-83 and cost data for 1985. 2Numbers in parentheses are crops ranked in descending order from the most variable to the least variable. 3 Yellow sweet corn. 4White sweet corn. 11,753 1,600 1,092 1,060 890 1,044 1,039 1,272 -133 -126 144 123 11,711 295 118 227 WHOLESALE WHOLESALE MARKET POTENTIAL FOR FRESH VEGETABLES $unit $/unit MARKET POTENTIAL FOR FRESH VEGETABLES 19 19 15 14 13 12 11 10 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 - Market Atlanta -- St.Louis Cincinnati 8 7 6 5 4 S 2 1 15 20 May 20 25 30 35 July 29 Weeks 40 Oct. 7 45 50 Dec.16 -----Market Atlanta St.Louis Cincinnati 3 2 115 20 May 20 25 30 35 40 Oct. 7 45 50 Dec.16 7 6 July 29 Weeks FIG. 2. Average weekly adjusted broccoli wholesale prices (wholesale price less 15 percent for marketing charge), Atlanta, Cincinnati, and St. Louis markets, per carton 14's-18's, 1979-83. FIG. 3. Average weekly adjusted turnip green (loose) wholesale prices (wholesale price less 15 percent marketing charge), Atlanta, Cincinnati, and St. Louis markets, per 1 1/9-bushel carton, 1979-83. so at different times and at different rates in each market. Overall, average prices tended to remain fairly level during the relevant harvest period. Turnip greens had low risk associated with both yield and price related income variability, tables 9, 10, and 11. Turnip greens, due to their low cost of production, demonstrated reduced risk associated with total crop failure or inability to find a buyer. The potential indicated for turnip greens should be evaluated relative to their limited demand and the historically strong ties between large, mainly Georgia, producers and wholesale buyers. The existence of producers with large operations specializing in production of a number of types of greens may present emerging producers with barriers to market entrance. Opportunities to supply only turnip greens may be limited because wholesale buyers may require a variety of greens. Because of relatively limited demand, significant acreage increases could also result in a saturation of the market and, thus, a decrease in price levels. This could adversely affect profitability of this enterprise. Cabbage On average, cabbage showed favorable profit potential based on average per acre net income, table 7. Similar potential was exhibited using a price-cost criterion at the 100 percent yield level in all but the 20 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION St. Louis markets, table 8. Considerably less potential was evidenced at the 70 percent yield level (65, 89, and 47 percent in the Atlanta, Cincinnati, and St. Louis markets, respectively). Favorable price quotations decrease by 30 percent in both the Atlanta and St. Louis markets as a result of a 30 percent decrease in yield, pointing out the need for the highest economically feasible production levels. 9 Examination of the price quotations below the 70 percent break-even price level indicated that producers could expect to receive positive net returns in about 2 of 5 years in the Atlanta and St. Louis markets. Spring cabbage also demonstrated a high degree of risk associated with overall and within season price variability and price related income variability relative to all other spring and summer crops, tables 10 and 11. As indicated by the coefficient of variation being greater than 100 in all markets, table 11, there is a high probability of negative net returns during some years with spring cabbage production. Because of the high degree of price and income variability, producers can expect to receive high prices during some years and extremely low prices during others. As such, average prices tend to be higher than could be expected during most years. For weeks 10 through 50, the highest average prices received for cabbage were during the Alabama harvest period (weeks 17 through 24), figure 4. In all but the Atlanta market, prices generally peaked during the first 3 to 6 weeks of the marketing period and then declined. On average, producers would benefit from the earliest possible market entrance. GROUP Two: YELLOW AND WHITE SWEET CORN Both yellow and white sweet corn were examined separately from other late spring-early summer crops because of the uniqueness of their production. Sweet corn, unlike crops such as snap beans, squash, or cucumbers, is basically harvested in a "once over" operation and thereby requires more careful consideration of planting and potential harvest dates. Producers are also able to manage and harvest more acres of sweet corn than most other vegetable crops. Yellow sweet corn showed extremely low potential when evaluated using both a per acre net income and the price-cost criteria, tables 7 and 8. An average of 65 and 37 percent of the weekly price quotations were above the break-even price calculated at the 100 and 70 percent yield levels, respectively. A 30 percent decrease in yield resulted in An economically feasible production level would be one where the additional cost of producing one more unit of output would be less than or equal to the additional income generated by the additional unit of output. 9 WHOLESALE MARKET POTENTIAL FOR FRESH VEGETABLES 21 an average 31 percent decrease in price quotations above the breakeven price level and an average per acre net income decrease of 108, 105, and 344 percent in the Atlanta, Cincinnati, and St. Louis markets, respectively, tables 8 and 9. Examination of yellow sweet corn price quotations below the break-even price showed producers could expect to realize profits in 3 of 5 years at the 100 percent yield level and in 1 of 5 years at the 70 percent yield level. White sweet corn had higher average per acre net income and showed much greater potential than yellow sweet corn at both breakeven price-cost levels, tables 7 and 8. On average, 91 percent of the price quotations were above the price-cost break-even level for 100 percent yield with an average of 77 percent being above the pricecost break-even level for 70 percent yield. On average, a 30 percent decrease in yield resulted in a 14 percent decrease in favorable white sweet corn price quotations and an average 59 percent decrease in average per acre net income, tables 8 and 9. This indicates lower production risk with white than with yellow sweet corn. While both types of sweet corn showed overall and within season price variability generally equal to each other and that of other alternative late spring-summer crops, table 10, yellow sweet corn had high risk associated with income related variability as indicated by coefficients of variation being greater than 100 in all markets, tables 10 and 11. It is generally agreed that the quantity demanded for white sweet corn makes up approximately 15 percent of the total demand for all sweet corn, with producers often growing both types and shipping them together in mixed loads. This renders specialization in the production of the more profitable and less risky white sweet corn varieties impractical, thereby pointing out the need for head-to-head evaluation of both varieties. Overall, average prices during the harvest season for sweet corn (weeks 22 through 30) peaked at about week 26 and then declined, figures 5 and 6. Prices received for yellow sweet corn declined by $1.76 per 4.5- to 5-dozen carton during the period between weeks 26 and 30, while prices received for white sweet corn declined an average of $2.20 per 4.5- to 5-dozen carton during this same period. Generally, the most favorable market period for sweet corn existed between weeks 26 and 28. Producers of both yellow and white sweet corn should enter the market as early as possible to "hit" the favorable July 4 market. Less potential exists after the third week (week 30) in July for yellow sweet corn. Aside from low market potential, sweet corn production presents producers with other problems which deserve consideration. Sweet 22 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION $lunit Market -------- $/unit 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 Atlanta St.Louis Cincinnati 15 14 - 13 12 11 10 9 8 --- Market Atlanta StLouis Cincinnati I 5 - , 5/ 4 3 23 1 0 15 20 May 20 25 '0''e 4 3 2 1 30 35 40 Oct. 7 45 50 Dec. 16 15 20 May 20 25 30 35 40 Oct.7 45 50 Dec.16 July 29 Weeks July 29 Weeks FIG. 4. Average weekly adjusted cabbage wholesale prices (wholesale price lanta, Cincinnati, and St. Louis markets, per 50-pound carton, 1979-83. FIG. 5. Average weekly adjusted sweet corn (yellow) wholesale prices (whole- less 15 percent marketing charge), At- sale price less 15 percent marketing charge), Atlanta, Cincinnati, and St. Louis markets, per 4.5 - 5 dozen carton, 1979-83. corn production requires an extremely high level of management to meet quality requirements. It also requires immediate cooling to remove field heat and maintain a high sugar content necessary for high quality. Thus, access to a hydrocooler is important. Given the relatively high fixed cost of specialized cooling equipment, high variable cost of production, and low per acre net returns, profitable sweet corn must be on a larger scale than is recommended for other alternative vegetable crops. Because production characteristics of sweet corn allow producers to manage more acres than would be possible with most other alternative fresh vegetable crops, profit potential for sweet corn may be greater than indicated on a per acre basis. If north Alabama producers are to compete favorably in sweet corn markets, they must maintain the highest possible economically feasible production levels. This requirement is indicated by the highly sensitive nature of income from yellow sweet corn production to yield decreases, along with the low potential shown at the 100 (250 crates) and 70 percent (175 crates) yield levels. If producers in Alabama are to be successful in sweet corn production, they must strive for yields greater than 250 crates per acre. With irrigation and proper production practices, yield levels as high as 300 crates per acre are possible in Alabama. Producers also must make every effort to get into mar- WHOLESALE MARKET POTENTIAL FOR FRESH VEGETABLES 23 kets as early as possible with acceptablevarieties in order to "hit" the more favorable July 4 markets. Due to high production costs, sweet corn producers must recognize the high degree of risk associated with low yields, crop failure, inadequate pest (primarily earworm) control, or the inability to find a buyer for the crop. Producers must also expect and be able to assume the risk of large negative net returns during some years. GROUP THREE: LATE SPRING-SUMMER CROPS This group consists of crops which are harvested starting in late May (snap beans, collards, and zucchini squash), early June (cucumbers and yellow squash), and mid-July (watermelons). Snap Beans Snap beans showed the greatest market potential of all late spring and summer vegetable crops, based on a price-cost criterion with an average 100 and 98 percent of the price quotations being above the 100 and 70 percent break-even price-cost levels, respectively, table 8. Snap beans had good net income potential and low risk associated with both yield and price related income variability, tables 7, 9, 10, and 11. On average, prices received for snap beans during the spring har$/unit 15 14 13 12 11 10 - - --Market Atlanta St Louis Cincinnati $/unit 15 14 13 12 \ 9 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 15 20 May 20 25 30 35 40 Oct.7 45 50 Dec.16 2 1 15 4 - - -StIu-is 3 Market SAtlanta ----- St. Louis Cincinnati 20 May 20 25 30 35 40 Oct. 7 45 50 Dec.16 July 29 Weeks July 29 Weeks FIG. 6. Average weekly adjusted sweet corn (white) wholesale prices (wholesale price less 15 percent marketing charge), Atlanta, Cincinnati, and St.Louis markets, per 4.5 - 5 dozen carton, 1979-83. FIG. 7. Average weekly adjusted snap bean wholesale prices (wholesale price less 15 percent marketing charge), Atlanta, Cincinnati, and St. Louis markets, per one-bushel carton, 1979-83. 24 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION vest season (weeks 20 through 26) tended to rise during the first 2 to 3 weeks of the marketing period, reach a peak between weeks 23 and 24, and then decline, figure 7. This peak in average price occurs at a time when Florida, the major supplier of snap beans at the six markets during the early spring, is completing its year's production and other Southern States, such as Georgia and North Carolina, are just entering the market. An evaluation of the data showed that during this time incoming producing regions were, on average, receiving prices higher than Florida. This situation may reflect a potentially favorable market period for Alabama producers. As more producers entered the markets, prices declined. Zucchini Squash Zucchini squash had good market potential relative to other crops within this grouping, tables 7 and 8. Both seasonal and overall price variability and income variability were high in the St. Louis market relative to other alternative crops, with risk being moderate in the remaining markets, tables 9, 10, and 11. While showing less potential based on a price-cost criterion than snap beans in the St. Louis market, zucchini squash had greater income potential than snap beans in the Atlanta market. It should be noted that due to lower demand, zuc$/unit 15 14 13 12 11 10 --Market Atlanta St.Louis Cincinnati $Sunit 15 14 13 12 11 10 -- 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 4 2 1 Market Atlanta 15 I 20 May 20 I 25 30 35 July 29 Weeks 40 Oct. 7 45 50 Dec.16 15 20 May 20 25 30 35 July 29 Weeks 40 Oct. 7 45 50 Dec.16 FIG. 8. Average weekly adjusted zucchini squash wholesale prices (wholesale price less 15 percent marketing Charge), Atlanta, Cincinnati, and St. Louis markets, per 5/9-bushel carton, 1979-83. FIG. 9. Average weekly adjusted yellow squash wholesale prices (wholesale price less 15 percent marketing charge), Atlanta market, per one-bushel carton, 1979-83. WHOLESALE MARKET POTENTIAL FOR FRESH VEGETABLES 25 chini squash is usually produced and shipped in mixed loads with yellow squash and thus should be so evaluated. In the Cincinnati and St. Louis markets, a downward trend in average prices for zucchini squash existed as the spring harvest period progressed (weeks 21 through 29), figure 8. Overall, squash producers would benefit through higher prices received by early market entrance. Zucchini squash producers must maintain the highest production levels possible to enhance profit. Timely harvest of zucchini squash is necessary if producers are to receive the higher prices for small as opposed to medium sized squash. Yellow Squash Yellow squash (straightneck) had slightly less potential based on both average per acre net income and the price-cost criteria than either snap beans or zucchini squash, but greater potential than was noted for other crops within this grouping, tables 7 and 8. Due to lower average net income, yellow squash had a slightly higher degree of risk associated with both price and yield-related income variability than either snap beans or zucchini squash and less than other crops within this grouping, tables 9, 10, and 11. Average price trends were similar to those of zucchini squash, with early spring markets being the most profitable, figures 9 and 10. As with zucchini squash, timely harvest of yellow squash is vitally important for profit enhancement. Interestingly, in the Cincinnati and St. Louis markets, yellow and zucchini squash generated roughly equal income levels. This fact, combined with the large difference in income levels between zucchini and yellow squash in the Atlanta market where yellow squash was sold in 1-bushel rather than 5/9-bushel containers, may indicate the greater market potential for smaller sized packs.This price differential was also evidenced in the New Orleans market. Cucumbers Relative to the previously mentioned crops within this grouping, cucumbers showed less market potential, especially at the 70 percent break-even price-cost level, tables 7 and 8. An average of 69 percent of the price quotations were above the 70 percent yield break-even price-cost level. Examination of price quotations below the 70 percent level indicated that, on average, producers may realize positive net returns in 2 of 5 years in the Atlanta market and in 4 of 5 years in the Cincinnati and St. Louis markets. 26 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION While income reduction due to a 30 percent decrease in yield was moderate (averaging 55 percent) when compared with other alternative crops, an average 26 percent decrease in favorable price quotations resulted in the Atlanta, Cincinnati, and St. Louis markets, tables 7 and 9. As such, cucumbers have a higher degree of production risk; therefore, a greater emphasis on maintaining high production levels is necessary. Both overall and within-season price variability and the resulting income variability were high in the Atlanta and Cincinnati markets, tables 10 and 11. The same relationship in average prices was seen with snap beans as was evidenced for cucumbers with producers in incoming production regions receiving higher prices than outgoing Florida producers. The rise in the average price level occurred prior to the start of the Alabama harvest season (weeks 23 through 29) in all but the Cincinnati market, with the peak generally occurring on or about week 23 or 24 (week 25 in Cincinnati market), figure 11. Prices tended to decline throughout the harvest period as supplies increased. Cucumber producers would tend to benefit from early market entrance. Collards Overall, collards had low market potential based on the price-cost criterion and low income potential relative to other alternative late $lunit 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 /, $unit Market St Louis ------- -Cincinnati 15 14 13 12 10 \ \ " . ! 