FLORIDA STATE MARKETING BUREAU

ANNUAL AGRICULTURAL STATISTICAL SUMMARY

1959 -60 SEASON
November, 1960
FORTY THIRD ANNUAL REPORT -

ACREAGE, PRODUCTION, VALUE,
DISPOSITION AND TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
With Seasonal Comparisons

By Elmo F. Scarborough, Market News Specialist
and Bureau Staff

Neill Rhodes, Commissioner
Florida State Marketing Bureau
Divislop- of
Florida 'Sate department t of Agriculture
Lee Thompson, Commissioner

This Annual Report is available free of charge to partie.- requesting it

Florida St~ate MarjCetig BureAn3
430 West Monroe Street
P. 0. Box 779
JacLsonvffe 1, Florida
MimiI

AGRI-
CULTURAL / 9- /
LIBRARY

BRIEFS OF SPECIAL INTEREST

Page 7:

Pages 18-26:

Page 32:

Page 38:

Page

Page

67:

123:

Pages 137-142:

Page

Page

157:

173:

Page 209:

Consumer incomes and the demand for food expected to
continue about steady the first half of 1961.

Twenty-five year "Monthly Average Temperatures and
Rainfall" given for selected Florida cities.

Changes in the Farm-Retail Marketing Bill from 1915
to 1958.

Sharp jump in bearing tree acreage for oranges during
the past season.

What is Citribusiness?

West Indies imports of cucumbers and tomatoes continued
high in 1959-60.

Interstate shipments of Florida grown cut flowers re-
corded for the first time in 1959-60.

Origins of flue-cured tobacco recorded in 1960.

Composition of Florida commercial egg flocks given by
areas.

Florida market cattle show steady improvement in grade.

FLORIDA VALUE OF AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION

CITRUS

TRUCK CROPS

OTHER FRUITS AND EDIBLE NUTS

FIELD CROPS

LIVESTOCK

DAIRY PRODUCTS

POULTRY AND EGG PRODUCTS

HORTICULTURAL SPECIALTIES

FOREST AND MISC. PRODUCTS

ALL COMMODITIES (TOTAL)

GOVERNMENT PAYMENTS

TOTAL VALUE OF AGRI. PRODUCTION

PRELIMINARY
1959-60

$275,010,000

170,091,000

1960

$ 2,809,000

77,129,000

98,100,000

90,000,000

43,700,000

37,000,000

14,110,000

807,949,000

6,200,000

$814,149,000

FINAL
1958-59

$347,827,000

155,594,000

1959

$ 3,431,000

75,342,000

97,106,000

87,948,000

38,242,000

36,057,000

14,160,000

855,707,000

6,149,000

$861,856,000

Fruit and vegetable values are for the production season August
through July, while other commodity values are for the calendar
year.

Detailed review of Florida Value of Agricultural Production is
shown on Pages 4 and 5.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Most of the following material contains historical data on FLORIDA acreage,
production and value. Some deal with county acreage only.

AGRICULTURAL REVIEWS
PAGE NO.

NEWS RELEASE Summary 1-3
VALUE OF PRODUCTION 4-5
AGRICULTURAL CASH RECEIPTS AND PROSPECTIVE DEMAND 6-8
SHIPMENTS Fruits and Vegetables Ten Seasons 9-13
ESTIMATED DISPOSITION OF FRUITS AND VEGETABLES 14-15
WEATHER 16-27
LABOR NEEDS IN AGRICULTURE 28
FARM CREDIT 29
FARMERS PAID FOR ITEMS U.S. Index & Prices 30-31
FARM RETAIL MARKETING BILL U.S. 32

CITRUS

CITRUS ANALYSIS ORANGES, GRAPEFRUIT, TANGERINES AND LIMES 34-46
Shipments, Valuations, Prices, Disposition,
Including Cost and Net Returns
WORLD CITRUS PRODUCTION 47
ON-TREE PRICES 48-50
F.O.B. PRICES AND F.O.B. VALUES 51-53
AUCTION SALES 54-55
CITRUS COSTS Picking, Hauling, Packing, Warehouses, etc. 56-57
CITRUS TREE NURSERY MOVEMENT 58-59
ACREAGE Florida Bearing Tree Basis, Total Florida and U.S. 60-62
PROCESS CITRUS 63-66
CITRIBUSINESS 67
FRESH DISTRIBUTION Rail and Truck 1959-60 Season 68-70
EXPORTS 71
SHIPPING RATES AND CONTAINER INFORMATION 72-73
WEIGHTS, MEASURES AND EQUIVALENTS 74
INSPECTION BY RAIL AND TRUCK 1959-60 SEASON 75

