• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Front Cover
 Abstract
 Acknowledgement
 Table of Contents
 Introduction
 Methodology
 Results
 Conclusion
 Reference














Group Title: Economics report - University of Florida Agricultural Experiment Station ; 117
Title: Market potential for selected vegetables grown on reclaimed phosphatic clay
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00027487/00001
 Material Information
Title: Market potential for selected vegetables grown on reclaimed phosphatic clay
Series Title: Economics report
Physical Description: v, 23 p. : ill. ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Rahmani, Mohammad
Taylor, Timothy G
Mulkey, W. David
University of Florida -- Food and Resource Economics Dept
Publisher: Food and Resource Economics Dept., Agricultural Experiment Station, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Fla.
Place of Publication: Gainesville
Publication Date: 1988
 Subjects
Subject: Vegetables -- Soils -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Crops and soils -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Mine soils -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Vegetables -- Growth -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Genre: government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references (p. 22-23)
Statement of Responsibility: Mohammad Rahmani, Timothy G. Taylor, David Mulkey.
General Note: "November 1988."
General Note: Cover title.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00027487
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: aleph - 001610527
oclc - 23531086
notis - AHN4886

Table of Contents
    Front Cover
        Page i
    Abstract
        Page ii
    Acknowledgement
        Page iii
    Table of Contents
        Page iv
        Page v
    Introduction
        Page 1
    Methodology
        Page 2
        Page 3
        Page 4
        Page 5
        Page 6
    Results
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
        Page 11
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
        Page 15
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
        Page 19
        Page 20
    Conclusion
        Page 21
    Reference
        Page 22
        Page 23
Full Text



NOVEMBER 1988
l s. 11f


MARKET POTENTIAL FOR SELECTED

VEGETABLES GROWN ON RECLAIMED

PHOSPHATIC CLAY


' JJ


Food and Resource Economics Department
Agricultural Experiment Station
Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences
University of Florida, Gainesville 32611


Mohammad Rahmani
Timothy G. Taylor
David Mulkey


ECONOMICS REPORT 117











ABSTRACT


The economic feasibility of producing vegetables on reclaimed

phosphatic clay in Polk County, Florida is examined. Five vegetable crops,

cabbage, cucumbers, sweet corn, peppers, and squash are included in the

analyses. The results indicated that cabbage, white sweet corn, cucumbers,

and crookneck squash may be economically viable for production on reclaimed

phosphatic clay in Polk County.



Keywords: phosphate mining, reclamation, vegetables, market windows,

economic feasibility.











ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS


This research was completed with funding from the Florida Institute of

Phosphate Research as a part of the Polk County/IFAS Mined Lands

Agricultural Research/Demonstration Project.

The Authors acknowledge the helpful comments of Richard Beilock, Max

Langham, George Hochmuth, and Jim Stricker. Any inaccuracies remain the

responsibility of the authors.













TABLE OF CONTENTS


ABSTRACT . .


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES .

LIST OF FIGURES


INTRODUCTION

METHODOLOGY

RESULTS .

Cabbage .

Sweet Corn

Cucumbers

Peppers

Squash

CONCLUSION .

REFERENCES .


LIST OF TABLES


Tables

1. Yearly cost data for selected vegetables . . .

2. Yearly average prices for selected vegetables . .


Pag
ii


iii

iv

iv


2

7

7




14
. . . 1
. . . 2












. . . 16

. . . 16

. . . 21

. . . 22


Pare

8

8


. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .










LIST OF FIGURES


Page


Average weekly prices for cabbage,
1977-78 to 1984-85 . .


2. Average weekly net returns for cabbage,
1977-78 to 1984-85 . . . . .

3. Average weekly prices for white sweet corn,
1977-78 to 1984-85 . . . . .

4. Average weekly net returns for white sweet corn,
1977-78 to 1984-85 . . . . .

5. Average weekly prices for yellow sweet corn,
1977-78 to 1984-85 . . . . .

6. Average weekly net returns for yellow sweet corn,
1977-78 to 1984-85 . . . . .

7. Average weekly prices for cucumbers,
1977-78 to 1984-85 . . . . .

8. Average weekly net returns for cucumbers,
1977-78 to 1984-85 . . . . .

9. Average weekly prices for peppers,
1977-78 to 1984-85 . . . . .

10. Average weekly net returns for peppers,
1977-78 to 1984-85 . . . . .

11. Average weekly prices for straight-neck squash,
1977-78 to 1984-85 . . . . .

12. Average weekly net returns for straight-neck squash,
1977-78 to 1984-85 . . . . .

13. Average weekly prices for crookneck squash,
1977-78 to 1984-85 . . . . .

14. Average weekly net returns for crookneck squash,
1977-78 to 1984-85 . . . . .


Figure

1.