8 6 43 2 1 15 20 May 20 25 \ / 5 4 3 2 1 --- Market Atlanta St.Louis Cincinnati -.... 30 35 40 Oct.7 45 50 Dec.16 15 15 July29 Weeks 20 May 20 25 35 30 July 29 Weeks 40 Oct.7 45 50 Dec.16 FIG. 10. Average weekly adjusted yellow squash wholesale prices (wholesale price less 15 percent marketing charge), Cincinnati, and St. Louis Markets, per 5/9-bushel carton, 1979-83. FIG. 11. Average weekly adjusted cucumber wholesale prices (wholesale price less 15 percent marketing charge), Atlanta, Cincinnati, and St. Louis markets, per 1 1/9-bushel carton, 1979-83. WHOLESALE MARKET POTENTIAL FOR FRESH VEGETABLES 27 spring-summer crops in all but the Atlanta market, tables 7 and 8. Prices in the Atlanta market were for bunched collards, while prices in the remaining markets were for loose collards. Generally, prices for bunched greens (turnips and collards) are higher than for loose greens. This could account for the greater market potential. Favorable market conditions could also be a function of the regional nature of demand for collards in the Atlanta market. The Cincinnati market evidenced some potential for collards. Collards showed low overall and within-season price variability. Due to their low net income shown in table 7, however, this crop demonstrated a high degree of price and yield-related income variability relative to other alternative crops in the Cincinnati and St. Louis markets, tables 9, 10, and 11. While collards and turnip greens received roughly equivalent prices, collards require greater field time until harvest, hence, greater cost are associated with additional insect, disease, and irrigation requirements. Thus, collards showed lower income potential and greater income risk than turnip greens. On average, prices received for collard greens tended to decline throughout the first half of the spring-summer harvest season (weeks 21 through 33) and then rise during the latter half and on into the fall harvest season, figures 12 and 13. Because of a small number of relatively large producers who supply most wholesale markets with a variety of greens, significant barriers to market entrance may exist. To $/unit 15 14 $/unit 15 14 Market St.Louis 13 12 11 10 9 8 "7 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 -- Cincinnati 5 4 3 2 1 0 5 Market Atlanta 4 3 2 1 15 20 May 20 25 30 me 35 i 40 Oct. 7 45 50 Dec.16 0i 0 15 20 May 20 25 30 35 40 Oct. 7 45 50 Dec.16 July 29 Weeks July 29 Weeks FIG. 12. Average weekly adjusted collard (bunched) wholesale prices (wholesale price less 15 percent marketing charge), Atlanta market, per 1 1/9-bushel carton, 1979-83. FIG. 13. Average weekly adjusted collard (loose) wholesale prices (wholesale price less 15 percent marketing charge), Cincinnati, and St. Louis markets, per 1 1/9-bushel carton, 1979-83. 28 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION overcome these institutional barriers, producers would most likely benefit from the earliest possible contact with wholesale buyers. For this reason, producers would benefit from the earliest market entrance possible. Watermelons With the exception of collards and cucumbers, watermelons showed less potential than other crops within this seasonal grouping. The Cincinnati and St. Louis markets showed good potential for watermelons at the 100 percent yield level with the least potential existing in the Atlanta market, table 8. An average of 90 and 73 percent of the price quotations were above the 100 and 70 percent yield break-even price-cost levels. In the Atlanta market, 75 and 60 percent of the price quotes were above the 100 and 70 percent breakeven price-cost yield levels. Greatly varying price levels existed at the three markets for the harvest period with St. Louis ($7.33 per hundredweight) having the highest prices followed by Cincinnati ($6.76 per hundredweight) and Atlanta ($4.29 per hundredweight), table 10. Watermelons had a high degree of seasonal price variability in all markets and there was a high degree of overall price variability in the Atlanta and St. Louis markets, table 10. Risks associated with both price and productionrelated income variability were great for watermelons sold in the Atlanta market, with less risk existing in Cincinnati and St. Louis markets where prices were higher, tables 9 and 11. The lower potential seen in the Atlanta market may be a result of the close proximity of the market to major watermelon producing regions in the Southeast. A definite declining trend in the average price of watermelons was evidenced both throughout the year and during the relevant spring harvest period, figure 14. Also, a high degree of seasonal variability (weeks 28 through 32) was evident. Average prices declined by $1.60, $2.40, and $3.00 per hundredweight during the harvest period in the Atlanta, Cincinnati, and St. Louis markets, respectively. As with sweet corn, it is important for producers to get melons into marketing channels as early as possible in the spring in a effort to "hit" the more favorable early summer markets. GnoUP Foun: FULL SEASON CROPS Full season indeterminate crops (bell peppers, okra, and staked tomatoes) produced in north Alabama generally come into the marketing system in July and remain until the end of September. They differ from other summer crops in that they require land resources WHOLESALE MARKET POTENTIAL FOR FRESH VEGETABLES 29 for a longer time and thereby limit opportunities for double and triple crop rotations. Tomatoes Analysis of the market potential for staked tomato production presented problems for the following two reasons: 1. Wholesale tomato prices were for repacked tomatoes in most cases and, as such, did not adequately represent producer received prices, and 2. Tomato prices were recorded in a variety of container sizes which exhibited varying quality attributes such as size and color. In an effort to be conservative in estimating market potential, prices for 6 x 6 sized, mature green or pink tomatoes were used when possible. To best determine producer received prices, only 25- and 30-pounds loose packed tomato prices were used. While loose packed tomatoes are becoming more of a standard in the industry, good price data were only available in the Cincinnati and St. Louis markets for 2 years and in the Atlanta market for 1 year. Data for 5 years were available in both the Baltimore and Chicago markets and, as such, they were the only markets suitable for analysis. Because of the lack of data, the "market window" analysis was performed in the Atlanta, Cincinnati, and St. Louis markets, but the results should be evaluated cautiously. Tomatoes showed good potential at the 100 percent break-even price-cost yield level in the Atlanta and Cincinnati markets, with less potential being shown in the Baltimore, Chicago, and St. Louis markets, tables 7 and 12. Overall, low market potential was shown at the 70 percent break-even price-cost yield level. On average, a 30 percent decrease in yield resulted in a 27 percent decrease in favorable price quotations. While tomatoes showed good income producing potential, the risks associated with both yield and price related income variability were high, tables 9, 10, and 12. Much of this risk stems from the high cost of staked tomato production. With total costs per acre of approximately $3,500, any reductions in gross income either induced by price reductions or any increases in pre-harvest cost resulting from yield reductions often result in large decreases in per acre net income. A 30 percent reduction in yield led to an average 84 percent reduction in average per acre net income, table 9. With pre-harvest costs of approximately $1,900, risks related to inability to find a buyer or crop failure are great, table 4. While seasonal and overall price variability were moderate compared to other alternative crops, the 30 /unit 15 14 --13 12 11 10 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION $/unit Market Atlanta St.Louis Cincinnati 15 14 13. 12 11 10 --Market Baltimore Chicago ------ 8 V \ 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 15 20 May 20 25 5 4 3 2 1 30 35 July 29 Weeks 40 Oct.7 45 50 Dec.16 15 20 May 20 25 30 35 40 Oct.7 45 50 Dec.16 July 29 Weeks FIG. 14. Average weekly adjusted watermelon wholesale prices (wholesale price less 15 percent marketing charge), Atlanta, Cincinnati, and St. Louis markets, per hundredweight, 1979-83. FIG. 15. Average weekly adjusted tomato wholesale prices (wholesale price less 15 percent marketing charge), Baltimore, and Chicago markets, per 25-pound and 30-pound box, 1979-83. TABLE 12. ALTERNATIVE EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR SPRING AND FALL TOMATOES GROWN IN NORTH ALABAMA AND SOLD AT THE BALTIMORE AND CHICAGO WHOLESALE MARKETS.' Evaluation criteria Season and market Spring Fall Baltimore Chicago Baltimore Chicago Average net income, dollar per acre .......................... 1,063 960 1,395 1,174 Percentage of weekly price quotations above break-even price level for alternative yields 100% yield, pct............... . 81 74 77 85 70% yield, pct............... 55 58 68 69 Sensitivity of average per acre net income to a 30% reduction in yield, pct. decrease .......... 84.5 90.3 72.2 67.6 Overall variability (between weeks and years) in weekly average prices, pct. 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19.9 21.6 22.2 22.4 Within season variabiality (between weeks) in weekly average prices, pct.3 . . . . . . 13.5 17.7 17.4 17.3 Overall variability (between weeks and years) in weekly average per acre net income resulting from price variability, pct. 2.... 97.9 113.3 89.0 81.1 'Analyses were conducted based on price data for 1979-83 and cost data for 1985. 2Measured by coefficient of variation. Measured by the standard deviation of the first differences between weekly price observations as a percentage of the mean price. WHOLESALE WHOLESALE MARKET POTENTIAL FOR FRESH VEGETABLES MARKET POTENTIAL FOR FRESH VEGETABLES 31 31 resulting effect on average net income was substantial, table 12. With coefficients of variation of 98 and 113 percent in the Baltimore and Chicago markets, respectively, there was a high degree of risk of negative income during some years associated with price variability. Because of inadequate quality data for tomatoes for other markets, price trends could be examined only in the Baltimore and Chicago markets. On average, prices tended to show a declining trend throughout the summer harvest season (weeks 27 through 39), pointing out the need for early market exploitation, figure 15. It should be noted that prices for 6 x 6 sized tomatoes used for this study are lower than for tomatoes of larger 5 x 6 or 5 x 5 sizes. If producers follow recommended production practices, raise approved varieties, and strive to maintain the highest economically feasible production levels, they might achieve higher per acre net incomes than indicated. However, market entry barriers exist due to the presence of Florida tomatoes in the early spring-summer market. Okra Analysis problems were also present with okra. In both the Cincinnati and St. Louis markets, recorded prices alternated within years between 1/2-, 5/9-, and 5/8-bushel containers, with the most often quoted prices in 5/9-bushels. For ease of analysis, all costs were in terms of 5/9-bushel sizes. This compromise may have resulted in slightly distorted prices. Okra showed varying degrees of income potential, but generally had greater average net income per acre than all other alternative crops except tomatoes, table 7. Good market potential, as measured by the price-cost criterion, was shown in the Cincinnati and St. Louis markets, with less potential existing in the Atlanta market, table 8. Prices recorded in the Atlanta market were for 1-bushel containers, while prices in the Cincinnati and St. Louis markets were for 1/2-, 5/8-, or 5/9-bushel containers, table 10. As seen with yellow squash, the difference in potential may indicate the wholesale market preference for smaller packs. Because of low pre-harvest production cost, okra had a reduced level of risk associated with both yield and price related income variability relative to other alternative vegetable crops, tables 9-11. Also, okra had reduced risk resulting from total crop failure or inability to market the crop. Average prices fior okra tended to decline throughout the spring in the Atlanta market, with the lowest prices being received during the north Alabama harvest season (weeks 26 through 39), figure 16. Price 32 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION levels in the Cincinnati and St. Louis markets showed no generally definable trend. On average, producers would most likely benefit from early market entrance. However, okra production can be adversely affected by early season weather variations. As with both yellow and zucchini squash, large decreases in price could be expected for medium, opposed to small-sized okra, increasing the importance of maintainihg a timely harvest schedule. Bell Peppers Bell peppers had the lowest income potential of the full season crops, but approximately equaled the potential of snap beans and zucchini squash and showed varying degrees of potential in the selected markets, tables 7 and 8. At the 100 percent break-even pricecost yield level, bell peppers at the Atlanta and Cincinnati markets showed a high degree of market potential, with the St. Louis market reflecting less potential, table 8. At the 70 percent break-even pricecost yield level, low potential was shown in all but the Atlanta market. An average of 67 percent of the price quotations were above the 70 percent yield level. Because of a 30 percent yield drop, favorable (above break-even) price quotations decreased by 12, 37, and 20 percent in the Atlanta, Cincinnati, and St. Louis markets, respectively. Price quotations for bell peppers which were below the break-even $/unit 15 14 13 12 11 11a 8 $/unit 15 14 13 12 / 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 7 6 5 - - --20 May 20 Market Atlanta St. Luis Cincinnati 25 30 July29 Weeks 35 40 Oct. 7 45 50 Dec.16 4 3 2 1 - Market Atlanta - - - St.Iuis ------ Cincinnati 20 May 20 25 30 July29 Weeks 35 40 Oct. 7 45 50 Dec.16 0 15 0 15 FIG. 16. Average weekly adjusted okra wholesale prices (wholesale price less Cincinnati, and St. Louis markets, per 5/9-bushel carton, 1979-83. 15 percent marketing charge), Atlanta, FIG. 17. Average weekly adjusted bell pepper wholesale prices (wholesale kets, per 1 1/9-bushel carton, 1979-83. price less 15 percent marketing charge), Atlanta, Cincinnati, and St. Louis mar- WHOLESALE MARKET POTENTIAL FOR FRESH VEGETABLES 33 price-cost level tended to occur during specific years. On average, producers might realize a positive net return at the 70 percent yield level 4 of 5 years in the Atlanta market, 3 of 5 years in the St. Louis market, and 1 of 5 years in the Cincinnati market. A definite declining trend in average prices received for bell peppers was apparent during the relevant harvest period (weeks 25 through 39), figure 17. Bell pepper prices showed a definite upward movement within the first week or two of the north Alabama harvest season. As with cucumbers and snap beans, this peaking of price corresponded with declining Florida production and the beginning of harvest in other Southeastern production regions. Because average prices peak in the beginning of the harvest season (weeks 25 and 26) and then decline, it is important that producers enter markets as early as possible. During the harvest season, prices declined an average $3.80, $3.00, and $4.40 per 1 1/9-bushel container in the Atlanta, Cincinnati, and St. Louis markets, respectively. Because of high production cost, bell peppers had generally greater risk associated with yield and price related income variability than other alternative summer crops except tomatoes, tables 9-11. The low market potential and average per acre net income shown at the 70 percent yield level emphasizes the importance of maintaining the highest possible production level given economic factors. Bell pepper producers can expect a high probability of negative net returns during some years if yield levels are not maintained. GROUP FIVE: IRISH AND SWEET POTATOES Irish and sweet potatoes differ from other crops examined in several ways. As with sweet corn, a far greater number of acres can be grown and managed by a single producer. Irish and sweet potato production also requires a greater capital investment in planting and harvest machinery than other vegetable crops. Because of the ability of producers to delay harvest of sweet potatoes or to store the product already harvested, identification of favorable market periods is of less importance than with other vegetable crops. This is true to a lesser degree for round red irish potatoes because storage time is considerably less than with sweet potatoes. Overall, irish potatoes showed lower market potential than all other summer crops except collards, sweet corn, and sweet potatoes based on the price-cost criterion, table 8. Irish potatoes showed an average 78 and 56 percent of the individual price quotations above the 100 and 70 percent break-even price yield levels, respectively. An 34 ALABAMA 34 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION S'unit 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 Market St.Lois S/unit 15 14 13 12 11 --Market Atlanta Cincinnati 9 8 7 6 6 5 4 3 2 3 2 1 I ' ,' 0 15 20 May 20 25 30 35 40 Oct. 7 