AVOCADOS LIMES

ACREAGE, PRODUCTION AND VALUE, Limited Data on Mangoes 76-77

TRUCK CROPS

TRUCK CROP SUMMARY 1959-60 Season 78-79
STATE ACREAGE, PRODUCTION, VALUE AND SHIPMENTS 17 Selected Commodities 80-96
MISCELLANEOUS VEGETABLES Crops not Officially Reported 97-100
COUNTY ACREAGE BY COMMODITIES 4 Seasons 101-110
F.O.B. SHIPPING POINT PRICES 1959-60 Season 111-118
SHIPPING RATES 1959-60 Season 119-121
SHIPPING CONTAINER INFORMATION 1959-60 Season 122
IMPORTS THROUGH FLORIDA Weekly 1959-60 Season 123
RAIL AND TRUCK SHIPMENTS Weekly 1959-60 Season 124-127
TRUCK DESTINATIONS 1959-60 Season 128-129
UNLOADS Rail and Truck Florida and Competition 1959-60 Season 130-134
INSPECTED FRUIT AND VEGETABLE ITEMS 1959-60 Season 135
TRUCK SHIPMENTS THROUGH ROAD GUARD STATIONS 1959-60 Season 136

HORTICULTURAL SPECIALTIES
PAGE NO.

FLOWER SHIPMENTS 137-142
CHRYSANTHEMUMS, GLADIOLUS, NURSERY PRODUCTS, PRODUCTION REPORT 143-145
FIELD CROPS
CORN 146
COTTON 147
FEED AND HAY Monthly Prices, 12 Selected 148-149
HAY Acreage and Production 150
SOYBEANS 151
OATS 151
PEANUTS 152-153
HONEY AND BEESWAX Florida and U.S. 154
TOBACCO 155-161
MAINLAND SUGAR PROGRAM 1959 161
TREE NUTS 162
DAIRYING
MILK PRODUCTION, DISPOSITION AND INCOME 163
MILK PRODUCTION AND VALUE by Supervised Areas 164-165
MILK USED AND MARKETED IN FLORIDA 166
DAIRY PRODUCTS SHIPPED INTO FLORIDA 167
MILK PRODUCTION, DISPOSITION AND INCOME U.S. 168
FORESTRY
FORESTRY STATISTICS FLORIDA 169-170
POULTRY AND EGGS
ALL POULTRY AND EGGS TOTAL VALUE 171
CHICKENS ON FARMS 171
COMMERCIAL BROILERS 171
FARM EGGS 172
POULTRY NUMBERS AS OF JANUARY 1 172
TURKEY PRODUCTION AND VALUE 172
COMPOSITIONS OF COMMERCIAL FLOCK by Areas 173
FLORIDA POULTRY AND EGG CENSUS STATISTICS 174
FLORIDA RANK IN POULTRY AND EGG PRODUCTION 175
BROILER PLACEMENTS WEEKLY 3 Seasons 176
TURKEY REPORTS U.S. 177
MARKET PRICES FLORIDA Poultry and Eggs 178-183
LIVESTOCK
(Principally Cattle and Hog Statistics)
INTRODUCTION 184
WORLD NUMBERS, by Countries 185
UNITED STATES: Numbers, Production, Slaughter, Prices, Income, 185-190
Consumption
FLORIDA: Numbers, Production, Marketings, Slaughter, Income 191-200
Increasing Quality and Values
LIVESTOCK SHIPMENTS 201
PRICES, PRICE RATIOS 202-208
GRADE PERCENTAGES 209
SHRINKAGE TABLE, PREVENTABLE LOSSES 210-211
SLAUGHTERING PLANTS, PROCESSORS, AUCTION MARKETS 212-214

DEFINITIONS

Rarely is it possible to indicate the total money value of any specific
group of agricultural crops on a comparable basis with another group of crops. In
other words, the level at which agricultural commodities are traded varies with
the particular items as well as the particular areas in which the trading takes
place. At the present there is no common denominator for the tabulation of all
agricultural products. For example,the total value of sweet potatoes is figured
on an F.O.B. basis, minus selling charges in Florida, Louisiana, and California,
while in New Jersey and the Carolinas, they are calculated on a price paid at the
farm. This is due to the differing systems of trading in these States.