9


. 12


. 12



. 13


. 13


. 15



. 15


. 17


. 17


. 19


. 19


. 20



. 20














MARKET POTENTIAL FOR SELECTED VEGETABLES

GROWN ON RECLAIMED PHOSPHATIC CLAY





INTRODUCTION



The state of Florida is the largest domestic producer of phosphate,

annually accounting for an average of about 75 percent of total U.S.

production (McHardy, 1983). Within Florida, Polk County is the largest

phosphate production area, consisting of about 140,000 acres of mined lands

(through 1985). Phosphate mining activity also occurs in Hillsborough,

Manatee, Hardee, and Hamilton counties (Wood, 1986).

At the present rate of mining, the phosphate reserves in Polk county

will be largely depleted in about 15 years. During this period Polk county

will experience a loss of approximately 10,000 jobs and an estimated $2.5

million in ad valorem tax revenues (Stricker, 1987).

When mining activity ceases Polk county will be left with 200,000

acres of mined land, 60% of which will be in the form of clay settling

areas. When used for phosphate mining this land has an assessed value of

about $5000 per acre. However, the value of this land subsequent to mining

activity is estimated to be only $100 per acre. It is clear that

alternative uses for this land are necessary if the negative tax and

employment effects resulting from the termination of phosphate mining in

Polk county are to be offset (Wood, 1986).

1










One potential use of phosphatic clay is the production of fresh winter

vegetables. Polk county is located within one of the principal winter

vegetable producing areas of Florida, and possesses the requisite climatic

characteristics to produce high-valued vegetable crops. Greenhouse and

laboratory studies have indicated that sand-clay mixes possess several

agronomic properties such as high water-holding capacity, high nutrient

reserves and pH levels favorable to plant growth (Bromwell and Carrier

Inc., 1985).

The existence of favorable climate and laboratory results that

indicate the physical potential to grow a crop are not, however, sufficient

to conclude that vegetable production on phosphatic clay will be an

economically viable activity when considered on a commercial scale. The

purpose of this report is to provide a preliminary look at the economic

potential of producing a number of vegetable crops on phosphatic clay in

Polk county. The specific crops included in these analyses are cabbage,

sweet corn, cucumbers, peppers, and squash.



METHODOLOGY



The general methodology used in this study falls into the broadly

defined area of "market window" analysis. This methodology, involves

analyzing markets in order to identify windows of opportunity or market

niches wherein potential producers can expect to receive prices in excess

of the cost of production and make a profit ( Colette and Wall, 1978).

While this notion on the surface borders on the obvious, it must be

remembered that the search for market windows generally involves crops not









previously grown at a particular time or location. Thus, while market

window analysis is conceptually straightforward, the general lack of

historical data often makes the actual implementation of the methodology

difficult.

The literature on market window analysis generally indicates that

although there are some differences in the methodology used, the basic

techniques are similar (Mizelle, 1983; Mook, 1985; O'Rourke, 1985; Zwingli

et al., 1987; and Criner et al., 1986). Weekly wholesale prices obtained

over a period of years are summarized and compared to estimated costs of

production. If, during certain periods of time (users of the market window

technique generally consider periods of at least two months sufficient to

justify a reasonable production scale, O'Rourke, 1984), average weekly

prices exceed the estimated cost of production, a market window is said to

exist. Market window analyses have been performed using a variety of

techniques from simple visual analyses to fairly sophisticated programming

models.

Evaluation of the economic feasibility of producing vegetables on

phosphatic clay is made difficult because no cost of production estimates

representative of commercial vegetable production on phosphatic clay are

available. Hence, market window analysis as described above cannot be

performed. However, given the existence of well defined markets for Florida

winter vegetables during the period when Polk county would likely be in

production, some basic inferences concerning the economic potential of

producing crops in this area may be obtained.