45 50 Dec. 16 15 20 May 20 25 30 35 40 Oct. 7 45 50 Dec. 16 July 29 Weeks July 29 Weeks FIG. 18. Average weekly adjusted round red irish potato wholesale prices (wholesale price less 15 percent marketing charge), St. Louis market, per 100-pound bag, 1979-83. FIG. 19. Average weekly adjusted round red irish potato wholesale prices (wholesale price less 15 percent marketing charge), Atlanta, Cincinnati markets, per 50-pound bag, 1979-83. average 21 percent decrease in favorable price quotations resulted from a 30 percent decrease in yield. Examination of the data showed that for irish potato price quotations below the 100 percent break-even price-cost yield level, all but three occurred during 1979. On average, producers could expect to realize positive net returns 4 of 5 years at the 100 percent yield level and 3 of 5 years at the 70 percent yield level. This point is substantiated by the consistency of price quotations between markets above both yield break-even price levels. While varying per acre net incomes were shown for irish potatoes, risk associated with both yield and price related income variability was high relative to other alternative crops, tables 7, 9, 10, and 11. Generally; no definable trends in average prices for irish potatoes during the harvest period (weeks 23 through 30) existed across markets, figures 18 and 19. In the Atlanta market, average prices tended to remain constant, whereas prices in Cincinnati and St. Louis markets tended to peak on or about week 26 and then decline. Sweet potatoes showed lower market potential based on the pricecost criterion than all other summer crops except collards and sweet corn and exhibited lower net income than most other alternative crops, tables 7 and 8. Sweet potatoes also showed a definite consistency between markets with respect to favorable price quotations above the break-even price at both yield levels. Farmers producing at WHOLESALE MARKET POTENTIAL FOR FRESH VEGETABLES 35 the 100 percent yield level might expect to receive prices above the 100 percent break-even price-cost an average of 74 percent of the time and above the 70 percent break-even level 59 percent of the time. As with irish potatoes, almost all sweet potato price quotations below the break-even price-cost level occurred during specific years (1979 and 1982). Producers could expect to realize profits in 4 years of 5 at the 100 percent yield level and 3 of 5 years at the 70 percent yield level. There also existed a high degree of risk associated with FIG. 20. Average weekly adjusted sweet potato wholesale prices (wholesale price less 15 percent marketing charge), Atlanta, Cincinnati, and St. Louis markets, per 50pound carton, 1979-83. 36 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION both yield and price related income variability relative to other alternative crops, tables 9, 10, and 11. As supplies of fresh sweet potatoes enter the marketing channel, prices typically rise, reach a peak, and then decline as ample supplies become available, figure 20. This peak in the price (week 28 through 30) occurred, in most cases, prior to the entrance of north Alabama producers, resulting in generally declining prices through to approximately week 44 followed by slight price increases as producers hold supplies in storage. Alabama producers should plan on entering the market as early as possible and prior to the generally less favorable market period existing between weeks 38 and 44. It should be noted that producers can, by growing earlier non-storable varieties, enter the markets approximately 3 weeks earlier than the market period used for this study. Some potential may exist for producers growing these varieties. For irish and sweet potatoes, the high risk resulting from yield and price variability was due in part to the relatively high production costs. Examination of the data indicated that there is a good chance of negative net returns during some years with both of these enterprises. Evaluation of both irish and sweet potato enterprises should consider the cost of storage facilities and specialized harvest equipment. Producers must have sufficient resources necessary for the sizable capital investment required for these enterprises. As with sweet corn, both irish and sweet potatoes may be produced on a larger scale than other alternative crops. Thus, income potential for irish and sweet potato enterprises may be greater relative to other crops than indicated on a per acre basis. GROUP Six: FALL CROPS A high degree of production risk exists during the fall season due to increased insect, disease, and weather related problems. The increase in production risk may result in yield levels often being lower than those obtained during the spring or summer seasons. For this reason, market potential should be examined with a greater emphasis placed on the 70 percentyield level than with analyses of the previous crop groupings. Price-cost criterion conclusions for fall tomatoes and watermelons are based on limited data available in most markets. Fall Tomatoes As with the previous analysis, limited data were available for fall tomatoes. The Baltimore, Chicago, Cincinnati, and St. Louis markets were used for determining potential based on the price-cost cri- WHOLESALE MARKET POTENTIAL FOR FRESH VEGETABLES 37 terion and per acre net income, with the remaining risk analyses being performed in the Baltimore and Chicago markets only. Of the early fall crops (snap beans, cucumbers, yellow and zucchini squash, tomatoes, and watermelons), tomatoes had the highest average per acre net income potential, along with varying degrees of TABLE 13. AVERAGE PER ACRE NET INCOME FOR SELECTED FALL VEGETABLE CROPS CALCULATED, BASED ON 100 AND 70 PERCENT YIELD LEVELS, RANKED BY CROP WITHIN MARKET, NORTH ALABAMA' Net income/acre, by markets and yield levels St. Louis Atlanta Cincinnati Crop 100% 70% 100% 70% 100% 70% yield yield yield yield yield yield level level level level level level Dol. Dol. Dol. Dol. Dol. Dol. 402(4) 318(6) 750(4) 631(6) 659(6)2 337(4) Beans, snap.............. 811(1) 950(1) 1,343(1) 1,541(2) 1,452(1) 888(1) Broccoli ................. 95(9) -102(8) 153(9) -62(9) 307(8) 46(8) Cabbage ................ -14(10) -190(9) 296(8) 27(8) 325(6) 721(4) Collards ................. 93(6) 194(7) 343(6) 223(7) 488(7) 529(7) Cucumbers .............. 435(3) 816(3) 826(3) 442(3) 333(5) 668(5) Squash, yellow........... 838(2) 452(2) 812(4) 434(4) 966(3) 541(3) Squash, zucchini . ......... . . . . . . . . . 554(5) -199(10) 1,591(1) 526(2) Tomatoes 3 . . . . . 141(5) 343(5) 342(7) 631(6) 1,050(2) 637(2) Turnip greens ............ 317(8) 62(7) 35(10) -135(10) Watermelons ............ 'Analyses were conducted using price data for 1979-83 and cost data for 1985. 2Numbers in parentheses are crops ranked in ascending order from the highest average per acre net income to the lowest average per acre net income (based on limited data). 3Based on limited data. TABLE 14. PERCENTAGE OF WEEKLY PRICE QUOTATIONS WHICH WERE ABOVE THE BREAKEVEN PRICE-COST AT ALTERNATIVE MARKETS AND YIELD LEVELS FOR SELECTED FALL VEGETABLE CROPS RANKED BY CROP WITHIN MARKET, NORTH ALABAMA' Markets and yield levels St. Louis Atlanta Cincinnati Crop 100% 70% 100% 70% 100% 70% yield yield yield yield yield yield level level level level level level Pct. Pct. Pct. Pct. Pct. Pct 96(2) 89(5) 100(1) 100(1) 100(1) Beans, snap..............100(1)2 100(1) 100(1) 100(1) 100(1) 100(1) 100(1) Broccoli ................. 36(8) 36(9) 56(9) 54(8) 60(9) 83(8) Cabbage ................ 46(10) 12(10) 74(8) 52(8) 100(1) 62(7) Collards ................. 47(6) 64(7) 79(6) 70(6) 82(7) 91(7) Cucumbers .............. 90(5) 90(3) 97(2) 88(5) 100(1) 95(6) Squash, yellow ........... 94(4) 86(4) 100(1) 97(2) 98(4) Squash, zucchini . ......... . . . . 100(1) 3 . . . . . . . . . . 66(6) 69(7) 23(9) 100(1) Tomatoes 71(5) 92(4) 98(3) 100(1) 98(6) 100(1) Turnip greens ............ 47(6) 25(10) 68(8) 35(10) Watermelons ............ 'Analyses were conducted based on price data for 1979-83 and cost data for 1985. 2Numbers in parentheses are crops ranked in descending order from the most variable to the least variable. 3Based on limited data 38 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION TABLE 15. SENSITIVITY OF AVERAGE PER ACRE NET INCOME TO A 30 PERCENT DECREASE IN YIELD FOR SELECTED FALL VEGETABLE CROPS DURING THE HARVEST SEASON; 1979-19831 Crop Net income decrease by alternative markets' Atlanta Cincinnati St. Louis Pct. Pct. 49.5 Pct. 46.5 48.8 Beans, snap ............... Broccoli ................. Cabbage ............... Collards ................. Cucumbers............ .. Squash, yellow ........... Squash, zucchini ......... 2 Tomatoes ............... Turnip greens ............ 38.9 84.9 54.9 57.9 50.1 44.0 -67.0 39.4 38.4 140.4 90.8 60.3 46.4 46.6 45.6 39.6 207.5 -1,264.0 73.0 46.6 46.1 136.0 58.7 Watermelons ............ 3 - 487.6 80.3 'Analyses were conducted based on price data for 1979-83 and cost data for 1985. 2 A negative number indicates negative average per acre net income at both yield levels Based on limited data. market potential, as measured by a price-cost criterion, tables 12 and 13. A slightly higher degree of market potential existed for fall tomatoes as compared with the spring-summer in all but the St. Louis market. On average, a 30 percent decrease in yield resulted in a 26 percent decrease in favorable price quotations above the break-even price-cost, tables 12 and 14. Staked tomatoes showed moderate price and high yield related risks associated with average per acre net income variability, tables 12, 15, 16, and 17. Average per acre net income fell an average of 70 percent in the Baltimore and Chicago markets, table 12. While fall tomato prices exhibited an overall upward trend during the fall harvest season (weeks 35 through 43), figure 16, producers considering late fall harvest should give consideration to the high degree of yield related income reductions. Yellow and Zucchini Squash Both zucchini and yellow squash can be grown and harvested from late spring until the first frost, with the fall market being designated weeks 28 through 43 for this analysis. Taking into consideration the lower prices received for 1-bushel as opposed to 5/9-bushel containers, yellow squash showed slightly less market potential based on the price-cost and average per acre net income criteria than did zucchini squash in the fall. Both yellow and zucchini squash ranked favorably relative to other alternative fall crops based on these measures, tables 13 and 14. Both yellow and zucchini squash prices showed a strong increasing 0 rn .RI- r TABLE 16. AVERAGE WEEKLLY PRICE, COEFFICIENT OF VARIATION, AND PERCENT SEASONAL VARIATION IN PRICE FOR SELECTED FALL VEGETABLES RANKED BY CROP WITHIN ALTERNATIVE MARKETS, NORTH ALABAMA' Atlanta Crop Unit Price Cincinnati Seasonal Variation Pct. 28.33(8) PricePrc St. Louis Seasonal Pct. 21.58(8) variation Pric per unit Dol. 9.00 Coefficient of Variation Beans, snap....1-bu. carton Broccoli .......... Carton 14's-iS's Cabbage..........50-lb. carton 3 . . . . . . . . . Collards . 1 1/9-bu. carton Cucumbers ....11/9-bu. carton Squash, yellow' ... .5/9-bu. carton Squash, zucchini ... 5/9-bu. carton Tomatoes 5 .. . . . . . . . 25-lb. -30-lb. carton Turnip greens...1 1/9-bu. carton Watermelons ... Hundredweight 8.06 4.36 6.46 8.56 8.53 5.78 5.25 28.72(7)2 10.71(1) 16.95(3) 19.46(4) 29.09(8) 25.88(6) 24.32(5) 16.45(2) - Pct. per unit Dol. 9.22 Coefficient of Variation Pct. 21.54(6) ui Dol. 9.81 per Coefficient of variation Seasonal variation 0 -i Pct. 21.74(4) Pct. 19.06(6) r z 8.81(4) 4.59(1) 7.89(3) 17.17(7) 14.07(5) 14.36(6) 6.48(2) - 8.78 4.49 4.50 9.01 5.62 5.58 4.66 4.54 10.89(1) 16.91(2) 20.41(3) 24.53(9) 22.87(8) 22.82(7) -- 7.18(1) 9.830(4) 7.56(3) 21.53(7) 17.26(6) 17.03(5) 7.94(3) 22.25(9) 20.59(4) 21.25(5) 8.16 4.30 3.72 8.34 5.59 5.65 6.40 3.92 5.64 10.95(1) 22.74(5) 14.38(2) 26.20(6) 30. 16(8) 28.85(7) 21.91(5) 17. 17(3) 33.80(9) 9.68(1) 12.33(4) 11.29(3) 28.18(8) 16.99(5) 19.29(7) 23.75(8) 10.97(2) 41.49(9) 70 CC() rn 'Analyses were conducted based on price data for 1979-83 and cost data for 1985. 'Numbers in parenthesis are rankings of crops in descending order from the most variable to the least variable. for collards are for loose greens in the Cincinnati and St. Louis markets and for bunched greens in the Atlanta market. 4 Price for yellow squash in the Atlanta market is for a 1-bushel carton. 5 Based on limited data. "Prices m U) TABLE 17. COEFFICIENT OF VARIATION AND PLUS AND MINUS ONE STANDARD DEVIATION (STD. DEV.) IN AVERAGE PER ACRE NET INCOME FOR SELECTED FALL VECETABLE CROPS RANKED BY CROP WITHIN MARKETS, NORTH ALABAMA' Coefficient of variation Pct. Beans, snap........ 78.52(6)2 Crop 2 Broccoli............19.31(1) Squash, yellow... Cabbage........... 84.30(7) Collards........... 52.31(3) Cucumbers........ 106.02(8) 66.10(5) Atlanta + One Std. dev. Pet. 1,177 1,733 565 1,099 1,089 1,109 - One Std. dev. Pet. 141 1,172 48 344 -32 226 Coefficient of variation Pct. 62.99(5) 20.17(1) 174.05(8) 124.30(7) 101.89(6) 56.08(2) Cincinnati + One Std. dev. Pet. 1,028 1,852 418 664 985 One Std. dev. Pet. 234 1,230 Coefficient of variation Pet. 56.85(2) 21.63(1) St. Louis + One Std. dev. Pet. 1,177 1,633 - One Std. dev. Pct. 324 1,052 Squash, zucchini.. . . . . 52.42(4) 1,472 460 56.48(3) 1,271 353 69.98(3) Tomatoes 3. . . . . . Turnip greens....... 32.92(2) 1,396 704 69.89(4) 1,014 247 78.81(5) Watermelons ... 692.62(9) 276 -207 150.15(7) 'Analyses based on price data for 1979-83 and cost data for 1985. 2Numbers in parenthesis are crops ranked in descending order from the most variable to the least variable. 'Insufficient data were available. 1,288 -113 -72 -9 363 361.10(8) -1,536.15(9) 143.48(6) 74.36(4) 437 200 834 1,423 1,424 - -248 -228 -149 209 0 C 252 - C - 611 794 72 -159 r x ma z -I --I Co) 0 z WHOLESALE MARKET POTENTIAL FOR FRESH VEGETABLES 41 trend in the latter part of the fall season, figures 8, 9, and 10. Taking into account the small reduction in favorable (above break-even) price quotations (an average 3 and 4 percent for yellow and zucchini squash, respectively) and the moderate risk of income reduction (average of 48 and 46 percent for yellow and zucchini squash, respectively) resulting from a 30 percent yield decrease, both yellow and zucchini squash are good candidates for the risky late fall markets, tables 14 and 15. Yellow and zucchini squash also demonstrated moderate price variability in all but the St. Louis market, having low risk associated with price related average per acre net income variability relative to most alternative fall crops, tables 16 and 17. Snap Beans Overall, fall snap beans retained the high market potential seen during the spring harvest season. Average prices for fall harvested snap beans in Cincinnati and St. Louis markets tended to increase over the relevant harvest period (weeks 39 through 44), providing potentially favorable late season markets, figure 7. Higher price levels were indicated during weeks 40 through 43 in the Atlanta market. While showing greater market potential as measured by the pricecost criterion than that for either yellow or zucchini squash, snap beans had slightly lower income potential and greater risk associated with both yield and price related income variability, tables 14 through 17. Snap beans demonstrated greater market potential and less production and price risk than most alternative fall crops. Because of the market and income potential exhibited at the 70 percent yield level, snap beans showed reduced risk associated with late fall production, making them good candidates for the risky late fall harvests. Cucumbers As indicated by their ranking, fall cucumbers exhibited lower income potential than other alternative fall crops such as yellow and zucchini squash and snap beans, table 13. Cucumbers also showed lower market potential, using the price-cost criterion, relative to other fall crops, with an average of 84 and 60 percent of the individual price quotations during the harvest season being above the 100 and 70 percent yield levels, respectively, table 14. Examination of the cucumber price quotations below the 100 percent break-even price-cost yield level indicated that, on average, producers might expect to realize profits in 4 of 5 years in the Cincinnati market and 3 of 5 years in the St. Louis market. At the 70 percent yield level, positive net returns might be possible in 3 of 5 years in 42 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION the Atlanta and Cincinnati markets and 2 of 5 years in the St. Louis market. On average, a 30 percent decrease in yield resulted in a 24 percent decrease in favorable price quotations above the break-even price level for cucumbers, table 14, and a 64 percent decrease in per acre net income, table 15, thereby emphasizing the need for high levels of production and the high degree of risk associated with late fall harvests. Cucumbers appear to be a poor candidate for late fall production. There was an increasing trend in average prices received for cucumbers during the first 3 to 4 weeks of the fall harvest period (weeks 37 through 43), followed by a period of declining prices during the last week or two of the harvest period, figure 11. Because of lower potential indicated at the 70 percent yield level, producers generally should be concerned more with obtaining high yields than risking yield reductions to "hit" the favorable market period. Watermelons Watermelons showed low potential in all but the Chicago and New Orleans fall markets. Low generated net income and poor market potential were shown