Since there is no feasible method for calculating agricultural products
to the same common denominator, various methods based on economic principle of
expressing the money value of production, sales and income have been accepted by
the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Definitions generally used throughout this
report follows:

Value of production is computed by applying the season average price re-
ceived by growers for quantities sold from a particular crop or during the market-
ing season, depending on the commodity, to the total quantities produced.
Similarly, the value of sales is the unit price applied to the quantity sold from
a particular crop or during the marketing season, depending on the commodity.

In other words, the value of production is the money worth of the total
crop grown for harvest while the value of sales is the money received for the
portion of the harvested crop sold on the market. For example, if a farmer feeds
the corn he produces to his livestock it has a production value. However, since
no money was received it has no sale value.

Gross Income: Realized gross farm income includes (a) cash receipts
from farm marketing; (b) value of farm products consumed in farm households; (c)
rental value of farm dwellings; and (d) government payments to farmers. Total
gross income is the realized gross income or minus the value of the net change in
farm inventories of crops and livestock.

Cash receipts from farm marketing consist of total money received from
the sale of farm products, together with the net receipts from Commodity Credit
Corporation loans.

In other words, cash receipts differ from gross income in that oash
receipts include only the amount of money received from the market transactions
and the CCC loan programs while gross income is the overall value of agricultural
products consumed and the marketed as well as the rental of the farm dwelling.

Farm Value (as used to compute total gross income above) as applied to
crops in the various tables, is derived by multiplying production by the estimated
season average price received by fanners for that portion of the commodity
actually sold. The term is used in the inventory tables on livestock and poultry
to mean value of the number of head on farms on January 1. It is derived by
multiplying the number of head by an estimated value per head as of that date.

F.O.B. Packed Value All prices used on truck crops are on an F.O.B.
basis, which includes harvesting services such as picking, grading, packing and
containers, less selling charges. In the case of some commodities which are sold
in units other than the one listed, these units are converted into the equivalent
of the ones used.

F.O.B. Packed Value differs from Farm Value in that the F.O.B. Value is
the money value of the harvested crop while the Fann Value covers current book
value of all farm crops and livestock, whether sold on the market or not.

Citrus price terminology: Average prices as sold refer to the average
prices actually received by growers in the local market at the point where the
fruit changes ownership. In general, fruit may be sold F.O.B. packed by growers,
at the incoming packing house door, or on the trees.. If sales are made through
grower cooperatives, it is considered that the first sale is made by the
cooperative.

However, in order to keep all prices on a local market basis, sales by
individual growers and grower-cooperatives at terminal auctions and other distant
points are priced on an equivalent F.O.B. shipping-point basis. F.O.B. citrus
prices refer to the prices received by grower-packer of grower cooperatives for
the fruit sold packed, with the price including costs of grading, packing, con-
tainers, and selling expenses. When adjustments are made in actual average prices
as sold in order that these prices will apply to some sales position other than
the position at which the sale was made, the results are referred to as "equiva-
lent per unit returns."

Equivalent per unit returns for citrus are calculated at two points of
sales:

(1) Equivalent packing-house door returns refer to all fruit, regardless
of the methods of sale, converted to a price which it would have returned had the
entire crop been sold at the incoming packing house door.

(2) Equivalent on tree returns refer to all fruit similarly converted
to the price it would have returned had the entire crop been sold on the tree.

In arriving at equivalent per unit returns, costs are added to, or
subtracted from prices of fruit as actually sold in order to obtain returns to
growers at one of the two specified points in the marketing process. For example,
in order to obtain equivalent packing-house door returns for Florida oranges, (1)
the average price for fruit actually sold F.O.B. packed is reduced by the charge
for grading, packing, containers, etc., (2) the average price for fruit actually
sold on the tree is increased by the cost of picking and hauling to the packing
house door, and (3) the season returns so derived are then combined with the re-
ported price for the quantity, if any actually sold in bulk at the incoming pack-
ing-house door by weighing the equivaent returns for each method of sales in
proportion to the volume actually sold at each point.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF CONTRIBUTORS

Our thanks to the Bureau Staff clerical and mailing room
personnel who have been most cooperative in preparation of this
summary.