If the introduction of commercial vegetable production on phosphatic

clay is to be economically feasible, then at least one of two conditions










must hold. First, there must be sufficient demand in existing markets to

absorb additional produce while still enabling producers to cover their

costs of production. Secondly, producers on phosphatic clay must be cost

competitive with producers of a given crop elsewhere in Florida.

The notion that room for additional supplies exists in a given market

may be translated into the existence of excess revenues over cost. That is,

if there exist periods of time during the season where revenues on average

exceed the cost of production including opportunity costs for crops already

being produced, it may be possible for additional producers to enter the

market and capture at least some of the available profit.

Even if such periods of excess revenues over cost do not exist, it may

still be possible to successfully produce vegetable crops on phosphatic

clay. However, producers on phosphatic clay would have to be the lowest-

cost producers. If additional supplies enter a market where no excess

profits are being made, prices will fall below levels sufficient for

marginal producers to cover cost, and some producers will be forced from

the market. Low-cost producers will be more likely to survive over time.

As noted earlier, sufficient data do not exist to identify any cost

advantage or disadvantage for vegetable producers on phosphatic clay

relative to other producers in Florida. However, it is possible to make

some inferences as to the existence of time periods during the production

season when revenues in general exceed cost of production for crops

currently being produced.

To accomplish the revenue-cost comparison in the present analysis,

historical cost of production data obtained from Brooke (1979, 1980), Bean

(1981), Taylor (1982, 1984, 1986) Taylor and Wilkowske (1983, 1984) and









Taylor and Locascio (1985) are used in conjunction with weekly FOB price

data obtained from the Federal-State Market News Service (various issues)

to obtain weekly net return estimates over the 1977-78 to 1984-85 period.

Since vegetable markets are highly volatile in any one season, the net

returns calculated for each season are deflated by the GNP deflator and

averaged over the 8 seasons considered. This results in a long run view of

the existence of profits for certain periods of time during the season that

could be appropriated by new market entrants (i.e. producers on phosphatic

clay). The reason for taking a long run view is that in any one season,

producers may well lose money. However, subsequent "good" years may result

in profits more than sufficient to offset these losses. Viewing the average

weekly net return over a number of seasons in real terms (deflated average

weekly net returns) allows identification of intraseasonal periods wherein

on average positive net returns exist.

Along with weekly net returns historical cost of production data and

average weekly prices are also provided for each crop analyzed in this

report. These data serve as benchmarks for potential producers on

phosphatic clay to consider. Average weekly prices serve as an upper bound

on the cost of production that would allow potential entrants to produce at

a profit. That is, even if there exists periods of time when there are

profits on average being realized, production (and marketing) costs must

still be below FOB price. Historical cost of production data also provide a

benchmark regarding the costs that must be realized by individuals

producing on phosphatic clay.

Before proceeding to the analyses of individual crops it is necessary

to point out a number of caveats. First, it is important to realize that










production costs are recorded on an annual basis. Hence, the weekly net

return calculations implicitly assume that production costs are constant

throughout the entire season. The extent to which this is a valid

assumption is unknown. However, there is a limited amount of information

that suggests that per unit cost of production does not vary greatly during

the various production seasons (e.g. fall, winter, spring).

It should also be noted that the extent to which the cost data used in

this study reflect the cost of production likely to be realized by

commercial farming activities on phosphatic clay is unknown. Although some

experimental plots have been grown, no reliable cost of production

estimates have been constructed.

The analyses also ignore the many dimensions of marketing vegetables

that are not manifested in monetary values. Thus, it is implicitly assumed

that new producers will encounter no difficulties in producing vegetables

in sufficient quantity and quality to enter into the mainstream marketing

channels. The importance of these factors cannot be underrated. Reputation

and quality are very significant factors in successfully marketing fresh

produce.

Finally, it should be noted that the analysis does not attempt to

incorporate any information regarding the likely effects that the presence

of additional supplies will have on market price. To be sure, any increase

in supply will result in some downward pressure on FOB price. However,

sufficient data do not exist to make even a rough estimate of the relavent

supply price flexibilities.