in the Cincinnati and St. Louis markets, tables 13 and 14. The lack of available price quotations may represent the low demand for watermelons during the fall season. Generally, watermelon prices tended to decline over the relevant fall harvest period (weeks 34 through 39), figure 14. Because of widely varying prices and income levels between markets for watermelons, conclusions concerning risk and expected income levels were difficult to derive. Overall, the results of both the "market window" and risk analyses would tend to indicate fair to poor potential for fall watermelon production. Because of possible low demand, producers attempting to market fall melons would benefit from crate packed sales in conjunction with mixed loads. Collards and Turnip Greens Both turnip and collard greens can be produced over the entire fall market period. Turnip greens showed considerably greater market potential based on both price-cost and average per acre net income criteria than collards, tables 13 and 14. Both greens had widely varying degrees of potential between markets and, as such, showed varying risks associated with yield and price related income variability, tables 15-17. Generally, turnips showed low risk associated with yield WHOLESALE MARKET POTENTIAL FOR FRESH VEGETABLES 43 and price related income variability relative to other fall crops, including collards. Overall, prices for both turnip and collard greens declined over the fall harvest season (weeks 37 through 44 for turnip greens and weeks 37 through 46 for collards), indicating less potential in the late fall season, figures 3, 12, and 13. Broccoli Of the late fall crops, broccoli showed the highest degree of market potential with 100 percent of the price quotations above both breakeven price-cost yield levels and average per acre income levels exceeding all other fall crops, tables 13 and 14. Because of its low pricecost ratio, broccoli had low risk related to both yield and price related income variability relative to all other fall crops, tables 15-17. Broccoli prices remained, on average, fairly stable during the fall harvest period (weeks 37 through 43), figure 2. Cabbage Along with low income potential, fall cabbage showed low potential at both yield levels; on the average, quoted prices were above the 100 and 70 percent break-even price-cost yield levels 66 and 42 percent of the time in the primary markets, tables 13 and 14. A 30 percent decrease in yield resulted, on average, in a 24 percent decrease in price quotations above the producers break-even price-cost, with average per acre net income decreasing 85, 140, and 208 percent in the Atlanta, Cincinnati, and St. Louis markets, respectively, tables 14 and 15. Along with poor market potential and a high degree of risk associated with yield-induced income variability, cabbage hada high degree of price related income risk, tables 16 and 17. Producers may realize positive net returns from fall cabbage production at the 100 percent break-even price-cost yield level in 4 of 5 years in the Atlanta market and 3 of 5 years in the Cincinnati and St. Louis markets, table 14. At the 70 percent yield level, production of fall cabbage was profitable in 3 of 5 years in the Atlanta market and 2 of 5 years in the Cincinnati and St. Louis markets. Because cabbage showed only slight increases in average price levels over the fall harvest season (weeks 41 through 45) and due to the high degree of risk associated with yield related reductions, late fall harvests show low potential, figure 3. CONCLUSIONS Agricultural producers will choose which crops to grow after evaluation of several factors in relation to their goals. The most prominent 44 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION criteria involve their managerial ability, available resources, market potential, profit potential, and their attitudes concerning risk aversion. Results of this study indicate that varying degrees of market potential exist at the national wholesale market level for fresh vegetables grown in north Alabama. As interest in and production of fresh vegetable crops increase, so will supplies. An increased supply of a given crop, if greater than the consumption increase, will result in decreased price levels and lower market potential than indicated by the results of this study. As competition increases, only the most efficient producers will survive. Increased competition may also result in an increase in quality standards and may emphasize the importance of special packaging and handling procedures to attract buyers. The analysis indicated that producers would generally benefit in terms of prices received from the earliest market entrance possible during the spring and summer. Producers would also benefit by staying in the fall markets as long as possible, given the generally higher late fall prices. While higher price levels may exist during early spring and summer and late fall markets, producers must make decisions on crops, varieties, and planting dates considering the risk associated with weather related yield reductions resulting from early planting in the spring and late harvests in the fall. During the fall, crops having the highest potential at the 70 percent yield level and the least amount of sensitivity in per acre net income to yield reductions would generally have the least amount of risk associated with income variability. While determination of favorable market periods is important, producers would generally benefit by producing a sufficient volume of a given crop over the longest possible time rather than trying to "hit" specific market periods. In many cases, these times of higher average prices also represent periods of greater price variability; therefore, price levels may differ greatly between years and thus increase the risks incurred by producers. Given the importance of quality and yield levels, producers should also analyze the potential of a crop on the basis of their ability to grow, harvest, and ship that commodity. Crops such as okra, while showing a relatively high degree of market potential, may not be the best crop to produce in light of the available harvest labor and its highly perishable nature relative to other vegetable crops. Crops such as cabbage, which have relatively less potential than other crops like broccoli during both the early spring and late fall, may be a better crop to produce given the ability of the producer and available resources.The producer's choice between cabbage and WHOLESALE MARKET POTENTIAL FOR FRESH VEGETABLES 45 broccoli production might be partially based on the ability to meet the necessary packing and cooling requirements required for broccoli. The potential shown in this study is based on the assumption that producers can find buyers for their produce at the wholesale level. It is widely understood that rather large barriers to market entrance exist at the national wholesale market level. Producers should recognize that it is better to hold out a low quality product and thereby lose money in the short term than to tarnish one's reputation by marketing inferior produce. Producers should also realize that even if they can meet the market requirements, they may, during the first years in production, not be able to find a buyer for their produce. Inexperienced producers should expect limited success during the first years of production and should be willing and able to lose money during this time. Because of the high cost of fresh vegetable production, losses can be quite substantial. As one gains a reputation for producing high quality produce in sufficient quantity on a consistent basis, these institutional barriers may be reduced. Overall, the Atlanta, Cincinnati, and St. Louis markets showed potential for north Alabama grown produce, with the New Orleans market primarily having potential during early spring and late fall seasons. The Baltimore market held little potential for all but fall produced vegetables and possibly tomatoes. Given the higher degree of potential indicated at the Cincinnati and St. Louis markets, Alabama producers would benefit from development and use of these markets. While not evaluated in this study, some consideration should also be given to development and use of Tampa, Orlando, and Miami markets during the "off-season" for Florida production. North Alabama producers, because of their climatic conditions, land resources, and availability of water, are in a good position to develop a fresh vegetable industry. Close proximity to Midwestern markets may, given adequate backhaul opportunities, give Alabama producers a comparative advantage in transportation cost as compared to other Southern producers. The opening of a farmers market in Montgomery also provides an outlet for produce. On a commodity basis, the following conclusions can be drawn from the analysis: Snap beans offered good potential. They had good income potential and low risk associated with both yield and price related income variability. Broccoli exhibited good potential based on the price-cost criterion and average per acre net income in the three primary markets for the 46 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION spring and fall marketing periods. Broccoli also showed low risk related to both yield and price related income variability. A degree of caution is necessary with this result because producers in several states have increased production in recent years and the market may adjust quickly to increased supplies since total per capita consumption of broccoli is low. Cabbage showed good potential in the spring market. However, much overall and within season price variability was evident. This translates into high income variability and a high degree of risk. Fall produced cabbage exhibited low potential at both the 100 and 70 percent yield levels. As with spring cabbage, fall cabbage had a high degree of price related income variability. Collards generally had low market potential based on the pricecost criterion and low income potential relative to other late spring and summer crops in all but the Atlanta market. Similar relationships were noted for the fall market. Collard production should be evaluated in conjunction with turnip green production to be able to gain and retain customers and supply more of the market. Sweet corn appeared to have relatively low potential, with white sweet corn being slightly more favorable than yellow, especially in terms of per acre net income. Evaluation of break-even and market quotation prices for yellow sweet corn indicated that producers could, on average, expect to realize profits in 3 of 5 years at 100 percent yields and 1 of 5 years at 70 percent yields. While both types of sweet corn evidenced similar overall and within season price variability, yellow sweet corn had high risk associated with income related variability. Due to relatively high production costs, sweet corn producers must recognize the high degree of risk associated with low yields, crop failure, unacceptable quality, or the inability to find a buyer. Cucumbers exhibited only moderate potential. Examination of price quotations below the 70 percent break-even price-cost yield level indicated that, on average, producers may realize positive net returns in 2 of 5 years in the Atlanta market and 4 of 5 years in the Cincinnati and St. Louis markets. Both overall and within season price variability and the resulting income variability were high in the Atlanta and Cincinnati markets. Okra offered good income potential, but there are possible problems related to labor, handling procedures, a reduced possibility for crop rotations, and the regional nature of demand. The price-cost criterion reflected good potential in the Cincinnati and St. Louis markets, with less potential noted in the Atlanta market. Because of a low WHOLESALE MARKET POTENTIAL FOR FRESH VEGETABLES 47 pre-harvest production cost, okra exhibited reduced risk attached to yield and price related income variability. Bell peppers had the lowest income potential of the full season crops (tomatoes, okra, and bell pepper), but income was good when compared with other crops evaluated. On average, producers could expect to realize positive net returns' at the 70 percent yield level in 4 of 5 years in the Atlanta market, 3 of 5 years in the St. Louis market, and 1 of 5 years in the Cincinnati market. Because of a high production cost, bell peppers had generally greater risk associated with yield and price related income variability than other alternative summer crops. As with okra and tomatoes, bell pepper production reduces rotation options. Potato (irish and sweet) production gives the producer somewhat more flexibility in marketing because the products can be stored for a limited period.Also, the producer can more effectively manage more acreage than with other vegetable crops and thus favorably affect gross income. Overall, irish potato production showed less market potential than all other summer crops except collards, sweet corn, and sweet potatoes based on the price-cost criterion. On average, irish potato producers could expect positive net returns in 4 of 5 years at the 100 percent yield level and 3 of 5 years at the 70 percent yield level. Only collards and sweet corn in the summer crop grouping showed less market potential than sweet potatoes using the price-cost criterion. Per acre net income was also typically lower for sweet potatoes. A high degree of risk associated with both yield and price related income variability existed. Squash (yellow and zucchini) offered good potential for both the late spring and fall markets, with zucchini squash being the most favorable. Both seasonal and overall price variability and income variability were high in the St. Louis market relative to other alternative crops, with risk being moderate in the remaining markets. Due to lower average net income, yellow squash had a slightly higher degree of risk associated with both price and yield related income variability than either snap beans or zucchini squash and less than other crops within the grouping. Staked tomatoes are a high cost enterprise which offers good income potential. A slightly higher degree of market potential existed for fall tomatoes in all but the St. Louis market. Staked tomatoes showed moderate price and high yield related risks associated with per acre net income variability. Tomato production is management intensive with high input cost and is extremely risky. 48 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION Turnip greens showed good market potential with prices being consistently above the break-even price-cost at both yield levels in all but the St. Louis market. Turnip greens had low risks associated with both yield and price related income variability. Production decisions should involve consideration of the regional nature of demand and the compatibility of production and marketing with collards. Watermelons exhibited moderate potential in the Atlanta market and good potential in Cincinnati and St. Louis markets in the spring season. Watermelons had a high degree of seasonal price variability in all markets, with a high degree of overall price variability in both the Atlanta and St. Louis markets. Fall produced watermelons showed low potential in all but the Chicago and New Orleans markets. Low generated net income and poor market potential were noted in the Cincinnati and St. Louis markets in the fall. Although not evaluated, Florida markets could offer good potential for late summer and fall. If Alabama is to develop as a force in the fresh vegetable industry, producers must: 1. Recognize the importance of marketing activities associated with fresh vegetable production, 2. Produce and ship a high quality product properly packaged and handled, 3. Produce in sufficient quantity to attract wholesale attention, 4. Provide markets with a given crop for as long as possible, 5. Provide markets with a given crop from year-to-year to establish a reputation as a consistent (volume and quality) producer, 6. Recognize the importance of maintaining one's reputation as a viable member of the industry, 7. Maintain the highest yield levels of the highest quality possible, 8. Follow production and variety recommendations, 9. Explore market opportunities prior to the production of a given crop, and 10. Expect and be willing and able to assume the risk of negative net returns during some years and harvest periods. WHOLESALE MARKET POTENTIAL FOR FRESH VEGETABLES 49 LITERATURE CITED (1) Lanham, Ben T., J. H. Yeager, and Ben F. Alvord. 1953. Alabama Agriculture: Its Characteristics and Farming Areas. Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 286. (2) Mizelle, William D. 1983. Market Windows for Selected Georgia Vegetables. University of Georgia, College of Agriculture, Cooperative Extension Service Bulletin 887. (3) National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Climatological Data - Annual Summary - Alabama. Washington, D.C., various years. (4) O'Rourke, Desmond A. 1983. Market Opportunities for Minor Washington Fruits and Vegetables. Department of Agricultural Economics, Washington State University Research Bulletin XB0946. . 1984. Use of the Market Window Technique in (5) Evaluating Potential for Interregional Trade. Draft paper prepared for Regional Project S-178, Washington State University. (6) United States Department of Agriculture. 