Some of the tabulations in this report were expressly pre-
pared for us by people in the various organizations listed below.
Some were contributed for use before the individual agency released
them in its own publications; other tables were duplicated from worth-
while agricultural reports. All are presented here to give you a well
rounded statistical outline of Florida agriculture. We are grateful
for the assistance given us by the Florida Fruit and Vegetable Associa-
tion; Florida Citrus Mutual; Florida Citrus Exchange; Florida Canners
Association; Florida Industrial Commission; Agricultural Commission of
American Bankers Association; Florida Forest Service; Florida Milk Com-
mission; Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations and Extension Service;
Federal-State Frost Warning Service; U. S. Weather Bureau at Gainesville;
Federal-State Market News Service; Research Department of the Florida
State Chamber of Commerce; Statistical Department of the Florida State
Citrus Inspection Service; Federal-State Vegetable Inspection Service;
Florida State Plant Board; USDA Tobacco Market News Service; USDA -
Florida Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Committee; USDA -
Crop Reporting Board, Washington; USDA Foreign Agricultural Service;
Fruit Growers Express; and other well informed sources.

Special acknowledgment is extended to Messrs. J.C. Townsend,
J.B. Owens, and their staff of the USDA Florida Crop Reporting Service,
for the considerable quantity of timely and excellent statistical in-
formation. Mr. Townsend has assisted in outlining and qualifying many
of the acreage, production and value tables. Likewise, Mr. J.L. Buntin
and his staff of the USDA, Fruit & Vegetable, Transportation Section,
were most courteous in preparing a number of IBM tabulations regarding
the Florida and U. S. transportation movement.

Substantial recognition belongs to our Commissicner, the
Honorable L. Neill Rhodes, whose contributions provide an energizing
force in the compilation of this report.

PREFACE

The Forty-Third Annual Statistical Summary reviews the 1959-60 fruit
and vegetable season and the 1960 year for other principal Florida Ag-
ricultural production. As Florida agriculture has grown, necessarily the
size of our annual reports has increased. If the value of fruits and
vegetables were only $80,862,348 as it was in 1924-25 for only 94,125 cars,
and value and volume data for other Florida agricultural products were not
included, preparation of the 1959-60 Annual Summary would appear to be
comparatively short and easy. The who-what-when of the 'Twenties is not
enough to give the what's-what of the 'Sixties.

While the commercial production of cotton, sweet potatoes and sugar
cane syrup has not kept pace with other fast steppers common to the major
segments of the State's agriculture, some lines unknown when those
commodities were kings have since advanced to ranking position -- horticul-
tural specialties, for example. Since the era of plantation operations,
dairy, poultry, livestock, forestry and other branches of farming have
attained high rank in the State's aggregate production. The value of the
annual Florida tung nut production now exceeds that of sweet potatoes.
Not only have new crops come into prominence, but some of the old reliables
in the vegetable category increasing acreage the most have migrated to new
and different areas from the previously established centers of production.

The Annual Statistical Summary of the Bureau for the 1959-60 season is
a source of pride in my recognition of the authorship and the able, tedious
and painstaking preparation of the many statistical compilations by Mr. E.
F. Scarborough. Other members of the Bureau staff have supplied sections
and tabulations appropriate to their specialized service, requiring much
thought, time and effort. The report is self-contained evidence of the
helping hands extended by the numerous sources by-line credited and
specifically mentioned on the Acknowledgment page. I am duly mindful that
without such authoritative assistance the report would be sadly deficient.
The cooperation by everyone contributing material for this Summary is
greatly appreciated.

This Summary does not purport to play up nor tone down Florida ag-
riculture. It is dedicated to facts openly and conscientiously determined,
from the record and for the record. How well it serves your requirements
will determine how much it rewards our endeavors.

Neill Rhodes
Commissioner
FLORIDA STATE MARKETING BUREAU