The magnitude of such a decrease is dependent on the amount and timing

of the increase in supply. Since no information on likely supply increases









resulting from phosphatic clay vegetable production is available, we have

simply assumed that the resulting price responses will be minor.



RESULTS



Analyses of average weekly prices for cabbage, sweet corn, cucumbers,

peppers, and squash for the 1977-78 to 1984-85 period indicate that market

windows for these crops may exist. Cabbage has a continuous market window

greater than two months because it can tolerate frost. Market windows for

the other crops in this study are less than two months for either fall or

spring harvesting periods.

There has been a steady increase in the cost of production of these

crops during the eight year period (1977-78 to 1984-85, Table 1). The

yearly average prices for these vegetables during the same period (table 2)

reflect smaller increase over time and more variability.

The following sections present a discussion of the potential market

windows for each crop. The average, maximum, and minimum weekly prices as

well as the average, maximum, and minimum weekly returns for the 1977-78 to

1984-85 period are presented. It should be noted that the term "production

season" in the following applies to the period of the year that a

particular crop may normally be produced on phosphatic clay in Florida.


Cabbage

Figure 1 illustrates the average weekly prices for cabbage for the

1977-78 to 1984-85 period. The market window for cabbage extends for about

four months from January through April. Although the production season for

cabbage may start in December, as it can be seen from Figure 1 average

7












Table 1. Yearly cost
Cabbage

Year (50 Ibs.)


data for selected vegetables, $/unit.a
Sweet Corn Cucumbers Peppers

(42 lbs.) (55 Ibs.) (25 lbs.)


77-78 3.15 4.16 5.69

78-79 3.12 4.76 5.42

79-80 4.04 5.20 7.07

80-81 3.58 5.23 7.14

81-82 4.42 6.27 7.16

82-83 4.59 6.86 7.17

83-84 6.74 6.95 7.13

84-85 4.94 6.60 8.16

aFor vegetables produced in more than one area,
cost for all areas is reported here.


5.00

5.01

5.94

7.92

8.75

8.77

9.14

10.10


the average


Table 2. Yearly average prices for selected vegetables, $/unit.


Cabbage

Year (50 Ibs.)


77-78

78-79

79-80

80-81

81-82

82-83

83-84

84-85


4.83

5.96

3.18

3.90

6.46

3.64

11.08

6.48


Sweet Corn
White Yellow
(42 Ibs.)


4.94

5.23

6.29

7.34

6.97

7.68

8.68


4.14

4.49

4.76

5.72

6.59

7.03

7.61

6.18


Cucumbers


Peppers


(55 Ibs.) (25 Ibs.)


8.34

8.54

10.36

11.05

11.67

13.21

10.91

10.60


7.47

6.98

9.27

14.38

9.22

13.00

13.52

7.94


Squash
Str.Neck Crookneck
(42 lbs.)


5.77

6.50

6.70

9.32

7.19

9.04

8.29

7.84


5.44

6.18

6.44

8.85

6.71

8.58

7.73

7.17


Squash

(42 Ibs.)


6.74

6.71

7.30

7.66

8.00

7.92

9.89

8.78


--







$24.00

$22.00

$20.00

$18.00

$16.00

$14.00

$12.00

$10.00

$8.00

$ 00



















$1 4,00

$12.00

$10.00

$8.00

$61,00

$4.00

$2.00

$0.00

($2.00)

($4.00)


9 11 13 15 17 19 21 2 25 27 29 31 33 35
PRODUCTION WEEK (1-First week of Oct.)
D AVERAGE + MAXIMUM 0 MINIMUM

FIGURE 2: AVERAGE WEEKLY NET RETURNS FOR CABBAGE,
1977-78 TO 1984-85

9


9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35
PRODUCTION WEEK (1-First week of Oct.)
D AVERAGE + MA>XI:UM o MINIMUM

FIGURE 1: AVERAGE WEEKLY PRICES FOR CABBAGE,
1977-78 TO 1984-85









weekly price for cabbage during December are generally low. The average

weekly prices for cabbage start to increase in January and peak in mid- or

late March, then prices begin to decline. While the minimum prices for

1977-78 to 1984-85 have shown very little weekly variation, the maximum

prices have increased from $5.00 in mid December to $22.00 in mid March.