1984. Agricultural Marketing Service. Atlanta Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Wholesale Market Prices. Washington, D.C.; various years. . Agricultural Marketing Service. (7) Baltimore Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Wholesale Market Prices. Washington, D.C.; various years. . Agricultural Marketing Service. (8) Chicago Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Wholesale Market Prices. Washington, D.C.; various years. . Agricultural Marketing Service. (9) Cincinnati Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Wholesale Market Prices. Washington, D.C.; various years. (10) . Agricultural Marketing Service. New Orleans Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Wholesale Market Prices. Washington, D.C.; various years. . Agricultural Marketing Service. (11) St. Louis Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Wholesale Market Prices. Washington, D.C.; various years. (12) U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of the Census. 1982. Census of Agriculture - Alabama, State and County Data, Washington D.C. (13) Zwingli, Michael E. 1986. Market Potential for Fresh Vegetables Grown in the Sand Mountain Region of Alabama. M.S. thesis, Auburn University. 50 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION 50 ALABAMA AGRICULTRLEP IMNSAIO APPENDIX ENTERPRISE BuDGETsIo APPENDIX TABLE 1. IRRIGATED SPRING SNAP BEANS IN THE SAND MOUNTAIN AREA OF ALABAMA FOR REGIONAL AND NATIONAL FRESH MARKETS, SPRING 1985 ESTIMATED COSTS AND RETURNS PER AGRE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT PRAGTICES Ite Itm Gross Receipts Snap beans................... Total........................ Variable Costs Preharvest Seed.... ............. Fertilizer (13-13-13)'........... Lime (Prorated)'.............. Herbicide.................... Insecticide.................... Nematicide................... Tractor and Equipment......... Irrigation..................... Interest on Operating Capital. Subtotal, Prebarvest......... Harvest Costs Harvest Labor 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Baskets...................... Hauling (150 Miles)............ Subtotal, barvest ............. Total Variable Cost ............... Income Above Variable Costs... Fixed Costs Tractor and Equipment .......... Irrigation Equipment ........... General Overhead .............. Total Fixed Costs................ Labor Costs Preharvest Labor ............... (Tractor and Machinery) Irrigation Labor ................ Total Labor Costs................ Total Costs..................... Net Returns to Land and Management.................. Break-even Price, Cost of Production .............. Appendix Table 1 Continued on page 51 Unt ni QanttyPrice or uatiycost/unit Dol. Value or cost Dol. 1, 696.00 1,696.00 Your entry Bu. Lb. Cwt. Ton Lb. Appl. Gal. Acre Acre Dol. Bu. Each Bu. 200.00 80.00 6.00 0.50 0.50 5.00 5.00 1.00 6.00 53.60 200.00 200.00 200.00 8.48 1.10 9.50 19.00 4.50 2.20 8.50 28.88 4.81 .13 2.25 1.20 .20 88.00 ____ 57.00___ 9.50 ____ 2.25 ____ 11.00 ____ 42.50 ____ 28.88___ 28.'86___ 6.97 ____ 274.96___ __ __ __ __ 450.00 240.00 39.00 729.00 ____ ____ ____ ____ 1,003.00 692.04 ____ Acre Acre Acre Hour Hour 1.00 1.00 1.00 4.07 35.65 24.76 50.00 4.25 4.00 35.65 24.76 50.00 110.41 ____ ____ __ 17.30___ 3.60 20.90 _____ ____ __ .90 1,135.00 560.73 ____ Bu. --- - 5.68 ____ following enterprise budgets are for spring-summer plantings. Costs used for fall plantings differed by the amount of additional irrigation and chemical application expense. (13). The budgets were prepared by the senior author in cooperation with personnel from the Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station, Alabama Cooperative Extension Service, and Tennessee Valley Authority. "The WHOLESALE MARKET POTENTIAL FOR FRESH VEGETABLES 51 APPENDIX TABLE 1 (CONTINUED). IRRIGATED SPRING SNAP BEANS IN THE SAND MOUNTAIN AREA OF ALABAMA FOR REGIONAL AND NATIONAL FRESH MARKETS, SPRING 1985 ESTIMATED COSTS AND RETURNS PER ACRE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT PRACTICES MACHINERY OPERATIONS AND LABOR REQUIREMENTS Operation Month Times Over 1 2 1 1 3 2 2 Hours 0.26 .50 .35 .38 1.06 .81 .71 4.07 Labor Machine Cost/acre Hours 0.17 .33 .24 .26 .71 .54 .47 2.71 Variable 1.09 2.15 1.51 2.39 11.04 3.35 7.36 28.88 Fixed 1.15 2.55 1.12 3.22 14.87 2.83 9.91 35.65 Plowing ................. Heavy Disking ........... Herb. Appl.............. Planting ................ Pest. Spray .............. Row Cultivate............ Pest. Spray .............. Totals ................... Machine Tractor(75hp) ............ . Chisel Plow................70 Heavy disk ............... 4-Row Planter ............ 4-Row Cultivator ......... Herbicide Appl............ PTO Air Blast Sprayer (500) Variety: Astro Planting Date: April 20 Mar. Apr. Apr. Apr. May May June TVC/hour 5.57 90 3.75 .67 .85 10.04 TFC/hour Hours/acre 3.04 0.17 3.61 .17 4.65 .26 9.52 .27 2.23 1.74 .24 .24 17.97 Days to Harvest: 56 Harvest Date: June 15 - June 30 'Fertilizer rates used (80-80-80) based on medium level of soil fertility. Soil testing is recommended on individual farms for fertilizer requirements. Fertilizer and lime are custom applied. 2Based on hand harvest. 52 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION APPENDIX TABLE 2. IRRIGATED SPRING BROCCOLI IN THE SAND MOUNTAIN AREA OF ALABAMA FOR REGIONAL AND NATIONAL FRESH MARKETS, SPRING 1985 ESTIMATED COSTS AND RETURNS PER ACRE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Item Unt Qaniycost/unit Dol. cost Dol. entry Gross Receipts Broccoli...................... 28# Box Total............ ... Variable Costs Preharvest Plants......................... Thou. Planting Labor .................. Hour Fertilizer (8-24-24)'1.............. Cwt. Ammonium Nitrate .............. Cwt. Lime (Prorated)'.................Ton Herbicide ..................... Lb. Insecticide ...................... Appl. Tractor and Equipment...........Acre Irrigation ....................... Appl. Interest on Operation Capital...... Dol. Subtotal, Preharvest ........... 325.00 10.00 8.00 5.00 2.40 8.39 2,726.75 ,726.75 80.00 32.00 54.50 24.00 9.50 8.00 4.00 10.90 10.00 19.00 .50 .50 6.00 1.00 1.00 59.35 325.00 325.00 4.50 8.85 36.57 4.81 .13 .50 .24 .60 .92 2.25 53.10 36.57 4.81 7.71 304.44 162.50 78.00 195.00 299.00 734.50 1,038.94 Harvest Costs Harvest Labor?2..................Box Hauling (150 Miles)...............Box Ice and Cooling.................. 28# Boxes...................... Subtotal, Harvest ......... Box Each 325.00 325.00 Total Variable Cost ........ Income Above Variable Costs .... Fixed Costs Tractor and Machinery............ Acre Irrigation Equipment............. Acre General Overhead ............... Acre Total Fixed Costs ......... Labor Costs Preharvest Labor ................ Hour (Tractor and 1,687.81 1.00 1.00 1.00 5.63 .15 42.90 24.76 35.00 4.25 4.00 42.90_____ 24.76 35.00 ____ 102.66_____ 23.91 .60 24.51 1,166.11 1506 ____ Machinery) Irrigation Labor ................. Hour Total Labor Costs ......... Total Costs.. . . . . . . . . .. Net Returns to Land and Management .1,560.64..... Break-even Price, Cost of Production............... Box ____ 3.59_____ MACHINERY OPERATIONS AND LABOR REQUIREMENTS Operation Plowing ............... Heavy Disking .......... Herb. Appl............. Transplanting.......... Pest. Spray ............. Row Cultivate ........... Pest. Spray ............. Row Cultivate ........... Totals................ Month Feb. Feb. Feb. Mar. Mar. Mar. Apr. Apr. Times over 1 1 1 1 3 2 3 1 Labor hours 0.26 .25 .35 1.43 1.06 .81 1.06 .40 5.63 cl. V~ Machine hours 0.17 .17 .24 .95 .71 .54 .71 .27 3.75 Costs/acre Variable Fixed 1.09 1.07 1.51 5.79 11.04 3.35 11.04 1.67 36.57 1.15 1.28 1.12 5.37 14.87 2.83 14.87 1.41 42.90 Appendix Table 2 Continued on page 53 WHOLESALE WHOLESALE MARKET POTENTIAL FOR FRESH VEGEALS5 APPENDIX TABLE 2 (CONTINUED). IRRIGATED SPRING BROCCOLI IN THE SAND MOUNTAIN AREA OF ALABAMA FOR REGIONAL AND NATIONAL FRESH MARKETS, SPRING 1985 ESTIMATED COSTS AND RETURNS PER ACRE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT PRACTICES MARKET POTENTIAL FOR FRESH VEGETABLES 53 MaChine TVC/hour TFC/hour Hours/acre 0.17 Tractor (75 hp)............ Chisel Plow............... Heavy disk ............... 4-Row Cultivator ......... Herbicide Appl........... PTO Air Blast Sprayer (500) Transplanter ......... Variety: Green Duke Planting Date: March 5 5.57 .70 .90 .67 .85 10.04 ..... 50 3.04 3.61 4.65 2.23 1.74 17.97 2.59 Days to Harvest: 53 Harvest Date: April 27 .17 .27 .24 .24 .95 'Fertilizer rates used (120-120-120) based on medium level of soil fertility. Soil testing is recommended on individual farms for fertilizer requirements. Fertilizer and lime are custom applied. 2Based on hand harvest. APPENDIX TABLE 3. IRRIGATED SPRING CABBAGE IN THE SAND MOUNTAIN AREA OF ALABAMA FOR REGIONAL AND NATIONAL FRESH MARKETS, SPRING 1985 ESTIMATED COSTS AND RETURNS PER ACRE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Ite Itm Gross Receipts d Unt ni QanttyPrice or uatiycost/unit Dol. Value or cost Dol. 1, 865.50 1,865.50 Your entry 50# Cabbage..................... . .Carton Total ........................... Variable Costs Preharvest Plants ........................ Thou. Planting Labor................ Hour Fertilizer (8-24-24)' ............. Cwt. Ammonium Nitrate ............. Cwt. Lime (Prorated)'............... Ton Herbicide.................... Lb. Insecticide.................... Appl. Tractor and Equipment .......... Acre Irrigation..................... Appl. Interest on Operation Capital... Dol. Subtotal, Preharvest......... Harvest Costs 2 350.00 5.33 10.00 8.00 5.00 2.40 .50 .50 7.00 1.00 2.00 70.27 350.00 350.00 350.00 11.00 4.00 10.90 10.00 19.00 4.50 8.85 47.55 4.81 .13 .48 110.00___ __ 32.00 ____ 54.50___ __ 24.00 ____ 9.50 ____ 2.25____ _ 61.95___ __ 47.55___ __ 9.62 ____ 9.14 ____ 360.51___ __ 168.00 105.00 ____ ____ . .. . . .. . .. . . .. . .. . . Harvest Labor Hauling (150 Miles) ............. 50-pound Carton.................. Ctn. Ctn. Each .30 1.10 Subtotal, Harvest............... Total Variable Cost.............. Income Above Variable Costs. Fixed Costs Tractor and Machinery .......... Irrigation Equipment ........... General Overhead .............. Total Fixed Costs................. Labor Costs Preharvest Labor............... (Tractor and Machinery) Irrigation Labor.............. Appendix Table 3 Continued on page 54 385.00 ____ 658.00_____ 1,018.51 846.99_____ Acre Acre Acre Hour Hour 1.00: 1.00 1.00 6.68 57.69 24.76 35.00 4.25 4.00 57.69 24.76 35.00 117.45 28.40 1.20 ____ ____ ____ ____ _ .30 ____ 54 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION APPENDIX TABLE 3 (CONTINUED). IRRIGATED SPRING CABBAGE IN THE SAND MOUNTAIN AREA OF ALABAMA FOR REGIONAL AND NATIONAL FRESH MARKETS, SPRING 1985 ESTIMATED COSTS AND RETURNS PER ACRE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Total Labor Costs .................. 29.60 Total Costs ....................... Net Returns to Land and Management ................... 1,165.56 699.94 Break-even Price, Cost of Production ............... 50-Lb. box 333 MACHINERY OPERATIONS AND LABOR REQUIREMENTS Operation Plowing ................. Heavy Disking ........... Herb. Appl............... Transplanting ............ Pest. Spray .............. Pest. Spray .............. Row Cultivate ............ Pest. Spray .............. Row Cultivate. ........... Totals ................... Machine Month Feb. Feb. Mar. Mar. Mar. Apr. Apr. May May Times over 1 1 1 1 2 4 2 3 1 Labor hours 0.26 .25 .35 1.43 .71 1.41 .81 1.06 .40 6.68 Machine hours 0.17 .17 .24 .95 .47 .94 .54 .71 .27 4.45 Costs/acre Variable Fixed 1.09 1.07 1.51 5.79 7.36 14.67 3.35 11.04 1.67 47.55 1.15 1.28 1.12 5.37 9.91 19.75 2.83 14.87 1.41 57.69 TVC/hour TFC/hour Hours/acre Tractor (75 hp)............ . 5.57 3.04 3.61 0.17 Chisel Plow...............70 .17 4.65 Heavy disk................90 .27 .67 2.23 4-Row Cultivator ......... .24 .85 1.74 Herbicide Appl............ 10.04 17.97 .24 PTO Air Blast Sprayer (500) 2.59 .95 Transplanter .............. .50 Variety: Stone Head Days to Harvest: 71 Planting Date: March 15 Harvest Date: May 25 'Fertilizer rates used (120-120-120) based on medium level of soil fertility. Soil testing is recommended on individual farms for fertilizer requirements. Fertilizer and lime are custom applied. 2 Based on hand harvest. WHOLESALE MARKET POTENTIAL FOR FRESH VEGETABLES APPENDIX TABLE 4. IRRIGATED SPRING COLLARDS (BUNGHED GREENS) IN THE SAND MOUNTAIN AREA OF ALABAMA FOR REGIONAL AND NATIONAL FRESH MARKETS, SPRING 1985 ESTIMATED COSTS AND RETURNS PER AGRE FOLLOWING REGOMMENDED MANAGEMENT PRAGTIGES 55 vv 5 Ite Itm Cross Receipts Collards...................... Total......................... Variable Costs Preharvest Seed....................... Fertilizer (8-24-24)'............ Ammonium Nitrate............ Lime (Prorated)'.............. Herbicide.................... Insecticide................... Fungicide.................... Rubber Bands................ Seasonal Labor............... Tractor and Equipment......... Irrigation..................... Interest on Operation Capital. Subtotal, Preharvest......... Harvest Costs Harvest and Pack 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . Containers.................... Hauling (150 Miles)............ Subtotal, Harvest ............. Total Variable Cost .............. . Income Above Variable Costs... Fixed Costs Tractor and Equipment .......... Irrigation Equipment ........... General Overhead .............. Total Fixed Costs................ Labor Costs Preharvest Labor ............... (Tractor and Machinery) Irrigation Labor ................ Total Labor Costs................ Total Costs..................... Net Returns to Land and Managemient.................. Break-even Price, Cost of Production .......... .. . Appendix Table 4 Continued on page 56 Unt ni QanttyPrice or Value or uatiycost/unit cost Dol. Dol. 1, 755.00 1,755.00 Your entry Doz. Lb. Cwt. Cwt. Ton Lb. Appl. Appl. Box Hour Acre Appl. Dol. Doz. Each Doz. 300.00 2.50 5.00 2.00 .50 .50 16.00 11.00 3.00 8.00 1.00 9.00 102.67 300.00 300.00 300.00 5.85 5.00 10.90 10.00 19.00 4.50 5.60 5.70 2.75 4.00 76.10 4.81 .13 .90 .92 .24 12.50 __ 54.50 ____ 20.00 __ 9.50 _ 2.25____ 89.60___ 62.70 ____ 8.25____ 32.00___ 76.10 ____ 43.29 ____ 13.35 ____ 424.03 ____ 270.00 ____ _ __ _ __ 276.00 72.00 618.00 ____ ____ 1,042.03 712.97___ __ Acre Acre Acre Hour Hour 1.00 1.00 1.00 9.58 1.35 95.86 24.76 35.00 4.25 4.00 95.86 24.76 35.00 155.62 40.71 5.40 46.11 ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ 1, 243.76 511.24 Doz. rl 4.15 ____ 56 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION APPENDIX TABLE 4 (CONTINUED). IRRIGATED SPRING COLLARDS (BUNCHED GREENS) IN THE SAND MOUNTAIN AREA OF ALABAMA FOR REGIONAL AND NATIONAL FRESH MARKETS, SPRING 1985 ESTIMATED COSTS AND RETURNS PER ACRE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT PRACTICES MACHINERY OPERATIONS AND LABOR REQUIREMENTS Operation Plowing.................... Heavy Disking ........... Herb. Appl.............. Planter.............. Row Cultivate ............ Row Cultivate ............ Pest. Spray .............. Row Cultivate ............ Pest. Spray .............. Row Cultivate ............ Pest. Spray.............. Row Cultivate ............ Pest. Spray .............. Row Cultivate............ Pest. Spray .............. Totals ................... Machine Tractor (75 hp) ........... . Chisel Plow.............. Heavy Disk...............90 4-Row Cultivator ......... Herbicide Appl. .......... PTO Air Blast Sprayer (500) 4-Row Planter............ Variety: Champion Planting Date: February 15 Month Jan. Feb. Feb. Feb. Feb. Mar. Mar. Apr. Apr. May May June June July July Times over 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 4 1 4 1 3 Labor hours 0.26 .50 .35 .39 .40 .40 .35 .40 1.42 .40 1.42 .40 1.42 .40 1.06 9.58 Machine hours 0.17 .33 .24 .26 .27 .27 .24 .27 .94 .27 .94 .27 .94 .27 .71 6.39 Costs/acre Variable Fixed 1.09 2.15 1.51 2.42 1.67 1.67 3.68 1.67 14.72 1.67 14.72 1.67 14.72 1.67 11.04 76.10 1.15 2.55 1.12 3.27 1.41 1.41 4.96 1.41 19.82 1.41 19.82 1.41 19.82 1.41 14.87 95.86 TVC/hour 5.57 .. 70 TFC/hour Hour/acre 3.04 . 3.61 0.17 4.65 .17 .67 2.23 .27 . 85 1.74 .24 10.04 17.97 .24 3.75 9.52 .26 Days to Harvest: 90 Harvest Date: May 16-July 31 rates used (120-120-120) based on medium level of soil fertility. Soil testing is recommended on individual farms for fertilizer requirements. Fertilizer and lime are custom applied. 2 Based on hand harvest. 'Fertilizer WHOLESALE MARKET POTENTIAL FOR FRESH VEGETABLES 57 APPENDIX TABLE 5. IRRIGATED SPRING COLLARDS (CUT GREENS) IN THE SAND MOUNTAIN AREA OF ALABAMA FOR REGIONAL AND NATIONAL FRESH MARKETS, SPRING 1985 ESTIMATED COSTS AND RETURNS PER ACRE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Item Gross Receipts Collards ....................... Total ............................. Variable Costs Preharvest Seed .......................... Fertilizer (8-24-24) ............... Ammonium Nitrate .............. Lime (Prorated) ................. Herbicide ...................... Insecticide...................... Fungicide ..................... Seasonal Labor .................. Tractor and Equipment ........... Irrigation ...................... Interest on Operation Capital...... Subtotal, Preharvest ........... Unit QuantityPrice or cost/unit Dol. Valueor cost Dol. 1,876.00 1,876.00 12.50 54.50 20.00 9.50 2.25 89.60 62.70 32.00 74.39 43.29 13.02 413.75 260.00 368.00 278.40 906.40 Your entry 1 1/9 Bu. Lb. Cwt. Cwt. Ton Lb. Appl. Appl. Hour Acre Appl. Dol. 1 1/9 Bu. Each 1 1/9 Bu. 400.00 2.50 5.00 2.00 .50 .50 16.00 11.00 8.00 1.00 9.00 100.18 400.00 400.00 400.00 4.69 5.00 10.90 10.00 19.00 4.50 5.60 5.70 4.00 74.39 4.81 .13 .65 .92 .70 Harvest Costs Harvest and Pack ................ Containers...................... Hauling (435 Mi.)