Analyzing the current returns and potential market by harvest method for west texas cotton
description
Transcript of Analyzing the current returns and potential market by harvest method for west texas cotton
Janani Thapa, Conrad Lyford, Eric Hequet, and Jeff Johnson
Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas
Project Funded by International Cotton Research Center at
Texas Tech University
(000) bales
Global demand --
ring spinning
applications
Market prefers
highly uniform
fibers with less
neps
Figure 1: Average production and export of cotton
Source: www.nass.usda.gov
• Texas is the largest producer of cotton in US.
• Traditional use of West Texas cotton is rotor spinning.
• Due to introduction of long staple varieties.
Figure 2: US cotton belt
Figure 3: Yield lbs/planted acre in Texas
Source: www.nass.usda.gov
Figure 4: Yield share by states
US cotton belt
New varieties improved returns to West Texas
cotton farmers by $ 1 million a year
Dr. Carl Anderson
……….But are West Texas cotton farmers receiving
potential returns with using traditional
stripper harvesting methods
Using varieties with strong genetic potential
Irrigated production Harvesting costs evaluated Ginned with appropriate sequence to maintain fiber quality
Will shifting to picker harvest be financially rewarding for farmers:
Determine quality differences Compare profits with returns based on the CCC loan rate and AMS prices
Determine if improved markets served is possible
Yield and quality data of fibers
from actual field (irrigated, variety
Fiber Max) for three cotton marketing
years - 2009, 2010 and 2011 under
picker harvest-picker ginning and
stripper harvest-stripper ginning
sequence.
Year Picker StripperIncreased SFC
by stripper
200930.05*
** 32.41 2.36
201028.25*
** 36.93 8.68
2011 23.58 23.73 0.15
Neps per Gram
Short Fiber Content
by No. (%) Year Picker Stripper
Increased trash by stripper
2009288.58*
** 298.33 9.75
2010307.75*
** 334.75 27
2011306.00*
** 343.00 37
Trash Content (Cnt/g)
Year Picker StripperIncreased Nep by
stripper
2009 327.58*** 466.33 139
2010 355.00*** 670.25 315
2011 284.92*** 382 97.1
YearCost
($/acre)
2009 271
2010 163
2011 216
Average 217
Picker
Higher cost from stripper
Stripper Year
Cost ($/acre)
2009 336
2010 210
2011 248Average 265
YearCost
($/acre)
2009 65
2010 47
2011 32
Average 48
Picker
Higher seed cotton yield from stripper
Stripper
YearYield
(lbs/acre)
2009 4898
2010 2938
2011 3908
Average 3915
YearYield
(lbs/acre)
2009 6251
2010 3909
2011 4621
Average 4927
YearYield
(lbs/acre)
2009 1353
2010 971
2011 713
Average 1012
Picker
Higher lint yield from stripper
Stripper
YearYield
(lbs/acre)
2009 1734
2010 1040
2011 1383
Average 1386
YearYield
(lbs/acre)2009 18572010 11612011 1371Average 1463
YearYield
(lbs/acre)
2009 123
2010 121
2011 -11
Average 78
Picker
Higher revenue from stripper
Stripper
YearRevenue ($/acre)
2009 1718
2010 1041
2011 1396
Average 1385
YearRevenue ($/acre)
2009 1833
2010 1132
2011 1382
Average 1449
YearRevenue ($/acre)
2009 114
2010 91
2011 -14
Average 64
Picker
Little difference in overall profit
Stripper
YearProfit($/acre)
2009 1447
2010 878
2011 1179Average 1168
YearProfit($/acre)
2009 1497
2010 922
2011 1133Average 1184
YearProfit($/acre)
2009 49
2010 44
2011 -46
Average 16
SJVSouth Texas
E/M 1
E/M 2
Traditional
Higher return Higher quality specification
Market Segments
SpinningQuality
Strength (GPT) Quality Rewards Color-Leaf-Length
San Joaquin Valley Ring 21-2-36 31 1180-1600 South Texas Ring 31-3-36 29 270-540
East/Memphis 1 Ring 31-3-36 28 170-450
South
East/Memphis 2 Rotor 41-3-34 28 0-80
South West Rotor 41-4-33 25 -(80-290)
Year Picker Stripper
2009 E/M2 Traditional
2010 E/M2 Traditional
2011 South Texas E/M1
Hence, picker harvested cotton fibers can at least meet the quality standards of market segment E/M 2 (average premium 40).
Little difference in returns from picker and
stripper harvesting methods in traditional
markets
Picker harvested West Texas cotton meets higher
segment market quality including short fiber
content, neps
Increased market access needs to be met with
sufficient volume to be noticed by the market
A focused effort to produce irrigated, picker
harvested cotton appears to be promising
Thank You
Happy New Year