Therefore, considering the cost of production in the existing production

areas in Florida, it appears that there is no market for this vegetable in

December.

Since there is no cost data for cabbage produced on phosphatic clay,

cost data for cabbage from Hastings area are used to calculate the average

weekly net returns. A positive average weekly net return can be identified

only after December when the price increases to over $10 per 50 lb. (Figure

2). With both average weekly net returns and average weekly deflated net

returns being positive, cabbage appears to have a market window for about

16 weeks. This means that under normal circumstances, cabbage production

from phosphatic clay can be expected to have a market potential from

January through April.

The mean of average weekly prices for the identified production season

of $6.40 indicates the upper limit for cost levels that will allow

profitable production of cabbage. Only growers that can produce below $6.40

per 50 lb. crate have an expectation of profitably marketing their product,

assuming that the increases supply on the phosphatic clay does not affect

the price. Average weekly net returns in real terms (deflated) indicate

similar trends.


. 10









Sweet Corn

Analyses were done separately for yellow corn and white corn types.

Figures 3 and 5 show the average weekly prices for white and yellow corn

over the 1977-78 to 1984-85 period. Sweet corn prices are generally high

during the months of January, February, and March, but due to the

possibility of frost, sweet corn production cannot be undertaken. Sweet

corn has two production seasons in the areas with weather conditions

similar to Polk County; fall and spring. Fall plantings can be harvested

during December and January until frost. The spring planting can be

harvested from early April until mid-May and sometimes even into late May.

An average of the production costs for three different areas; Central

Florida, Everglades, and Lower East Coast was used to calculate average

weekly net returns. As Figures 4 and 6 show, there are positive average

weekly net returns during both the fall and spring production season. The

positive average net returns for white corn extend over a longer period of

time than for yellow corn. If the weather conditions allow an early

planting so that the harvesting can begin in early or mid-March, a market

window can be identified for white corn. Using the aforementioned cost data

for calculating average weekly net returns, a market window cannot be

identified for yellow corn. White corn market potentials exist only for

spring planting. For the fall planting, the outlook is not as promising. An

early fall planting that could be harvested from mid-October through

November would likely return relatively low income. Negative average weekly

net returns have been identified for that period of time (Figures 4 and 6).

Comparing average weekly net returns for the two sweet corn types,

some differences are evident. For the yellow corn to have a market window,









$14.00

$13.00

$12.00

$11.oo

$1o.00

$9.00

Seo
$600


$4.00

$0 -00

$4.00

$3.00

$2.00


1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37
PRODUCTION WEEK (1.First week of Oct.)
0 AVERAGE + MAXIMUM o MINIMUM

FIGURE 3: AVERAGE WEEKLY PRICES FOR WHITE SWEET CORN,
1977-78 TO 1984-85


$8 00
$e oo

S.C.oo
$S7 00


- oo


$4 00

$3 00

$200





($1.00)

(C2.00)

($3,uO)

(34.00)


1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31
PRODUCTION WEEK (1=-Firt week of Oct.)
0 AVERAGE + MAXIMUM o MINIMUM

FIGURE 4: AVERAGE WEEKLY NET RETURNS FOR WHITE
1977-78 TO 1984-85
12


33 35 37


SWEET CORN,







$14.00

$13.00

$12.00

$11.00

$10.00





67.00


$?.oo


$4.00


$2.00










$7.00

$6 .00

$5.00

$4.00

$3.00

$2.00

$1.00

so.oo
$0.00

($ .00)

($2.00)

($>,00)

($4.00)


1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37
PRODUCTION WEEK (1-First week of Oct.)
0 AVERAGE + MAXIMUM 0 MINIMUM

FIGURE 6: AVERAGE WEEKLY NET RETURNS FOR YELLOW SWEET CORN,
1977-78 TO 1984-85


1 C5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37
PRODUCTION WEEK (1-First week of Oct.)
0 AVERAGE + MAXIMUM o MINIMUM

FIGURE 5: AVERAGE WEEKLY PRICES FOR YELLOW SWEET CORN,
1977-78 TO 1984-85










it would have to be produced at a cost below that of any of the existing

production areas in Florida. White corn would have to be produced below

$6.15 per crate and yellow corn below $5.23 per crate to have an

expectation of profitable marketing.