................ Subtotal, Harvest .............. Total Variable Cost ................ Income Above Variable Costs ........ 1,320.15 555.85 Acre Acre Acre Hour Hour 1.00 1.00 1.00 9.17 1.35 93.69 24.76 35.00 4.25 4.00 93.69 24.76 35.00 153.45 38.97 5.40 44.37 Fixed Costs Tractor and Equipment........... Irrigation Equipment ............ General Overhead ............... Total Fixed Costs .................. Labor Costs Preharvest Labor ................ (Tractor and Machinery) Irrigation Labor ................. Total Labor Costs .................. Total Costs ....................... Net Returns to Land and M anagement .................... Break-even Price, Cost of Production............... 1 1/9 Bu. 1,517.97 358.03 3.79 Appendix Table 5 Continued on page 58 58 58 ALABAMA ALABAMA AGRICULTURLEPRMN AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION TTO APPENDIX TABLE 5 (CONTINUED). IRRIGATED SPRING COLLARDS (CUT GREENS) IN THE SAND MOUNTAIN AREA OF ALABAMA FOR REGIONAL AND NATIONAL FRESH MARKETS, SPRING 1985 ESTIMATED COSTS AND RETURNS PER AGRE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT PRAGTICES MACHINERY OPERATIONS AND LABOR REQUIREMENTS Operation Plowing................. Heavy Disking........... Herb. Appl.............. Planting ................. Row Cultivate ............ Pest. Spray.............. Row Cultivate ............ Pest. Spray.............. Row Cultivate............ Pest. Spray............... Row Cultivate ............ Pest. Spray.............. Row Cultivate............ Pest. Spray............... Totals ................... Machine Tractor (75 hp)............. Chisel Plow................. Month Feb. Feb. Feb. Feb. Mar. Mar. Apr. Apr. May May June June July July Times over 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 4 1 4 1 3 Labor hours 0.26 .50 .35 .38 .40 .35 .40 1.42 .40 1.42 .40 1.42 .40 1.06 9.17 Machine hours 0.17 .33 .24 .26 .27 .24 .27 .94 .27 .94 .27 .94 .27 .71 6.11 Cost/acre Variable Fixed 1.09 2.15 1.51 2.39 1.67 3.68 1.67 14.72 1.67 14.72 1.67 14.72 1.67 11.04 74.39 1.15 2.55 1.12 3.22 1.41 4.24 1.41 19.82 1.41 19.82 1.41 19.82 1.41 14.87 93.69 TVC/hour 5.57 .90 4.65 .17 Heavy disk................. 4-Row Planter.............. 3.75 9.52 .26 .27 4-Row Cultivator..... .67 2.23 1.74 .24 Herbicide AppI............. .85 PTO Air Blast Sprayer (500) 10.04 17.97 .24 Variety: Champion Days to Harvest: 90 Planting Date: February 15 Harvest Date: May 16-July 31 'Fertilizer rates used (120-120-120) based on medium level of soil fertility. Soil testing is recommended on individual farms for fertilizer requirements. Fertilizer and lime are custom applied. 2 Based on hand harvest. .70 TFC/hour 3.04 3.61 Hours/acre 0.17 WHOLESALE MARKET POTENTIAL FOR FRESH VEGETABLES 59 APPENDIX TABLE 6. IRRIGATED SWEET CORN IN THE SAND MOUNTAIN AREA OF ALABAMA FOR REGIONAL AND NATIONAL FRESH MARKETS, SPRING 1985 ESTIMATED COSTS AND RETURNS PER AGRE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT PRAGTIGES Ite Itm Gross Receipts Sweet Corn (Yellow)........... Total......................... Variable Costs Preharvest Seed....................... Fertilizer (13-13-13)'........... Ammonium Nitrate............ Lime (Prorated)'.............. Herbicide.................... Insecticide.................... Tractor and Equipment......... Irrigation..................... Interest on Operation Capital. Subtotal, Preharvest......... Harvest Costs 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pick and Pack . Containers.................... Ice and Cool.................. Hauling (150 Miles)............ Subtotal, Harvest ............. Total Variable Cost .............. . Income Above Variable Costs... Fixed Costs..................... Tractor and Equipment .......... Irrigation Equipment ........... General Overhead .............. Total Fixed Costs................ Labor Costs Preharvest Labor ............... (Tractor and Machinery) Irrigation Labor ................ Total Labor Costs................ Total Costs..................... Net Returns to Land and Management.................. Break-even Price, Cost of Production .............. Appendix Table 6 Continued on page 60 Unt ni QanttyPrice or Value or uatiycost/unit cost Dol. Dol. 1,367.50 1,367.50 Your entry Crate Lb. Cwt. Cwt. Ton Lb. Appl. Acre Appl. Dol. Crate Each Crate Crate 250.00 12.00 5.00 3.00 .50 1.00 15.00 1.00 8.00 63.82 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 5.47 2.85 9.50 10.00 19.00 15.00 5.25 65.68 4.81 .13 .85 .95 .60 .30 34.20 ____ 47.50 ____ 30.00 ______ 9.50 _ 15.00 __ 78.75 ____ 65.68 ____ 38.48_____ 8.30 ____ 327.41 ____ 212.50 237.50 150.00 75.00 675.00 _____ ____ _____ ______ ____ 1,002.41 365.09_____ Acre Acre Acre Hour Hour 1.00 1.00 1.00 7.61 1.20 85.21 24.76 25.00 4.25 4.00 85.21 24.76 25.00 134.97 ____ ____ ____ ____ 32.34_____ 4.80 37.14 ____ ____ 1,174.51 192.99 ____ Crate 4.70 ____ 60 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION APPENDIX TABLE 6 (CONTINUED). IRRIGATED SWEET CORN IN THE SAND MOUNTAIN AREA OF ALABAMA FOR REGIONAL AND NATIONAL FRESH MARKETS, SPRING 1985 ESTIMATED COSTS AND RETURNS PER ACRE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT PRACTICES MACHINERY OPERATIONS AND LABOR REQUIREMENTS Operation Plowing ................. Heavy Disking ............ Herb. Appl.............. Planting ................. Row Cultivate ............ Pest Spray ............... Row Cultivate ............ Pest. Spray............... Pest. Spray .............. Totals ................... Month Mar. Mar. Apr. Apr. Apr. Apr. May May June Times over 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 6 8 Labor hours 0.26 .50 .35 .38 .40 .35 .40 2.12 2.83 7.61 Machine hours 0.17 .33 .24 .26 .27 .24 .27 1.42 1.89 5.07 Cost/acre Variable Fixed 1.09 2.15 1.51 2.39 1.67 3.68 1.67 22.08 29.44 65.68 1.15 2.55 1.12 3.22 1.41 4.96 1.41 29.73 39.64 85.21 Machine Tractor (75 hp) ............ . Chisel Plow...............70 Heavy disk ............... 4-Row Planter............ . . 4-Row Cultivator ......... Herbicide Appl............ PTO Air Blast Sprayer (500) Variety: Bonanza Planting Date: April 15 Hour/acre TFC/hour 3.04 3.61 0.17 90 4.65 .17 3.75 9.52 .26 .67 2.23 .27 .85 1.74 .24 17.97 .24 10.04 Days to Harvest: 85 Harvest Date: July 9 'Fertilizer rates used (160-60-60) based on medium level of soil fertility. Soil testing is recommended on individual farms for fertilizer requirements. Fertilizer and lime are custom applied. 2 Based on hand harvest. TVC/hour 5.57 WHOLESALE MARKET POTENTIAL FOR FRESH VEGETABLES APPENDIX TABLE 7. IRRIGATED SPRING CUCUMBERS IN THE SAND MOUNTAIN AREA OF ALABAMA FOR REGIONAL AND NATIONAL FRESH MARKETS, SPRING 1985 ESTIMATED COSTS AND RETURNS PER ACRE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT PRACTICES 6 61 Ite Unt QanttyPrice or Itm Cross Receipts ni uatiycost/unit Dol. Value or cost Dol. 1, 894.50 1, 894.50 Your entry Cucumbers................... Total......................... Variable Costs Preharvest Seed....................... Fertilizer (4-12-12)............. Ammonium Nitrate............ Lime (Prorated)'.............. Herbicide.................... Fungicide.................... Insecticide.................... Nematicide................... Hoeing Labor................ Tractor and Machinery......... Irrigation..................... Interest on Operation Capital. Subtotal, Preharvest......... Harvest Costs, 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Harvest Labor Containers.................... Grade and Pack............... Hauling (150 Miles) ............. Subtotal, Harvest ............. Total Variable Cost ............... Income Above Variable Costs... Fixed Costs Tractor and Machinery .......... Irrigation Equipment ........... General Overhead .............. Total Fixed Costs................ Labor Costs Preharvest Labor ............... (Tractor and Machinery) Irrigation Labor ................ Total Labor Costs................ Total Costs..................... Net Returns to Land and Management.................. Break-even Price, Cost of Production .............. 1 1/9-Bu. Carton Lb. Cwt. Cwt. Ton Lb. Appl. Appl. Gal. Hour Acre Appl. Dol. Carton Each Carton Carton 225.00 8.42 2.00 7.00 2.00 .50 1.00 7.00 7.00 5.00 5.00 1.00 6.00 68.01 225.00 225.00 225.00 225.00 37.00 7.60 10.00 19.00 10.67 4.00 2.20 8.50 4.00 37.92 4.81 .13 1.39 74.00 ____ 53.20 ____ 20.00 ____ 9.50 ____ 10.67 ____ 28.00 ____ 15.40 42.50 ____ 20.00 __ 37.92 ____ 28.86___ 8.84 ____ 348.89 ____ 312.30 207.00 ____ __ .92 1.39 .33 312.48 ____ 74.25_ 906.03 1,)254.92 639.58_____ Acre Acre Acre Hour Hour 1.00 1.00 1.00 5.18 46.98 24.76 40.00 93.00 4.25 4.00 46.98 24.76 40.00 111.74 22.02 3.60 25.62 ____ ____ __ ____ __ .90 ______ ____ 1,392.27 502.23 ____ 1 1/9 Bu. 6.19 _ Appendix Table 7 Continued on page 62 62 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION APPENDIX TABLE 7 (CONTINUED). IRRIGATED SPRING CUCUMBERS IN THE SAND MOUNTAIN AREA OF ALABAMA FOR REGIONAL AND NATIONAL FRESH MARKETS, SPRING 1985 ESTIMATED COSTS AND RETURNS PER ACRE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT PRACTICES MACHINERY OPERATIONS AND LABOR REQUIREMENTS Operation Month Times over 1 2 1 1 1 2 4 3 Labor Machine Cost/acre hours 0.26 .50 .35 .38 .40 .81 1.42 1.06 5.18 hours 0.17 .33 .24 .26 .27 .54 .94 .71 3.45 Variable 1.09 2.15 1.51 2.39 1.67 3.35 14.72 11.04 37.92 Fixed 1.15 2.55 1.12 3.22 1.41 2.83 19.82 14.87 46.98 Plowing ................. Heavy Disking ........... Herb. Appl.............. Planting ................. Row Cultivate ............ Row Cultivate ............ Pest. Spray .............. Pest. Spray .............. Totals ................... Machine Tractor (75 hp) ........... . Chisel Plow............... Heavy disk ............... 4-Row Planter............ 4-Row Cultivator ......... Herbicide Appl............ PTO Air Blast Sprayer (500) Variety: Sprint 440S Planting Date: April 15 Mar. Mar. Mar. Apr. Apr. May May June TFC/hour Hours/acre 3.04 3.61 0.17 4.65 .17 9.52 .26 2.23 .27 1.74 .24 1797 .24 Days to Harvest: 60 Harvest Date: June 14 - July 1 'Fertilizer rates used (80-80-80) based on medium level of soil fertility. Soil testing is recommended on individual farms for fertilizer requirements. Fertilizer and lime is custom applied. 2Based on hand harvest. TVC/hour 5.57 .70 90 3.75 .67 .85 10.04 WHOLESALE MARKET POTENTIAL FOR FRESH VEGETABLES 6 63 APPENDIX TABLE 8. IRRIGATED OKRA (5/9 Bu.) IN THE SAND MOUNTAIN AREA OF ALABAMA FOR REGIONAL AND NATIONAL FRESH MARKETS, SPRING 1985 ESTIMATED COSTS AND RETURNS PER AGRE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT PRAGTICES Ite Itm Unt ni QanttyPrice or uatiycost/unit Dol. Value or cost Dol. 3, 376.80 3, 376.80 Your entry Cross Receipts Okra.........................5/9Bu. Total......................... Variable Costs Preharvest Seed.......................... Lb. Fertilizer (4-12-12)'..............Cwt. Cwt. Ammonium Nitrate .............. Lime (Prorated)'.................Ton Herbicide ...................... Lb. Insecticide......................Appl. Nematicide ..................... Gal. Tractor and Equipment...........Acre Irrigation.......................Appl. Dol. Interest on Operation Capital. Subtotal, Preharvest......... Harvest Costs 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Harvest Labor 5/9 bu. Baskets (5/9 Bushel)..............Each Hauling (435 Miles)..............5/9 Bu. Subtotal, Harvest............. Total Variable Cost ............... Income Above Variable Costs... Fixed Costs Tractor and Equipment ........... Acre Irrigation Equipment............. Acre General Overhead ............... Acre Total Fixed Costs................ Labor Costs Preharvest Labor ................ Hour (Tractor and Machinery) Hour Irrigation Labor ................. Total Labor Costs................ Total Costs..................... Net Returns to Land and Management.................. Break-even Price, Cost of Production............... Bu. Appendix Table 8 Continued on page 64 360.00 10.00 7.00 2.00 .50 .50 5.00 5.00 1.00 14.00 52.72 360.00 360.00 360.00 9.38 2.80 7.60 10.00 19.00 4.50 2.10 8.50 30.32 4.81 .13 2.75 1.00 28.00___ 53.20 ____ __ 20.00 9.50 ___ 2.25 ____ 10.50 ____ 42.50 ____ 30.32 ____ 67.34___ 6.85 ____ 270.47___ 990.00 360.00 125.28 ____ __ __ .35 1,475.28 1, 745.75 1,631.05 1.00 1.00 1.00 4.42 2.10 36.85 24.76 35.00 4.25 4.00 36.85 24.76 35.00 96.61 18.79 8.40 27.19 ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ 1, 869.55 1,507.25 5.19 ________ 64 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT 64 ALABAMA AGRICULTURLEPRMN STATION TTO APPENDIX TABLE 8 (CONTINUED). IRRIGATED OKRA (5/9 Bu.) IN THE SAND MOUNTAIN ABEA OF ALABAMA FOB REGIONAL AND NATIONAL FRESH MARKETS, SPRING 1985 ESTIMATED COSTS AND RETURNS PER AGRE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT PRAGTIGES MACHINERY OPERATIONS AND LABOR REQUIREMENTS Operation Month Times over 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 Labor hours 0.26 .17 .50 .35 .38 .81 .18 .35 .35 .35 .35 .35 4.42 Machine hours 0.17 .11 .33 .24 .26 .54 .12 .24 .24 .24 .24 .24 2.95 3.04 3.61 4.65 9.52 2.23 1.74 Cost/acre Variable Fixed 1.09 .64 2.15 1.51 2.39 3.35 .81 3.68 3.68 3.68 3.68 3.68 30.32 1.15 .42 2.55 1.12 3.22 2.83 .78 4.96 4.96 4.96 4.96 4.96 36.85 Plowing ................. Apr. Spike Harrow............. Apr. Heavy Disking...........Apr. Herb. Appl.............. Apr. Planting................. May Row Cultivate ............ May Dry Fert. Spread.......... May Pest. Spray.............. May Pest. Spray.............. June Pest. Spray............... July Pest. Spray ............. Aug Pest. Spray .............. Sept Totals.......... Machine Tractor (75 hp)............. Chisel Plow................ Heavy disk................. 4-Row Planter.............. 4-Row Cultivator..... Herbicide Appi..... PTO Air Blast Sprayer (500) TVC/hour 5.57 .70 .90 3.75 .67 .85 10.04 TFC/hour Hours/acre 0.17 .17 .26 .27 .24 .24 Spike Harrow............... Dry Fertilizer Spreader.. Variety: Clemson Spineless Planting Date: May 7 .15 .98 .11 3.30 .12 Days to Harvest: 55 Harvest Date: July 1 - September 30 17.97 .72 'Fertilizer rates used (80-80-80) based on medium level of soil fertility. Soil testing is recommended on individual farms for fertilizer requirements. Fertilizer and lime are custom applied. 2 Based on hand harvest. WHOLESALE MARKET POTENTIAL FOR FRESH VEGETABLES 65 APPENDIX TABLE 9. IRRIGATED BELL PEPPERS IN THE SAND MOUNTAIN AREA OF ALABAMA FOR REGIONAL AND NATIONAL FRESH MARKETS, SPRING 1985 ESTIMATED COSTS AND RETURNS PER ACRE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Item Unit Quantity Price or Value or cost/unit cost Dol. Dol. 2,847.60 2,847.60 90.00 32.00 54.50 16.00 9.50 30.00 168.75 60.00 71.69 72.15 19.65 624.24 533.23 331.20 86.40 201.60 Your entry Gross Receipts Bell Peppers .................... Total ............................. Variable Costs Preharvest Plants .................. ...... Planting Labor .................. Fertilizer (8-24-24)' .............. Ammoniun Nitrate ............... Lime (Prorated)' ................. Herbicide ...................... Insecticide ...................... Fungicide ...................... Tractor and Equipment ........... Irrigation ....................... Interest on Operation Captial...... Subtotal, Preharvest ........... 1 1/9 Bu. Thou. Hour Cwt. Cwt. Ton Acre Lb. Appl. Acre Appl. Dol. 360.00 6.00 8.00 5.00 1.60 .50 1.00 187.50 15.00 1.00 15.00 151.15 360.00 360.00 360.00 360.00 7.91 15.00 4.00 10.90 10.00 19.00 30.00 .90 4.00 71.69 4.81 .13 1.48 .92 .24 .56 Harvest Costs Harvest Labor . Carton Containers........................ Each Hauling (150 Miles) .............. Carton Grading ........................ Carton 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Subtotal, Harvest .............. Total Variable Cost ................ Income Above Variable Costs........ Fixed Costs Tractor and Equipment........... Irrigation Equipment ............ General Overhead ............... Total Fixed Costs .................. Acre Acre Acre Hour Hour 1.00 1.00 1.00 8.76 2.25 87.21 24.76 60.00 4.25 4.00 1,152.43 1,776.67 1,070.93 87.21 24.76 60.00 171.97 37.23 9.00 46.23 Labor costs Preharvest Labor ................ (Tractor and Machinery) Irrigation Labor ................. Total Labor Costs .................. Total Costs ....................... Net Returns to Land and852.73 Management .................... 1,994.87 852.73 Bu. 5.54 Break-even Price, Cost of Production............... Appendix Table 9 Continued on page 66 66 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION APPENDIX TABLE 9 (CONTINUED). IRRIGATED BELL PEPPERS IN THE SAND MOUNTAIN AREA OF ALABAMA FOR REGIONAL AND NATIONAL FRESH MARKETS, SPRING 1985 ESTIMATED COSTS AND RETURNS PER ACRE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT PRACTICES MACHINERY OPERATIONS AND LABOR REQUIREMENTS Operation Plowing ................. Heavy Disking ........... Herb. Appl.............. Transplanting ............ Pest. Spray .............. Row Cultivate ............ Herbicide Appl........... Pest. Spray... ............ Row Cultivate ............ Pest. Spray .............. Pest. Spray .............. Pest. Spray .............. Totals ................... Month Apr. Apr. Apr. May May May June June June July Aug. Sep. Times over 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 4 4 2 Labor hours 0.26 .25 .35 1.43 .35 .40 .35 1.42 .40 1.42 1.42 .71 8.76 Machine hours 0.17 .17 .24 .95 .24 .27 .24 .94 .27 .94 .94 .47 5.84 Cost/acre Variable Fixed 1.09 1.07 3.67 5.79 3.68 1.67 1.51 14.72 1.67 14.72 14.72 7.36 71.69 1.15 1.28 1.12 5.37 4.96 1.41 1.13 19.82 1.41 19.82 19.82 9.91' 87.21 Machine TVC/hour Tractor (75 hp)............ . 5.57 Chisel Plow...............70 Heavy disk................90 4-Row Cultivator ......... .67 Herbicide Appl............ .85 PTO Air Blast Sprayer (500) 10.04 Transplanter .............. .50 Variety: Keystone Resistant Giant #4 Planting Date: May 1 TFC/hour Hours/acre 3.04 3.61 0.17 4.65 .17 2.23 .27 1.74 .24 17.97 .24 2.59 .95 Days to Harvest: 75 Harvest Date: July 14 - September 30 'Fertilizer rates used (100-120-120) based on medium level of soil fertility. Soil testing is recommended on individual farms for fertilizer requirements. Fertilizer and lime are custom applied. 2 Based on hand harvest. WHOLESALE MARKET POTENTIAL FOR FRESH VEGETABLES 67 APPENDIX TABLE 10. IRRIGATED IRISH POTATOES (100-POUND INTHE SAND MOUNTAIN AREA OF ALABAMA FOR REGIONAL AND NATIONAL FRESH MARKETS, SPRING 1985 ESTIMATED COSTS AND RETURNS PER AGRE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Item Gross Receipts Potatoes ....................... BAG) Unt Qaniycost/unit Dol. cost Dol. entry 100-Lb. 170.00 10.31 1,752.70 1, 752.70 73.50 76.00 30.40 9.50 30.00 38.00 42.50 27.50 197.20 32.60 28.86 31.61 617.67 ____ ____ ____ Total............ ....... ...... Variable Costs Preharvest Seed Potatoes...................Cwt. Fertilizer (13-13-13)'.............Cwt. Fertilizr (4-12-12)'...............Cwt. Lime (Prorated)'.................Ton Herbicide ...................... Acre Insecticide......................Acre Nematicide ..................... Gal. Fungicide ...................... Lb. Cultural Labor..................Hr. Tractor and Machinery ............ Acre Irrigation.......................Appl. Interest on Operation Capital.......Dol. Subtotal, Preharvest......... Harvest Costs Harvest Labor...................Bag Containers......................Each Hauling (425 Miles)..............Bag Grade and Pack..................Bag Tractor and Machinery ............ Acre Subtotal, Harvest ............. Total Variable Cost ............... Income Above Variable Costs... Fixed Costs Tractor and Machinery............ Acre Irrigation....................... Acre General Overhead ............... Acre Total Fixed Costs................ Labor Costs (Tractor and Machinery) Preharvest Labor ................ Hour Harvest Labor .................. Hour Irrigation Labor ................. Hour Total Labor Costs................ Total Costs..................... Net Returns to Land and Management.................. Break-even Price, Cost of Production ............... Cwt. Appendix Table 10 Continued on page 68 7.00 8.00 4.00 .50 1.00 1.00 5.00 10.00 49.30 1.00 6.00 243.18 170.00 170.00 170.00 170.00 10.50 9.50 7.60 19.00 30.00 38.00 8.50 2.75 4.00 32.60 4.81 .13 .29 1.10 1.70 .49 11.85 ____ ____ ____ 1.00 48.55 187.00 289.00 84.05 11.85 620.45 ____ ____ 1,238.12 514.58 ____ 1.00 1.00 1.00 43.9624.76 35.00 43.96 24.76 35.00 103.72 ____ ____ ____ 4.95 1.38 .90 4.25 4.25 4.00 21.04 5.84 3.60 30.49 ____ ____ ____ ____ 1,372.33 380.37_____ 8.07 ____ 68 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION APPENDIX TABLE 10 (CONTINUED). IRRIGATED IRISH POTATOES (100-POUND BAG) IN THE SAND MOUNTAIN AREA OF ALABAMA FOR REGIONAL AND NATIONAL FRESH MARKETS, SPRING 1985 ESTIMATED COSTS AND RETURNS PER ACRE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT PRACTICES MACHINERY OPERATIONS AND LABOR REQUIREMENTS Operation Plowing................. Heavy Disking ........... Herb. Appl. ............. Planter ................. Bedder ................. Row Cultivate ............ Pest. Sprayer ............ Pest Sprayer ............. Potato Combine .......... Rake.................... Totals ................... Machine Tractor (75 hp) ........... Potato combine........... . Chisel Plow...............70 Heavy disk ............... Potato Bedder............ 4-Row Cultivator ......... Herbicide Appl............ PTO Air Blast Sprayer (500) Potato Planter ............ Potato Digger ............ Rake.....................69 Variety: Red LaSoda Planting Date: March 15 Month Jan. Jan. Jan. Mar. Mar. Apr. Apr. May June June Times over 1 2 1 1 1 2 2 3 1 1 Labor hours 0.26 .50 .35 .34 .41 .81 .71 1.06 1.38 .52 6.33 Machine hours 0.17 .33 .24 .23 .27 .54 .47 .71 .92 .34 4.22 Cost/acre Variable Fixed 1.09 2.15 1.51 1.90 2.05 3.35 7.36 11.04 11.85 2.15 44.45 1.15 2.55 1.12 2.48 1.46 2.83 9.91 14.87 5.98 1.61 43.96 TVC/hour 5.57 7.36 90 1.99 .67 .85 10.04 2.74 6.65 TFC/hour 3.04 3.48 3.61 4.65 2.35 2.23 1.74 17.97 7.78 11.16 1.63 Days to Harvest: 100 Harvest Date: June 23 Hour/acre 0.92 .17 .17 .27 .27 .24 .24 .23 .66 .34 'Fertilizer rates used (120-150-150) based on medium level of soil fertility. Soil testing is recommended on individual farms for fertilizer requirements. Fertilizer and lime are custom applied. WHOLESALE MARKET POTENTIAL FOR FRESH VEGETABLES 69 6 IN THE SAND MOUNTAIN AREA APPENDIX TABLE 11. IRRIGATED IRISH POTATOES (50-LB. OF ALABAMA FOR REGIONAL AND NATIONAL FRESH MARKETS, SPRING 1985 ESTIMATED COSTS AND RETURNS PER AGRE FOLLOWING REGOMMENDED MANAGEMENT PRAGTIGES BAG) Ite IeUnt UitPrice Quantity 340.00 or cost/unit Value or cost Your entry Dol. Gross Receipts Potatoes.................... Total....................... Variable Costs Preharvest Seed Potatoes................ Fertilizer (13-13-13)'........... Fertilizer (4-12-12)'............ Lime (Prorated)' .............. Herbicide.................... Insecticide.................... Nematicide................... Fungicide.................... Cultural Labor............... Tractor and Machinery......... Irrigation..................... Interest on Operation Capital. Subtotal, Preharvest......... Harvest Costs Harvest Labor................. Containers.................... Hauling (150 Miles)............ Grade and Pack................ Tractor and Machinery .......... Subtotal, Harvest ............. Total Variable Cost ............... Income Above Variable Costs... Fixed Costs Tractor and Machinery .......... Irrigation..................... General Overhead .............. Total Fixed Costs................ Labor Costs (Tractor and Machinery) Preharvest Labor ............... Harvest Labor ................. Irrigation Labor ................ Total Labor Costs................ Total Costs..................... Net Returns to Land and Management.................. Break-even Price, Cost of Production .............. 50-Lb. bag Cwt. Cwt. Cwt. Ton Acre Acre Gal. Lb. Hr. Acre Appl. Dol. Bag Each Bag Bag Acre 6.06 Dol. 2,060.40 2,060.40 7.00 8.00 4.00 .50 1.00 1.00 5.00 10.00 49.30 1.00 6.00 243.18 340.00 340.00 340.00 340.00 1.00 10.50 9.50 7.60 19.00 30.00 38.00 8.50 2.75 4.00 32.60 4.81 .13 .14 .90 .30 .25 11.85 73.50___ 76.00___ 30.40 9.50 ____ 30.00___ 38.00 __ 42.50 ____ 27.50 197.20 ____ 32.60 ____ 28.86___ 31.61 __ 617.67___ 48.55___ 306.00___ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ 102.00 84.05 11.85 552.45 __ __ ____ _ 1,170.12 890.28 ____ Acre Acre Acre 1.00 1.00 1.00 43.96 24.76 35.00 43.96 24.76 35.00 103.72 _____ Hour Hour Hour 4.95 1.38 .90 4.25 4.25 4.00 21.04 5.84 3.60 ____ ____ ____ 30.49_____ 1,304.33 756.07 ____ 50-Lb. bag 3.84 Appendix Table 11 Continued on page 70 70 70 ALABAMA ALABAMA AGRICULTURLEPRMN AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION TTO APPENDIX TABLE 11 (CONTINUED). IRRIGATED IRISH POTATOES (50-LB. BAG) IN THE SAND MOUNTAIN AREA OF ALABAMA FOR REGIONAL AND NATIONAL FRESH MARKETS, SPRING 1985 ESTIMATED COSTS AND RETURNS PER ACRE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT PRACTICES MACHINERY OPERATIONS AND LABOR REQUIREMENTS Operation Plowing ................. Heavy Disking........... Herb. Appl............... Planter.................. Bedder................. Row Cultivate ............ Pest. Spray............... Pest. Spray............... Potato Combine.......... Rake................... Totals ................... Month Jan. Jan. Jan. Mar. Mar. Apr. Apr. May June June Times over 1 2 .1 1 1 2 2 3 1 1 Labor hours 0.26 .50 .35 .34 .41 .81 .71 1.06 1.38 .52 6.33 Machine hours 0.17 .33 .24 .23 .27 .54 .47 .71 .92 .34 4.22 Cost/acre Variable Fixed 1.09 2.15 1.51 1.90 2.05 3.35 7.36 11.04 11.85 2.15 44.45 1.15 2.55 1.12 2.48 1.46 2.83 9.91 14.87 5.98 1.61 43.96 Hours/acre TFC/hour TVC/hour Machine 3.04 5.57 Tractor (75 hp)............ 0.92 .3.48 7.36 Potato combine............. .17 3.61 .70 Chisel Plow................. .17 4.65 .90 Heavy disk................. .27 2.35 1.99 Potato Bedder.............. .27 2.23 .67 4-Row Cultivator...... .24 1.74 .85 Herbicide Appl............. .24 17.97 10.04 PTO Air Blast Sprayer (500) .23 7.78 2.74 Potato Planter.............. .66 11.16 6.65 Potato Digger.............. .34 1.63 .69 Rake...................... Days to Harvest: 100 Variety: Red LaSoda Harvest Date: June 23 Planting Date: March 15 'Fertilizer rates used (120-150-150) based on medium level of soil fertility. Soil testing is recommended on individual farms for fertilizer requirements. Fertilizer and lime are custom applied. WHOLESALE MARKET POTENTIAL FOR FRESH VEGETABLES APPENDIX TABLE 12. IRRIGATED SPRING YELLOW SQUASH (1 BU.) IN THE SAND MOUNTAIN AREA OF ALABAMA FOR REGIONAL AND NATIONAL FRESH MARKETS, SPRING 1985 ESTIMATED COSTS AND RETURNS PER AGRE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT PRACTICES 7 71 Ite Itm Cross Receipts Squash..................... Total...........: ............... Variable Costs Preharvest Seed....................... Fertilizer (4-12-12)'............ Ammonium Nitrate............ Lime (Prorated)'.............. Fungicide.................... Insecticide.................. Nematicide................... Herbicide.................... Tractor and Machinery......... Irrigation..................... Interest on Operation Capital. Subtotal, Preharvest......... Harvest Costs................... . . . . . . . . . Harvest Labor2 . . . . . . Baskets (Bushel).............. Hauling (150 Miles) ............. Subtotal, Harvest ............. Total Variable Cost ............... Income Above Variable Costs... Fixed Costs Tractor and Machinery .......... Irrigation..................... General Overhead .............. Total Fixed Costs ................ . Labor Costs Preharvest Labor ............... (Tractor and Machinery) Irrigation Labor ................ Total Labor Costs................ Total Costs..................... Net Return to Land and Management Break-even Price, Cost of Production .............. Appendix Table 12 Continued on page 72 Unt ni QanttyPrice or Value or uatiycost/unit cost Dol. Dol. 1, 372.00 1,)372.00 Your entry Bu. Lb. Cwt. Cwt. 200.00 3.00 7.00 2.00 .50 7.00 7.00 5.00 1.00 1.00 9.00 61.16 200.00 200.00 200.00 6.86 11.00 7.60 10.00 19.00 5.50 2.70 8.50 10.67 36.24 4.81 .13 1.50 1.20 Ton Appl. Appl. Gal. Lb. Acre Appl. Dol. Bu. Each Bu. 33.00___ 53.20 ____ 20.00 ____ 9.50 ____ 38.50 ____ 18.90 ____ 42.50 ____ 10.67 ____ 36.24 ____ 43.29 ____ 7.95 ____ 313.75 ____ 300.00 240.00 48.60 ____ ____ ____ ____ __ ____ __ .24 588.60 902.35 469.65 Acre Acre Acre Hour Hour 1.00 1.00 1.00 4.78 1.35 45.56 24.76 35.00 4.25 4.00 45.56 ____ 24.76___ 35.00 ____ 105.32 ____ 20.30 5.40 25.70 ____ __ ____ ____ 11,033.38 338.62 ____ Bu. 5.17 ____ 72 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION APPENDIX TABLE 12 (CONTINUED). IRRIGATED SPRING YELLOW SQUASH (1 Bu.) IN THE SAND MOUNTAIN AREA OF ALABAMA FOR REGIONAL AND NATIONAL FRESH MARKETS, SPRING 1985 ESTIMATED COSTS AND RETURNS PER ACRE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT PRACTICES MACHINERY OPERATIONS AND LABOR REQUIREMENTS Operation Plowing ................. Heavy Disking ........... Herb. Appl............... Planting ................. Pest. Spray .............. Row Cultivate ............ Pest. Spray .............. Month June June June June July July Aug. Times over 1 2 1 1 4 2 3 Labor hours 0.26 .50 .35 .38 1.42 .81 1.06 Machine hours 0.17 .33 .24 .26 .94 .54 .71 Cost/acre Variable Fixed 1.09 2.15 1.51 2.39 14.72 3.35 11.04 1.15 2.55 1.12 3.22 19.82 2.83 14.87 Totals ................... Machine Tractor (75 hp) ........... . Chisel Plow...............70 Heavy disk ............... 4-Row Planter............ 4-Row Cultivator ......... Herbicide Appl............ PTO Air Blast Sprayer (500) TVC/hour 5.57 90 3.75 .67 .85 10.04 4.78 3.19 36.24 45.56 TFC/hour 3.04 3.61 4.65 9.52 2.23 1.74 17.97 Days to Harvest: 50 Harvest Date: June 20 Hour/acre 0.17 .17 .26 .27 .24 .24 Variety: Early Prolific Straightneck Planting Date: May 1 'Fertilizer rates used (80-80-80) based on medium level of soil fertility. Soil testing is recommended on individual farms for fertilizer requirements. Fertilizer and lime are custom applied. 2 Based on hand harvest. WHOLESALE MARKET POTENTIAL FOR FRESH VEGETABLES 73 APPENDIX TABLE 13. IRRIGATED SPRING YELLOW SQUASH (5/9 BU.) IN THE SAND MOUNTAIN AREA OF ALABAMA FOR REGIONAL AND NATIONAL FRESH MARKETS, SPRING 1985 ESTIMATED COSTS AND RETURNS PER ACRE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Ite Itm Unt ni QanttyPrice or uatiycost/unit Dol. Value or cost Dol. 1,936.80 1,936.80 Your entry Cross Receipts Squash.......................5/9Bu. Total......................... Variable Costs Preharvest Lb. Seed.......................... Fertilizer (4-12-12)'.....Cwt. Ammonium Nitrate .............. Cwt. Lime (Prorated)'.................Ton Fungicide......................Appl. Insecticide......................Appl. Nematicide ..................... Gal. Herbicide ...................... Lb. Tractor and Machinery Acre Irrigation ...................... Appl. Interest on Operation Capital. Dol. Subtotal, Preharvest.......... Harvest Costs 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Harvest Labor 5/9 Bu. Baskets ........................ Each Hauling (435 Miles).............5/9 Bu. Subtotal, Harvest ............. Total Variable Cost ............... Income Above Variable Costs... Fixed Costs Tractor and Machinery............ Acre Irrigation....................... Acre General Overhead ............... Acre Total Fixed Costs Labor Costs Preharvest Labor ................ Hour (Tractor and Machinery) Irrigation Labor ................. Hour Total Labor Costs................ Total Costs..................... Net Returns to Land and Management.................. Break-even Price, Cost of Production............... 5/9 Bu. Appendix Table 13 Continued on page 74 360.00 3.00 7.00 5.38 11.00 7.60 2.00 .50 7.00 7.00 5.00 1.00 1.00 9.00 61.16 360.00 360.00 360.00 10.00 19.00 5.50 2.70 8.50 10.67 36.24 4.81 .13 .83 .90 .35 33.00 ____ 53.20 __ 20.00___ 9.50 ____ 38.50 ____ 18.90 ____ 42.50 10.67 ___ 36.24 ____ 43.29 ____ 7.95 ____ 313.75 ____ 298.80 ____ 324.00 ____ 125.28 ____ 748.08___ __ __ 1,061.83 874.97___ __ 1.00 1.00 1.00 45.56 24.76 35.00 4.25 4.00 45.56 24.76 35.00 105.32 ____ 4.78 1.35 20.30 5.40 25.70 ____ ____ 1,192.86 743.94 3.31 ____ ___ 74 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION APPENDIX TABLE 13 (CONTINUED). IRRIGATED SPRING YELLOW SQUASH (5/9 Bu.) IN THE SAND MOUNTAIN AREA OF ALABAMA FOR REGIONAL AND NATIONAL FRESH MARKETS, SPRING 1985 ESTIMATED COSTS AND RETURNS PER ACRE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT PRACTICES MACHINERY OPERATIONS AND LABOR REQUIREMENTS Operation Month Times over 1 2 1 1 1 1 4 Labor Machine Cost/acre hours 0.26 .50 .35 .38 .35 .40 1.42 hours 0.17 .33 .24 .26 .24 .27 .94 .27 .47 3.19 Variable 1.09 2.15 1.51 2.39 3.68 1.67 14.72 Fixed 1.15 2.55 1.12 3.22 4.96 1.41 19.82 Plowing ................. Heavy Disking ........... Herb. Appl.............. Planting ................ Pest. Spray .............. Row Cultivate ............ Pest. Spray............... Apr. Apr. Apr. May May May June Row Cultivate ............ Pest Spray............... Totals ................... June July 1 2 .40 .71 4.78 1.67 7.36 36.24 1.41 9.91 45.56 Machine TVC/hour Tractor (75 hp) ............ . 5.57 Chisel Plow...............70 Heavy disk ............... 90 4-Row Planter............ 3.75 4-Row Cultivator ......... .67 Herbicide Appl............ .85 PTO Air Blast Sprayer (500) 10.04 Variety: Early Prolific Straightneck Planting Date: May 1 TFC/hour Hour/acre 3.04 3.61 0.17 4.65 .17 9.52 .26 2.23 .27 1.74 .24 17.97 .24 Days to Harvest: 50 Harvest Date: June 20-July 20 'Fertilizer rates used (80-80-80) based on medium level of soil fertility. Soil testing is recommended on individual farms for fertilizer requirements. Fertilizer and lime are custom applied. 2Based on hand harvest. WHOLESALE MARKET POTENTIAL FOR FRESH VEGETABLES 75 APPENDIX TABLE 14. IRRIGATED SPRING ZUCCHINI SQUASH IN THE SAND MOUNTAIN AREA OF ALABAMA FOR REGIONAL AND NATIONAL FRESH MARKETS, SPRING 1985 ESTIMATED COSTS AND RETURNS PER AGRE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Ite Itm Unt ni QanttyPrice or uatiycost/unit Dol. Value or cost Dol. 1, 843.20 1, 843.20 Your entry Gross Receipts Squash.......................5I9Bu. Total........................... Variable Costs Preharvest Lb. Seed.......................... Fertilizer (4-12-12)'..............Cwt. Ammonium Nitrate .............. Cwt. Lime (Prorated)'.................Ton Fungicide......................Appl. Insecticide......................Appl. Nematicide ..................... Gal. Herbicide ...................... Lb. Tractor and Machinery ............ Acre Irrigation.......................Appl. Interest on Operation Capital.......Dol. Subtotal, Preharvest......... Harvest Costs 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Harvest Labor 5/9 Baskets ........................ Each Hauling (150 Miles)..............5/9 Bu. Subtotal, Harvest Total Variable Cost ............... Incomne Above Variable Costs... Fixed Costs Tractor and Machinery............. Acre Irrigation....................... Acre General Overhead ............... Acre Total Fixed Costs................ Labor Costs Preharvest Labor ................ Hour (Tractor and Machinery) Irrigation Labor ................. Hour Total Labor Costs................ Total Costs..................... Net Returns to Land and Management.................. Break-even Price, Cost of Production............... 5/9 Bu. Appendix Table 14 Continued on page 76 360.00 3.00 7.00 2.00 .50 6.00 6.00 5.00 1.00 1.00 9.00 58.78 360.00 360.00 360.00 5.12 11.00 7.60 10.00 19.00 5.50 2.70 8.50 10.67 32.56 4.81 .13 .83 .90 .12 33.00 ____ 53.20 20.00 __ 9.50 33.00 ___ 16.20 __ _ 42.50 ____ 10.67 ____ 32.56___ __ 43.29 ____ 7.64 ____ 301.56.____ 298.80 ____ 324.00 ____ 43.20 ____ 666.00 ____ 967.56___ 875.64 ____ Bu. __ 1.00 1.00 1.00 40.61 24.76 35.00 4.25 4.00 40.61 24.76 35.00 100.37 18.80 5.40 24.20 ____ ____ 4.42 1.35 ____ ______ ____ 1, 092.13 751.07 ____ 3.03 76 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION APPENDIX TABLE 14 (CONTINUED). IRRIGATED SPRING ZUCCHINI SQUASH IN THE SAND MOUNTAIN AREA OF ALABAMA FOR REGIONAL AND NATIONAL FRESH MARKETS, SPRING 1985 ESTIMATED COSTS AND RETURNS PER ACRE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT PRACTICES MACHINERY OPERATIONS AND LABOR REQUIREMENTS Operation Plowing ................. Heavy Disking ........... Herb. Appl.............. Planting ................ Pest. Spray............... Row Cultivate. ........... Pest. Spray .............. Row Cultivate ............ Pest. Spray .............. Totals ................... Machine Tractor (75 hp)............ . Chisel Plow...............70 Heavy disk................90 4-Row Planter ............ 4-Row Cultivator ......... Herbicide Appl............ PTO Air Blast Sprayer (500) Variety: Seneca Zucchini Planting Date: May 1 Month Apr. Apr. Apr. May May May June July July Times over 1 2 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 Labor hours 0.26 .50 .35 .38 .35 .40 1.42 .40 .35 4.42 Machine hours 0.17 .33 .24 .26 .24 .27 .94 .27 .24 2.95 Cost/acre Variable Fixed 1.09 2.15 1.51 2.39 3.68 1.67 14.72 1.67 3.68 32.56 1.15 2.55 1.12 3.22 4.96 1.41 19.82 1.41 4.96 40.61 TFC/hour Hour/acre 3.04 3.61 0.17 4.65 .17 3.75 9.52 .26 .67 2.23 .27 .85 1.74 .24 10.04 17.97 .24 Days to Harvest: 40 Harvest Date: June 10-July 10 'Fertilizer rates used (80-80-80) based on medium level of soil fertility. Soil testing is recommended on individual farms for fertilizer requirements Fertilizer and lime are custom applied. 2Based on hand harvest. TVC/hour 5.57 WHOLESALE MARKET POTENTIAL FOR FRESH VEGETABLES APPENDIX TABLE 15. IRRIGATED SWEET POTATOES IN THE SAND MOUNTAIN AREA OF ALABAMA FOR REGIONAL AND NATIONAL FRESH MARKETS, SPRING 1985 ESTIMATED COSTS AND RETURNS PER AGRE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT PRAGTICES 77 7 ItemUnit Itm Gross Receipts Sweet Potatoes, U.S. #1........ Total.......................... Variable Costs Preharvest Plants....................... Planting Labor ............... Fertilizer (5-10-15)............. Ammonium Nitrate............ Lime (Prorated)............... Herbicide.................... Nematicide................... Tractor and Machinery......... Irrigation..................... Interest on Operation Capital. Subtotal, Preharvest......... Harvest Costs Harvest Labor................. Boxes...................... Storage...................... Hauling (150 Miles)............ Tractor and Machinery......... Subtotal, Harvest ............. Total Variable Cost ............... Income Above Variable Costs... Fixed Costs Tractor and Equipment .......... Irrigation Equipment ........... General Overhead .............. . Total Fixed Costs.... ........... Labor Costs (Tractor, Machinery, and Irrigation) Preharvest Labor ............... Irrigation Labor ................ Harvest Labor Costs ............ Total Labor Costs................ ........... Total Costs .......... Net Returns to Land and Management.................. Break-even Price, Cost of Production .............. ni QuanityPrice or Value or cost uatiycost/unit Dol. Dol. 1, 915.00 1,915.00 Your entry Bu. Thou. Acre Cwt. Cwt. Ton Lb. Gal. Acre Appl. Dol. Bu. Each Bu. Bu. Acre 250.00 13.00 1.00 10.00 1.00 .50 1.50 5.00 1.00 9.00 142.83 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 7.66 20.00 40.00 7.60 10.00 19.00 2.50 8.50 15.30 4.81 .13 1.25 1.30 .75 .30 8.08 260.00 __ 40.00 ___ 76.00 __ 10.00 ____ 9.50 ____ 3.75 ____ 42.50 15.30 _ 43.29 ____ 18.57 ____ 518.91_____ 312.50 325.00 187.50 75.00 8.08 908.08 ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ 1,426.99 Acre Acre Acre 1.00 1.00 1.00 23.57 24.76 65.00 23.57 24.76 65.00 ____ 113.33_____ Hour Hour Hour 3.69 1.35 .99 4.25 4.00 4.25 15.69 5.40 4.22 25.31 ____ _____ 1,565.63 349.37_____ Bu. 6.26 Appendix Table 14 Continued on page 78 78 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION APPENDIX TABLE 15 (CONTINUED). IRRIGATED SWEET POTATOES IN THE SAND MOUNTAIN AREA OF ALABAMA FOR REGIONAL AND NATIONAL FRESH MARKETS, SPRING 1985 ESTIMATED COSTS AND RETURNS PER ACRE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT PRACTICES MACHINERY OPERATIONS AND LABOR REQUIREMENTS Operation Plowing ................. Heavy Disking ........... Herb. Appl............... Transplanting ............ Row Cultivate ............ Rotary Mower............ Potato Digger ............ Totals ................... Machine Tractor (75 hp) .............. Chisel Plow.............. Heavy disk .............. 4-Row Cultivator ......... Herbicide Appl........... Transplanter ............. Rotary Mower............ Potato Digger ............ Variety: Jewel Planting Date: May 1 Month Mar. Apr. Apr. Apr. May Aug. Aug. Times over 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 Labor hours 0.26 .50 .35 1.43 .81 .34 .99 4.68 Machine hours 0.17 .33 .24 .95 .54 .23 .66 3.12 Cost/acre Variable Fixed 1.09 2.15 1.51 5.79 3.35 1.42 8.08 23.38 1.15 2.55 1.12 5.37 2.83 1.15 9.39 23.57 TVC/hour 5.57 . .70 .90 .67 .85 .. 50 .62 6.65 TFC/hour Hour/acre 3.04 3.61 0.17 4.65 .17 2.23 .27 1.74 .24 2.59 .95 1.97 .23 11.16 .66 Days to Harvest: 150 Harvest Date: August 8-August 28 'Fertilizer rates used (80-100-150) based on medium level of soil fertility. Soil testing is recommended on individual farms for fertilizer requirements. Fertilizer and lime are custom applied. 2 Based on hand harvest. WHOLESALE MARKET POTENTIAL FOR FRESH VEGETABLES 79 7 APPENDIX TABLE 16. IRRIGATED SPRING TOMATOES (STAKED) IN THE SAND MOUNTAIN AREA OF ALABAMA FOR REGIONAL AND NATIONAL FRESH MARKETS, SPRING 1985 ESTIMATED COSTS AND RETURNS PER AGRE FOLLOWING REGOMMENDED MANAGEMENT PRACTIGES Ite Itm Cross Receipts Tomatoes .................... Total......... ................ Variable Costs Preharvest Plants....................... Fertilizer (8-24-24)'............ Ammonium Nitrate............ Lime (Prorated)'.............. Insecticide................... Nematicide................... Fungicide.................... Herbicide.................... Stakes (Prorate 3 Years)......... Twine (Ball).................. Hired Labor ................. Labor (For Staking)............ Tractor and Machinery......... Irrigation..................... Interest on Operation Capital. Subtotal, Preharvest......... Harvest Costs Harvest Labor2............... Buckets (Prorate).............. Containers.................... Grading ..................... Hauling (627 Miles) ............. Subtotal, Harvest ............. Total Variable Cost ............... Income Above Variable Costs.... Fixed Costs..................... Tractors and Machinery.......... Irrigation Equipment............ General Overhead .............. Total Fixed Costs................ Unt ni QanttyPrice or uatiycost/unit Dol. Value or cost Dol. 5, 026.00 5,026.00 Your entry Box' Thou. Cwt. Cwt. Ton Acre Gal. Acre Acre Each Each Hour Hour Acre Appl. Dol. Box Each Box Box Box 700.00 5.80 5.00 2.40 .50 1.00 12.00 1.00 1.00 834.00 24.00 35.00 100.00 1.00 12.00 393.09 700.00 50.00 700.00 700.00 700.00 7.18 36.00 10.90 10.00 19.00 142.00 8.50 113.00 30.00 .14 4.00 4.00 4.00 78.09 4.81 .13 .60 .50 1.10 .60 .75 208.80 ____ 54.50 ____ 24.00 ____ 9.50 __ 142.00 __ 102.00 ____ 113.00 ____ 30.00_____ 116.76 ____ 96.00 ____ 140.00 ____ 400.00_____ 78.09_____ 57.72 ____ 51.10 __ 1,623.48 420.00 25.00 770.00 420.00 526.68 ____ ____ __ ____ ____ 2,161.68 3,785.16 1,240.84 Acre Acre Acre Hour Hour 1.00 1.00 1.00 98.66 24.76 110.00 4.25 4.00 98.66 24.76 110.00 233.42 ________ Labor Costs (Tractor and Machinery) Preharvest Labor ............... Irrigation labor................ Total Labor Costs................ Total Costs ...... ............... Net Returns to Land and Management.................. Break-even Price, Cost of Production .............. 9.76 1.80 41.48 7.20 48.68 ____ ____ 4,067.25 958.75 ____ 25-Lb. box 5.81 ____ '25-Pound Box Appendix Table 16 Continued on page 80 80 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION APPENDIX TABLE 16 (CONTINUED). IRRIGATED SPRING TOMATOES (STAKED) IN THE SAND MOUNTAIN AREA OF ALABAMA FOR REGIONAL AND NATIONAL FRESH MARKETS, SPRING 1985 ESTIMATED COSTS AND RETURNS PER ACRE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT PRACTICES MACHINERY OPERATIONS AND LABOR REQUIREMENTS Operation Plowing ................. Heavy Disking ........... Herb. Appl.............. Transplanting ............ Row Cultivate ............ Pest. Spray .............. Row Cultivate ............ Pest. Spray .............. Pest. Spray ............... Pest. Spry............... Pest. Spray .............. Totals ................... Machine Tractor.................. Chisel Plow............... Heavy disk ............... Transplanter .............. 4-Row Cultivator ......... Herbicide Appl............ PTO Air Blast Sprayer (500) Variety: Flora - Dade Planting Date: April 7 Month Mar. Mar. Mar. Apr. Apr. Apr. May May June July Aug. Times over 1 2 1 1 2 2 1 4 4 4 3 Labor hours 0.26 .50 .35 1.43 .81 .71 .40 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.06 9.76 Machine hours 0.17 .33 .24 .95 .54 .47 .27 .94 .94 .94 .71 6.51 Cost/acre Variable Fixed 1.09 2.15 1.51 5.76 3.35 7.36 1.67 14.72 14.72 14.72 11.04 78.09 1.15 2.55 1.12 5.35 2.83 9.91 1.41 19.82 19.82 19.82 14.87 98.66 TVC/hour 5.57 .70 90 .50 .67 .85 10.04 TFC/hour Hour/acre 3.04 3.61 0.17 4.65 .17 2.59 .95 2.23 .27 1.74 .27 17.97 .24 Days to Harvest: 82 Harvest Date: June 28-August 30 'Fertilizer rates used (120-120-120) based on medium level of soil fertility. Soil testing is recommended on individual farms for fertilizer requirements. Fertilizer and lime are custom applied. 2 Based on hand harvest. WHOLESALE MARKET POTENTIAL FOR FRESH VEGETABLES APPENDIX TABLE 17. IRRIGATED SPRING TURNIPS (CUT IN THE SAND MOUNTAIN AREA OF ALABAMA FOR REGIONAL AND NATIONAL FRESH MARKETS, SPRING 1985 ESTIMATED COSTS AND RETURNS PER AGRE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT PRAGTICES 81 GREENS) Item Unit Price or Quantity cost/unit Dol. Value or cost Dol. 1, Your entry Gross Receipts 1/9 Bu. Turnips.......................1 Total......................... Variable Costs Preharvest Seed.......................... Lb. Fertilizer (8-24-24)'..............Cwt. Ammonium Nitrate...............Cwt Ton Lime (Prorated)' ................. Herbicide ...................... Lb. Insecticide......................Appl. Fungicide......................Appl. Seasonal Labor..................Hour Tractor and Equipment...........Acre Irrigation.......................Appl. Interest on Operation Capital.......Dol. Subtotal, Preharvest Harvest Costs Harvest and Pack..............1 1/9 Bu. 2 Containers..................... Each Hauling (150 Miles).............. 1 1/9 Bu. Subtotal, Harvest Total Variable Cost ............... Income Above Variable Costs... Fixed Costs Tractor and Equipment ........... Acre Irrigation Equipment............. Acre General Overhead ............... Acre Total Fixed Costs................ Labor Costs Preharvest Labor ................ Hour (Tractor and Machinery) Irrigation Labor ................. Hour Total Labor Costs................ Total Costs.................... . Net Returns to Land and Management.................. Break-even Price, Cost of Production............... 1 1/9 Bu. Appendix Table 17 Continued on page 82 400.00 2.00 5.00 2.00 .50 .50 4.00 3.00 8.00 1.00 2.00 49.26 400.00 400.00 400.00 4.56 1, 824.00 2.25 10.90 10.00 19.00 4.50 5.60 5.70 4.00 25.18 4.81 .13 .65 .92 .24 4.50 ____ 54.50___ __ 20.00 _______ 9.50 ____ 2.25____ 22.40___ __ 17.10 ____ 32.00 __ 25.18 ___ 9.62 ____ 6.40 ____ 824. 00 _ 260.00 ____ 368.00 ____ 96.00___ 724.00 ____ 927.45___ 896.55 30.68 ____ 24.76 ___ 35.00 ____ 90.44___ 15.77 1.20 16.97 ____ __ __ 1.00 .50 30.68 49.52 1.00 3.71 35.00 4.25 4.00 __ .30 ____ ____ 1,034.86 789.14 2.59 ____ ____ 82 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION APPENDIX TABLE 17 (CONTINUED). IRRIGATED SPRING TURNIPS (CUT GREENS) IN THE SAND MOUNTAIN AREA OF ALABAMA FOR REGIONAL AND NATIONAL FRESH MARKETS, SPRING 1985 ESTIMATED COSTS AND RETURNS PER ACRE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT PRACTICES MACHINERY OPERATIONS AND LABOR REQUIREMENTS Operation Plowing ................. Heavy Disking ........... Herb Appl .............. Planting ................ Row Cultivate ............ Pest. Spray .............. Totals............... Machine Tractor.................. Chisel Plow............... Heavy disk ............... 4-Row Planter............ . 4-Row Cultivator ......... Herbicide Appl............ PTO Air Blast Sprayer (500) Variety: Shogoin Planting Date: March 20 Month Mar. Mar. Mar. Mar. Apr. Apr. Times over 1 2 1 1 2 4 Labor hours 0.26 .50 .35 .38 .81 1.42 3.71 Machine hours 0.17 .33 .24 .26 .54 .94 2.47 Cost/acre Variable Fixed 1.07 2.15 1.51 2.39 3.35 14.72 25.18 1.13 2.55 1.12 3.22 2.83 19.82 30.68 TVC/hour 5.57 .70 90 3.75 .67 .85 10.04 Hour/acre TFC/hour 3.04 0.17 3.61 4.65 .17 .26 9.52 .27 2.23 .24 1.74 17.97 .24 Days to Harvest: 30 and 45 Harvest Date: April 19-May 7 .Fertilizer rates used (120-120-120) based on medium level of soil fertility. Soil testing is recommended on individual farms for fertilizer requirements. Fertilizer and lime are custom applied. 2Based on hand harvest. WHOLESALE MARKET POTENTIAL FOR FRESH VEGETABLES 83 APPENDIX TABLE 18. IRRIGATED SPRING WATERMELONS IN THE SAND MOUNTAIN AREA OF ALABAMA FOR REGIONAL AND NATIONAL FRESH.MARKETS, SPRING 1985 ESTIMATED COSTS AND RETURNS PER ACRE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ItemUnit Itm ~ i QuanityPrice or uatiycost/unit Dol. Value or cost Dol. 1, 072.50 1,072.50 21.00 60.80 15.00 6.27 32.00 2.75 42.50 10.67 160.00 23.09 33.67 13.25 421.00 Your entry. Gross Receipts Cwt. Watermelons ................... Total......................... Variable Costs Preharvest Lb. Seed.......................... Fertilizer (5-10-15)'..............Cwt Ammonium Nitrate .............. Cwt. Lime (Prorated)'.................Ton Fungicide......................Appl. Insecticide......................Pint Nematicide.....................Gal. Herbicide......................Lb. Cultural Labor..................Hour Acre Tractor and Machinery ............ Irrigation.......................Appl. Interest on Operation Capital.......Dol. Subtotal, Preharvest......... Harvest Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Harvest 2 . . Cwt. Haul (150 Miles).................Cwt. Subtotal Harvest............ 250.00 2.00 8.00 1.50 .33 4.00 1.00 5.00 1.00 40.00 1.00 7.00 101.94 250.00 250.00 4.29 10.50 7.60 10.00 19.00 8.00 2.75 8.50 10.67 4.00 23.09 4.81 .13 .54 .60 ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ 135.00 150.00 285.00 706.00 366.50 ____ ___ ____ ____ Total Variable Costs............. . Income Above Variable Costs... Fixed Costs Tractor and Machinery............ Irrigation Equipment............. General Overhead ............... Total Fixed Costs................ Labor Costs Preharvest Labor ................ (Tractor and Machinery) Irrigation Labor ................. Total Labor Costs................ Total Costs..................... Net Returns to Land and Management.................. Break-even Price, Cost of Production ............... Acre Acre Acre Hour Hour 1.00 1.00 *1.00 3.23 1..05 28.42 24.76 30.00 4.25 4.00 28.42 24.76 30.00 83.18 13.73 4.20 17.93 807.11 ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ 265.39 Cwt. vrr~ ~vvvu 3.23 ____ Appendix Table 18 Continued on back cover APPENDIX TABLE 18 (CONTINUED). IRRIGATED SPRING WATERMELONS IN THE SAND MOUNTAIN AREA OF ALABAMA FOR REGIONAL AND NATIONAL FRESH MARKETS, SPRING 1985 ESTIMATED COSTS AND RETURNS PER ACRE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT PRACTICES MACHINERY OPERATIONS AND LABOR REQUIREMENTS Operation Plowing ................. Heavy Disking ........... Month Mar. Mar. Times over 1 1 Labor hours 0.26 .25 Machine hours 0.17 Cost/acre Variable Fixed 1.09 1.07 1.15 1.28 Herb. Appl.............. Planting ................. Springtooth .............. Row Cultivate ............ Pest. Spray .............. Pest. Spray .............. Apr. Apr. Apr. May May June 1 1 1 1 2 2 .35 .38 .17 .40 .71 .71 Totals ................... Machine Tractor (75 hp) ........... Chisel Plow...............70 Heavy disk ............... 4-Row Planter............ 4-Row Cultivator ......... Herbicide Appl............ PTO Air Blast Sprayer (500) Springtooth...............13 Variety: Charleston Gray Planting Date: April 15 TVC/hour 5.57 3.23 .17 .24 .26 .11 .27 .47 .47 2.15 1.51 2.39 .63 1.67 7.36 7.36 1.12 3.22 .41 1.41 9.91 9.91 23.09 28.42 TFC/hour Hour/acre 3.04 3.61 0.17 90 4.65 .17 3.75 9.52 .26 .67 2.23 .27 .85 1.74 .24 10.04 17.97 .24 .64 .11 Days to Harvest: 80 Harvest Date: July 4 'Fertilizer rates used (90-80-120) based on medium level of soil fertility. Soil testing is recommended on individual farms for fertilizer requirements. Fertilizer and lime are custom applied. 2 Based on hand harvest.