Cucumbers

The production season for cucumbers is the same as that for corn with

fall harvesting from early December until early January or until frost and

spring harvesting from early April until mid-to late May. But unlike corn,

cucumber production has the advantage of the high price periods in the

market, especially for the spring planting (Figure 7). Also an early fall

planting which is harvested from mid-October to mid-November shows

potential for profitable marketing. Cucumbers show a high net return

potential in December as well as for the period from early April through

late May. Immokalee-Lee area cost data were used for calculating average

weekly net returns. Positive returns can be identified for a fall harvest

and from early April through late May in the spring (Figure 8). Note that

even the minimum average weekly net returns exhibit positive values for

some period.

However, to have expectations of profitable marketing, cost of

producing cucumbers on phosphatic clay would have to be less than $10.84

per bushel. Little differences were evident regarding the existence of

potential market when comparing average weekly deflated net returns with

non-deflated returns.








$32.00 -
$30.00 -
$28.00 -
$26.00 -
$24.00 -
$22.00 -
$20,00 -
$18.00-
$16.00.
$14.00 -
$12,00
$10.00
oo-
$800o
V -00 -
$4.00
$2.00









$24.00

$22 00
$20 00

$1 I.00
$i .o0

$14 00

$12 00

$10.00

$8 .00
$6 00
$4 00

$2,00

$0.oo

($2.00)

($4.00)


1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27' 29 31 33 35 37 39
PRODUCTION WEEK (1-First week of Oct.)
0 AVERAGE + MAXIMUM 0 MINIMUM
FIGURE 8: AVERAGE WEEKLY NET RETURNS FOR CUCUMBERS,
1977-78 TO 1984-85


1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39
PRODUCTION WEEK (1-First week of Oct.)
D AVERAGE + MAXIrUM o MINIMUM
FIGURE 7: AVERAGE WEEKLY PRICES FOR CUCUMBERS,
1977-78 TO 1984-85









Peppers

Pepper production has two potential production seasons in the

phosphatic clay area in Polk County. If transplanting is used for fall

plantings, crops can be harvested as early as mid-November and harvesting

can be continued through December until frost. The first harvest from

spring planting can begin in early May and last for two to three weeks, and

the last harvest can begin in early June. As shown in Figure 9, pepper

production in the areas with weather conditions typical of Polk County do

not have a marketing opportunity during January February, and March-

April, when high prices are present in the market. Thus, pepper production

cannot take advantage of most of the favorable market due to weather. The

average cost data from two different producing areas, Immokalee-Lee, and

Palm Beach-Broward were used to calculate average weekly net returns. Under

this assumption, market potentials for fall planting does not exist.

Although spring planting shows positive average weekly net returns for four

to five weeks (Figure 10), it may be too short to be considered as a market

window for peppers. Only if peppers can be produced at a cost below $9.10

per bushel, would it have an expected market potential. Deflating the

average weekly net return has no effect on the shape and trend of returns.



Squash

Prices for two types of squash; straight-neck and crook-neck, and the

average cost from three producing areas; Immokalee-Lee, Palm Beach-Broward,

and Dade County were used in evaluating the market potential for squash.







$40.00-

.- Production Production Season
Season

$30.00-


$25.00-


$20.00-


$15.00



$10.00 -





3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33
PRODUCTION WEEK (1-Firlt week of DOt.)
D AVERAGE + MAXIMUM o MINIMUM
FIGURE 9: AVERAGE WEEKLY PRICES FOR PEPPERS,
1977-78 TO 1984-85


$35 00

$30 00 Production Production Season
Season

$25 00




$15,00 -

'Sl.OO -

$0.00
$ooo-







($5.00)

{$.5.oo) II
3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33
PRODUCTION WEEK (1First week of Oct.)
D AVERAGE + MAXIMUM 0 MINIMUM

FIGURE 10: AVERAGE WEEKLY NET RETURNS FOR PEPPERS,
1977-78 TO 1984-85
17










Average weekly prices for these two types are different. Although the

average weekly prices for each type fluctuates during the production

season, the high and low prices for each type of squash do not coincide

(Figures 11 and 13). As a result, average weekly net returns illustrate

different patterns for the two squashes.

The production season for squash in Polk County occurs over the same

time span as for corn and cucumbers. Early fall plantings are harvested

from mid-October to mid-November, with harvest of the late fall plantings

starting early in December and continuing through the end of December.

Spring crops can be harvested from early April through mid- or late May.

Average weekly price trends for both types show that production of this

crop can take advantage of some of the.high prices in the market. However,

only the crookneck squash exhibits positive average weekly net returns for

the entire production season. The average weekly net returns for crookneck

squash show a favorable market potential for both spring as well as fall

planting. The market window analysis for straight-neck squash does not

illustrate similar results (Figures 12 and 14). Assuming that additional

supply would not affect the market price of squash, production costs below

$6.65 per bushel for straight-neck and below $10.00 per bushel for

crookneck would lead to an expectation for profitable production during the

periods identified. An analysis of average weekly deflated net returns

yields similar conclusions.







$24.00

$22.00

$20,00

$1800

$16.00

$14.00

$12.00

$10.00

$8.00



$4.00

$2.00









$14.00





$8 00

$ 400



$2.00

10.00
$2.00










($4.00)

($4.00)


($800)
($8 00)


3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33
PRODUCTION WEEK (1-First wek of Oct.)
0 AVERAGE + MAXIMUM MINIMUM

FIGURE 11: AVERAGE WEEKLY PRICES FOR STAIGHTNECK SQUASH,
1977-78 TO 1984-85


3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 '25 27 29 31 33
PRODUCTION WEEK (1-First week of Oct.)
0 AVERAGE + MAXIMUM 0 MINIMUM

FIGURE 12: AVERAGE WEEKLY NET RETURNS FOR STRAIGHTNECK SQUASH,
1977-78 TO 1984-85








$26.00

$24.00 Production \ Production Season
Season
$22.00 -
$2.oo -
$20.00 -

$16,00 -


$14.00-

$124.00




SC.oo -
12.00




S 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35
PRODUCTION WEEK (1-First week of Oct.)
0 AVERAGE + MAXIMUM 0 MINIMUM

FIGURE 13: AVERAGE WEEKLY PRICES FOR CROOKNECK SQUASH,
1977-78 TO 1984-85







$10200 -
50.oo0



$10.00



. $4.00

64.00 -

$2,00



($2.00)

($4 00)

3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 '27 29 31 33
PRODUCTION WEEK (I-First week of Oct.)
O AVERAGE + MAXIMUM o MINIMUM

FIGURE 14: AVERAGE WEEKLY NET RETURNS FOR CROOKNECK SQUASH,
1977-78 TO 1984-85









CONCLUSION


The results of this study indicate that, under conditions assumed,

there appears to be market windows for some of the selected vegetables that

could be grown on reclaimed phosphatic clay. Cabbage, white sweet corn,

cucumbers, and crookneck squash are among those having favorable

expectations for market potentials. Yellow sweet corn, peppers, and

straight-neck squash have little market potential.

These conclusions, however, are conditioned by a number of caveats.

These caveats are: 1) Production costs are recorded on an annual basis,

assuming that the production costs are constant throughout the entire

season; 2) Marketing of vegetables has many dimensions that are not

manifested in monetary values, assuming that sufficient quantity of these

vegetables can enter into the marketing channels with no difficulties; and

3) The likely negative effect of additional supplies on market prices has

not taken into consideration.

With respect to overall conditions in vegetable markets, cost of

production is the most important factor in determining the economic

feasibility of these crops for phosphatic clay. Therefore it is important

to develop realistic estimates of the cost of producing various crops on

phosphatic clay on a commercialized scale. However, to have expectations of

profitable crops, it would appear that the cost of producing these

vegetables on phosphatic clay would have to be less than; $6.40 per 50 lb.

for cabbage, $6.15 per crate for white corn, $5.23 per crate for yellow

corn, $10.84 per bushel for cucumbers, $9.10 per bushel for peppers, $6.65

per bushel for st.neck squash, and $10.00 per bushel for crookneck squash.










REFERENCES


Bean, D. Steven. "Costs and Returns from Vegetable crops in Florida,
Season 1979-80 with comparison." Economic Information Report 143.
FRED, IFAS, University of Florida, May 1981.

Bromwell & Carrier, Inc. "Vegetable Production Potential of Selected
Mixtures of Sand Tailings and Waste Phosphate Clays." Prepared for
Florida Institute of Phosphate Research, November 1985, File No. 684.

Brooke, D. L. Costs and Returns from Vegetable Crops in F 1 o r i d a
Season 1977-78." Economic Information Report 110, FRED, IFAS,
University of Florida, April 1979.

Brooke, D. L. Season 1978-79." Economic Information
Report 127, FRED, IFAS, University of Florida, March 1980.

Collette, W. Arden and G. Brian Wall. "Evaluating Vegetable Production
for Market Windows as an Alternative for Limited Resource Farmers."
Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, Volume 10, No.2, December
1978, pp. 189-193.

Criner, George K., Duane A. Smith, Kathy J. Sage, and Ralph Reeb II. A
Standardized Methodology for Evaluating Commodity Potential, Main
Agricultural Experiment Station, University of Maine at Orono,
Miscellaneous Publication No. 688, April 1986.

McHardy, J. C. "Future Trends in Florida Phosphate Mining, Beneficiation
and Tailing Disposal." Mining Engineering. August 1983, pp. 1196-
1200.

Mizelle, William 0. Market Windows for Selected Georgia Vegetables."
University of Georgia, College of Agriculture, Cooperative Extension
Service Bulletin 887, 1983.

Mook, Richard G. "Applications of Market window Analysis: An Example."
Proceedings of Analyzing the Potential for Alternative Fruit and
Vegetable Crop Production Seminar. New Orleans, Louisiana, November
4, 1985, pp. 82-93.

O'Rourke, A. Desmond. "Market Opportunities for Minor Washington Fruit and
Vegetables." Agricultural Research Center, Washington University
Research Bulletin XB 0946, 1984.

O'Rourke, A. Desmond. "Use of the Market Window Technique in Evaluating
Potential for Interregional Trade." Proceedings of Analyzing the
Potential for Alternative Fruit and Vegetable Crop Production Seminar.
New Orleans, Louisiana, November 4, 1985, pp. 68-81.









Stricker, James A. "Final Report Mined Lands Agricultural
Research/Demonstration Project, Prepared for Florida Institute of
Phosphate Research." July 1987.

Taylor, Timothy G. "Costs and Returns from Vegetables Crops in Florida,
Season 1980-81 with Comparisons." Economic Information Report 159,
FRED, IFAS, University of Florida, June 1982.

Taylor, Timothy G., and Gary H. Wilkowske. "Costs and Returns from
Vegetable Crops in Florida, Season 1981-82 with Comparisons."
Economic Information Report 186. FRED, IFAS, University of Florida,
July 1983.

Taylor, Timothy G., and Gary H. Wilkowske. "Costs and Returns from
Vegetable Crops in Florida, Season 1982-83 with Comparisons."
Economic Information Report 199. FRED, IFAS, University of Florida,
June 1984.

Taylor, Timothy G. "Projected Costs and Returns for Florida Vegetables for
1984-85 Production Season." Economic Information Report 201. FRED,
IFAS, University of Florida, September 1984.

Taylor, Timothy G., and David Locascio, "Cost and Returns from
Vegetables Crops in Florida, Season 1983-84 with Comparisons."
Economic Information Report 205, FRED, IFAS, University of Florida,
June 1985.

Taylor, Timothy G. "Estimated Production Costs for Selected Florida
Vegetables, 1985-86." Economic Information Report 227. FRED, IFAS,
University of Florida, December 1986.

United States Department of Agriculture. Marketing Florida Vegetables.
Federal-State Market News Service, Winter Park, Florida (annual
issues).

Wood, Chuck. "Reclamation, Can Agriculture Fill Economic Vacuum Created by
Polk County's Declining Phosphate Industry?" The Citrus Industry,
July 1986, pp. 17-18.

Zwingli, Michael E., J. L. Adrian, W. E. Hardy, and W. J. Free,
"Wholesale Market Potential for Fresh Vegetables Grown in North
Alabama." Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn University,
Alabama, Bulletin 586, July 1987.




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs