CALIFOjpiA
AGRICULTURAL E^JtTENSION SERVICE
CIRCULAR 1
April, 1926 '"^
SERIES ON CALIFORNIA CROPS AND PRICES
PEACHES
H. R. WELLMAN
PUBLISHED BY
THE COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA
Cooperative Extension work in Agriculture and Home Economics, College of Agriculture,
University of California, and United States Department of Agriculture cooperating. Dis-
tributed in furtherance of the Acts of Congress of May 8 and June 30, 1914. B. H. Crocheron,
Director, California Agricultural Extension Service.
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PRINTING OFFICE
BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA
1926
This publication is the first of a series, each of which will dis-
cuss the economics of a crop prominent in California agriculture.
Heretofore, those who desired to consult the statistics for any
particular crop were compelled to search through a long and
varied list of references scattered in publications of many
bureaus of the State and Federal governments and of various
private agencies. This publication attempts to bring the material
together in one publication and to present it in graphic form.
This work was initiated as the result of a request from the
California Farm Bureau Federation, the California State Grange
and the California Farmers' Union. Its fulfillment has been
made possible through the hearty cooperation of many agencies
which have generously contributed from their data and their
time. Among these are the Bureau of Agricultural Economics
of the United States Department of Agriculture, the Cooperative
Crop Reporting Service of the State Department of Agriculture,
the United States Department of Commerce, the California
Development Association, the Agricultural Legislative Commit-
tee, the California Canning Peach Growers, the California Fruit
Exchange, the California Peach and Fig Growers Association,
and the California Cooperative Canneries.
This publication tries to give such facts as are available. It
is hoped that it may be of assistance to farmers interested in
growing peaches, both to those who have already planted peach
orchards and to those who may wish to determine whether they
should plant this crop. No attempt has been made to decide the
matter for the grower. Decision must be left to him, because
much will depend on local conditions and on the personal
equation.
The peach industry is complicated because the fruit has three
uses : as fresh, dried, or canned products. Even in the simplified
form here presented, the material may appear complex and diffi-
cult to grasp. Few persons will gain much from a casual glimpse
or reading of the publication. Those who would gain knowledge
and understanding of the industry will be repaid by a thorough
study of the facts here given.
B. H. Crocheron,
Director of Agricultural Extension.
PEACHES
11. E. WELLMAN*
SUMMARY
California produces all of the dried peaches and practically all of
the canning peaches in the United States. With fresh peaches, how-
ever, the situation is different : only a small portion of the fresh
peaches are produced in California. A study of the industry must
consider, therefore, three fairly distinct commodities ; viz., canning
peaches, dried peaches, and fresh peaches. These three are closely
related, owing primarily to the fact that certain varieties of Freestone
peaches may be canned, dried, or shipped fresh. The relationship is
most clearly shown in the tendency for the prices of each of the kinds
of peaches to move in the same general direction. This tendency is
especially noticeable with canning and dried peaches.
A number of important changes in the peach industry have been
taking place during the last twenty years. Since the changes have not
all been in the same direction nor to the same extent, it seems advisable
to summarize each commodity separately.
Canning Peaches. — One of the important changes has been the
steady decline in the purchasing power of canning peaches, which has
declined eleven per cent during the past fifteen years. The dollar
which the growers receive for their peaches will normally buy less of
other commodities today than it did five, ten, or fifteen years ago.
A second important change has been the rapidly increasing pro-
duction of canning peaches in California, particularly of canning
Clingstone peaches. This increased production has been the most
important cause for the decline in purchasing power. However, a
change in the consuming habits of the American people, that of eating
more canned peaches and less fresh and dried peaches, has prevented
the price of canning peaches from going as low as it otherwise would.
A study of the data presented in this circular indicates that the
trend of purchasing power of canning peaches is not likely to rise above
the present level within the next few years, because :
1. Production is increasing. New plantings are more than sufficient
to maintain the present bearing acreage. These are being made in
localities in which the yield per acre is high.
Extension Specialist in Agricultural Economics.
4 CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE [CiRC. 1
2. The production of competing products such as pineapples, pears,
apricots, and cherries is also increasing.
3. The buying power of consumers, as indicated by wages and
employment, has been at a high level since 1922 ; and it can not be
expected that this buying power wdll increase to any considerable extent
in the near future.
Furthermore, the trend of purchasing power may continue to
decline unless the present rate of plantings is decreased or unless the
demand for canning peaches should increase.
Dried Peaches. — The purchasing power of dried peaches has
declined more rapidty than that of canning Clingstone peaches, despite
a considerable decrease in production during the last ten years. The
tendency is for people to eat less dried peaches today than they
formerly did, even though they can buy them at a relatively lower
price.
On the other hand, the present rate of planting of Freestone peaches
is hardly sufficient to maintain the present bearing acreage. It does
not seem likely that the volume of production will rise above its
present level within the next few years, unless a portion of the Free-
stone peaches which are normally canned and shipped fresh should be
dried. This, however, is an ever-present possibility. Whenever the
price offered for dried peaches is more attractive than that offered for
canning or fresh peaches, some growers will dry certain varieties of
their Freestone peaches instead of shipping them fresh or selling them
to the canners.
The alternative outlets for Freestone peaches have been largely
responsible for the close relation between the prices of the three kinds
of peaches during the past ; and there is reason to believe that these
alternative outlets will prevent the future prices of dried peaches from
rising much above that offered for canning and fresh peaches.
Fresh Peaches.- — The purchasing power of fresh peaches has
declined even more rapidly than that of canning Clingstone peaches
or dried peaches. This decline seems to be largely a result of the
increase in the production of competitive fruits and vegetables, and a
decrease in the per capita consumption of fresh peaches. During the
last twenty years there has been a definite tendency for the American
people to eat less peaches in the fresh form.
The price which California growers receive for fresh peaches is
determined almost wholly by conditions outside of the state. Although
the production of fresh peaches in the United States as a whole has not
increased appreciably during the last twenty years, there has been a
1926] CROPS AND PRICES : PEACHES 5
definite shift in the peach producing sections from areas of high cost
to areas of low cost. Consequently, California fresh peach growers
will probably be subjected to more severe competition in the future.
According to the Agricultural Outlook for 1926, published by the
Bureau of Agricultural Economics of the United States Department
of Agriculture, a rapidly increasing production of fresh peaches may
be expected, due to the extensive plantings of young orchards in recent
years in the South Atlantic and Middle Western states. Our principal
markets are even more readily available to these sections than to Cali-
fornia. It seems likely, therefore, that the decline in the trend of the
purchasing power of fresh peaches will continue for some time unless
there should be an unexpected increase in consumption.
Foreign Demand. — Definite information on the demand for peaches
in foreign countries is not available. In the Agricultural Outlook for
1926, the Bureau of Agricultural Economics makes the following fore-
cast of the general foreign demand for farm products :
''The present prospects in foreign markets are that the demand
for most of the products of our farms in 1926 will be no better than for
the products of 1925, if as good, unless the competing products of
foreign countries should be reduced by a less favorable season.
Although the purchasing power of consumers in most countries for the
products which they will have to import may be as good or better than
in the past year, recovering domestic production and the imposition of
protective tariffs is reducing the demand in some countries for foreign
products and competition in all foreign markets probably will be at
least as strong as last year. ' '
The present outlook of the peach grower does not justify an increase
in his peach acreage unless he is able to produce peaches at the current
values or lower. He should not expect greatly increased values for his
product during the forthcoming years, but must depend in the main
upon improved efficiency for an increase in his return. The expansion
of the peach industry, if it is to continue, should be made upon lands
that are primarily adapted to the production of this fruit, and only
with an understanding of the possibility of continually lowering values.
While this declining price level may not be realized and while cir-
cumstances may arise which will improve the present condition of the
peach grower, these are not yet evident from the facts we have been
able to gather. Unless the grower can obtain a high tonnage per acre
at a relatively low cost he should not expect to find peach grooving a
profitable business.
CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE
[CiRC. 1
s
o
^
<v
o
pi
B*
m
C3
<v
f-i
b£)
>
u
ft
:^
s
C3
?
-H
03
Oi
P
rt
+^
o
o
+2
(tS
w
be
Pi
OS
s
o
PI
Pi
>
P!
'zi
O
o
o
Pi
CO
Pi
03
<o
q;
to
<v
r— 1
02
!h
'feJO'^
c5
(D
pi
OS
^
O
=H
,o
Pi
o^
o
-M
CD
2
P3
^
o
<D
O
Pi
?3
©
,i:3
'TIS
o
4-*
p3
Id o
OJ
ft
2
o
.^
rt
r^
";h
be
4J
cS
03
S3
^
5
s
Cl
Ci
I— 1
O
W
r^
q3
PI
o
o
O
c3
o
s
Oi
©
•rH
CQ
OS
>
o
5
'b£)
O
«4-l
<v
05
ft
lO
CO
<V
;h
3
(D
Qi
S3
CM
OS
;h
ft
Oi
p
•+J
T-i
• i-i
bJC
pi
o
O
o
rH
o
,^3
<v
O
OS
OS
<D
,£3
cS
OS
!h
q5
'^ r^
0)
id
1-1
o
o
■♦-'
CD
.)-:>
02
2
c3
Pi
o
>
Pi
pi
s
to
O
a
-4^
o
CO
<v
<u
SH
o
pi
r2
C^
-M
PJ
OS
'ft
1
-t-»
03
a
o
Pi
t>
en
•r-(
. o
O
0)
ps
fc
<v
a>
o
>^
Qj oS -*-|;
ri-f?
1926] CROPS AND PRICES: PEACHES
THE GENEEAL SITUATION
Peach Acreage, United Staies. — Thirty-one of the 48 states had
more than 4000 acres of peaches each in 1919, as indicated in figure 1.
The total peach acreage in that year amounted to approximately
872,640 acres, 98 per cent of which were in the 31 states. The 14 states
of Georgia, California, Texas, Pennsylvania, Arkansas, New York,
Oklahoma, Ohio, Missouri, North Carolina, Tennessee, New Jersey,
Michigan, and West Virginia had more than 25,000 acres each ; a total
of 663,000 acres, or 76 per cent of the total United States acreage.
Of the 872,640 acres, 656,460 were in bearing and 216,180 were not in
bearing. The ratio of non-bearing to bearing in 1919, therefore, was
33 per cent ; that is, there were 33 non-bearing trees for each 100
bearing trees.
The total peach acreage in the United States decreased from
1,367,730 in 1909 to 872,640 in 1919, a decrease of 495,090 acres or
36.2 per cent. During this same period the bearing acreage decreased
30.5 per cent, and the non-bearing acreage decreased 48.9 per cent.
In 1909 there were 945,067 bearing acres and 422,662 non-bearing
acres, the ratio of non-bearing to bearing being 45 per cent. Since
the bearing acreage decreased 30.5 per cent from 1909 to 1919 it is
evident that 45 non-bearing trees for each 100 bearing trees were not
sufficient to maintain the bearing acreage. The ratio of non-bearing to
bearing in 1919 was 33 per cent. This indicates that a further decrease
in bearing acreage is taking place at the present time. The rate of
decline cannot be measured because the 1925 Farm Census does not list
separately the bearing and non-bearing peach trees. On the whole it
seems probable that the ratio necessary to maintain the bearing acreage
will gradually become smaller, because the shift in peach production
is away from those areas in which the ratio is high and toward those
areas in which the ratio is smaller. Consequently, acreage figures must
be supplemented by production figures in order to obtain a correct view
of the situation.
Peach Production, United States. — Although the bearing peach
acreage has decreased, peach production has increased as indicated in
figure 2. During the ten-year period from 1909 to 1919 there was an
increase of 12 per cent in production, although the number of bearing
trees decreased 30.5 per cent.
Peach production in California has increased much faster than in
the United States as a whole. From 1906 to 1925 California 's produc-
tion increased 147.6 per cent as compared with an increase of 23.6
per cent for the United States.
CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE
[CiRC. 1
Peach Production, United States and California, 1906-192{
U.S.
c in
o o
Calif, is
1500
1000
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
rji lom lOtommcn tooc«-o» r-
VO rHCO rHCDCVJOica U>0»f-lc>- C\J
lO CM O
(T> CO ^
o r~ CO
(T> O Oi
CD <T> •-*
O W r-t
O O OOr-<f-«r-».HrH r-lrHrH
CT> CT> CT»
a» o rH CM to -* in
rM CM CM CM CM CM CM
cr> cr>
Years
Fig. 2.* — Data from tables 19 and 20. Equation for lines of trend are: United
States, 2/ = 961.8 + 11.96rr; California, i/ = 157.46 + 12.23^. The slope of the
trend lines indicates the rate of growth.
Main Peach Producing States. — California is the foremost peach
producing state in the Union as shown in figure 3, producing 32 per
cent of the total. Georgia is next followed by New York, New Jersey,
Texas, etc.
Changes in Peach Producing Areas. — The net increase of peach
production in the United States is the resultant of increases in some
states and decreases in other states as shown in figure 4. From 1911
to 1925 total peach production increased 16.4 per cent. In New Jersey
production increased 430 per cent, in Utah 117 per cent, and in Cali-
fornia 105 per cent. The states of Illinois, Michigan, Arkansas, and
Missouri show a decrease of over 50 per cent. The data presented in
figure 4 indicate that the production areas are shifting toward the
localities in which peaches can be produced at the lowest comparative
* The short explanations underneath the illustrations in this circular are
intended primarily for those who are interested in statistical methods. An
understanding of the equations of the trend lines is not necessary in order to
read the circular intelligently.
Belative Imfortance of Main Peach Producing States
(Average Production, 1920-1924)
state 1000 bu.
Per
cent
California
14,954
32.0
Georgia
5,768
12.3
New York
2,316
5.0
New Jersey
1,935
4.1
Texas
1,704
• 3.6
Penneylvania
1,506
3.2
Ohio
1,477
3.2
Tennessee
1,346
2.9
Arkansas
1,280
2.7
North Carolina
1,191
2.6
Missouri
1,125
2.4
Oklahoma
1,101
2.4
Alabama
1,005
2.1
Michigan
977
2.1
Colorado
810
1.7
Kentucky
787
1.7
Virginia
782
1.7
Utah
734
1.6
Washington
726
1.6
South Carolina
719
1.5
Illinois
704
1.5
West Virginia
644
1.4
Waryland
510
1.1
All others
2,614
5.6
Total
46,715
100.0
Fig. 3. — Data from table 16. All states that had an average production of
more than 500,000 bushels during the five-year period, 1920-1924 are listed
separately. The states that had an average production of less than 500,000
bushels are included in all others.
Percentage Increase or Decrease in Trends of Peach Production in Main
Peach Producing States, 1911-1925
Percent
♦120
♦100 |_J |_
Fig. 4. — Data from table 16. A straight line of trend was fitted to the pro-
duction figures of each of the states. The form of the equation used is
y = a-{-'bx.
10
CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE
[CiRC. 1
cost. Three of the factors which are causing- this change are (1) the
amount of new plantings necessary to maintain the bearing acreage,
(2) the yearly fluctuations in production, and (3) the yield per acre.
1. Since the cost of planting is one of the important costs in the
production of peaches, an area in which the ratio necessary to main-
tain the bearing acreage is high, is at a disadvantage to other areas in
which the ratio is Ioav, providing other things are equal. And other
Peach Production, California and Michigan, 1911-1925
Calif
o
o "* 8 ^
20,000
10,000
9,000
8,000
7,000
6,000
0> O <-H CJ to ^ W
CM CM C\J CM CM CM
Year:
Fig, 5. — Data from table 16. Equations for lines of trend are: California,
y — 8409.5 + 630.5a;; Michigan, y = 1659.9 — 76.7a;.
1^26] CROPS AND PRICES: PEACHES 11
things being equal, the acreage in those areas which have the least
favorable ratios will gradually decline, and the acreage in those areas
which have more favorable ratios will gradually increase. For example,
in 1909 Michigan had 103 non-bearing trees for each 100 bearing trees,
and yet her bearing acreage decreased 31 per cent during the following
ten-year period. On the other hand, California had only 56 non-
bearing trees for each 100 bearing trees in 1909, and her bearing
acreage increased 16 per cent during the same period.
2. A second factor causing this shift is the relative variation in
production from year to year. In some areas unfavorable weather
conditions, such as freezing, is apt to reduce the crop materially.
Where such conditions prevail the risk of producing peaches is great,
and consequently the cost of bearing the risk is high. The tendency,
therefore, is for production to be reduced in areas having a large varia-
tion and to be increased in areas where the variation is small. This
tendency is illustrated in figure 5. In Michigan the relative variation
in production for the years 1911 to 1925 was 51.6 per cent, as compared
with a relative variation of 14.7 per cent in California. During this
period Michigan peach production decreased 58.5 per cent while
California production increased 105 per cent.
3. The influence of the yield per acre upon the costs of production
for a particular locality in California is discussed on page 48. It is
apparent that there is a tendency for the cost per ton to decrease as
the yield per acre is increased. This tendency is in part responsible
for the shifting of the producing area toward those sections in which a
high yield can be obtained, and helps to explain why peach production
in the United States has increased despite a decrease in bearing acreage.
The shift in the peach producing areas is significant. It makes
possible a lower cost of production, and consequently enables peach
growers to make a profit at lower prices. Since profits are the main
incentive for increasing production, and since increased production
normally means lower prices, California growers will probably be sub-
jected to keener competition from other areas.
As production shifts to more favorable areas, the fluctuations from
year to year will probably decrease, resulting in a more stabilized con-
dition. The chief cause of fluctuation in production is due to climatic
conditions as shown in figure 6. Thus production fluctuates in the
same direction and to nearly the same extent as does the condition of
the crop. Because of this, farmers can do very little to stabilize pro-
duction, except as they individually adjust their own production to
more favorable areas.
12
CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE [CiRC. 1
United States Peach Production as a Percentage of the Secular Trend
AND Condition of the Crop as a Percentage of the
Normal Crop, 1906-1925
Per-
cent
140
130
120
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
/
,
/
r
-Pn
\dcfi -Hot
1
i
/
\
i
\
\
/
\
\
I
\
/
/
\
\
/
\
1
\
/
\
\
/
\
/
/
\
\
/
\
\
/
\
V
\
/
\
/
\i
\
1
i
\
/
\
/
A
\
\
f
\
\
/ /
V
J
V
1
\
J
/
\
/
\
\
y
\
\
/
\
/
\
/
\
y
^^
/
\
\
f
\
1
^
y
\
1
\
Cor
dif
on
of
Cro
J
_J
Years
Fig, 6. — Data on production; line of trend fitted to production figures, see
figure 2, and the yearly items figured as a percentage of the line of trend. Data
on condition of crop: Years 1906-1923 from Yearbook U.S.D.A., 1923, p. 746.
Years 1924-1925 from E. E. Kaufman. The percentage condition of the crop
is based upon the influence of the climatic conditions upon yield.
Utilization of the United States Peach Crop. — The five-year average
production, 1920-1924, of all peaches in the United States was
1,121,160 tons, of which 72.4 per cent was marketed fresh, 15.2 per cent
canned, and 12.4 per cent dried. The proportion of the crop used in
the different ways varies from year to year as indicated in figure 7.
From 1906 to 1925 the proportion of the total crop marketed fresh has
declined ; the proportion canned has increased, particularly since 1915 ;
and although the proportion dried increased from 1906 to 1913, it has
declined during the latter years of this period.
In actual tons, fresh peach production has increased slighly, about
3 per cent, during the 20-year period (see fig. 8). Since 1906, the
1926]
CROPS AND PRICES : PEACHES
Percentage of United States' Peaches Shipped Fresh, Dried, and Canned,
1906-1925
in t^
CO t^
c
CC
81.3
81.9
80.5
81.8
70.4
72.8
82.9
71,7
70.1
71.2
70.6
71.0
67.8
72.3
70.5
78.0
69.7
Drled g '^ ".
ff
0»0>^r- OOlOiHtOCO OiOr>- lOrieOO*
i- i
c
C\JrHr-tCJ r-t -^r-ir-OOrt lOf}-* rltOOt-
Canned '^ '^ °.
COWrHlO O (0<0<V»«00 -^lOlO CM'^t^r*
100
o
t>
IT
i V
a CC
If
> a
3
i£
i
' "-
A If
•<;
h lO I^ O 'O ^
1 1 i
CM
CM
90
^.
80
\
^'
^-i»
_.
■" ••
.
jf
y
70
\
y
/
\
-...-^s
rrt
7Sh
y
60
50
30
20
Dri
7d^
\ J"
Conn^ —
___ ^
yjf
^^^
-— -
.-.
r
'^^
*^^
^^
'^
'•s^
:r:=
10
»—
— «S
'**'«^
#^
1 ■
— ^
-^^
^
*^
Years
Fig. 7.— Data from table 19.
production of canned peaches has increased 331 per cent, or at a uni-
form rate of 7.9 per cent a year. Dried peach production shows two
distinct movements; a rapidly increasing production during the first
half of the period and a decreasing production during the latter half
of the period.
California's Place in the Peach Industry. — At the present time
California produces practically all of the United States tonnage of
dried and canned peaches (see fig. 9). Dried peach production has,
for many years at least, been confined entirely to California. In 1906
approximately 72 per cent of the canned peaches were produced in
this state. This percentage increased steadily up to 1921, reaching a
high point of 98 per cent in that year; and since then has remained at
about the same point. Our interstate shipments of fresh peaches, how-
ever, are a very small percentage of the total United States fresh peach
production, although they are becoming increasingly important.
14
CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE
[CiRC. 1
Production of Fresh, Dried, and Canned Peaches, United States,
1906-1925
Fresh
Dried
Canned
^^
-*
r-.
CM
■^
t>-
o
t>-
^
VO
o»
lO
o»
00
<T>
<T*
5
rf
o>
-^l*
w
t^
a>
t^
-^J"
r-t
o
cr»
p-
CM
O
m
«o
CT>
'O
o
«o
en
CM
»o
CO
la
00
l>-
lO
o>
t<
•H
»H
o ^
to
t-
O
CO
lO
o
to
to
t>-
^
UJ
o
to
a»
«o
rH
O U5
o
00
r-t
i-t
o^
o
I-t
o
cvj
t^
r-l
CM
r-«
CT>
rH
rH
r-i
1500
1000 ^
O OOOrHrirHiHrHrHrHrH
CT> O rH CM to •^ lO
rH CM CM CM CM CM CM
Years
Fig. 8. — Data from table 19. Dried and canned figures converted to a fresh
ton basis. Equations for lines of trend are: Fresh, 1/ = 804.37 + 1.34a;; Canned,
log 2/=l-7078o + .03339a;; Dried, for years 1906-1915, y — 77 AQ + 11.72a;; for
years 1916-1925, y = 176.44 — 6.88a;.
Utilization of the California Peach Crop. — That California is
primarily a drying and canning peach producing state may be seen
from figure 10. The five-year average commercial production, 1920-
1924, was 338,638 tons, of which 48.7 per cent was canned, 41.2 per
cent dried, and 10.1 per cent shipped fresh. During the 20-year period,
1906-1925, approximately the same proportion of the crop has been
shipped fresh, but the position of dried and canned peaches has been
reversed. Prior to 1920, dried peaches were the most important, but
1926]
CROPS AND PRICES: PEACHES
15
Percentage of United States^ Dried, Canned, and Fresh Peaches Produced
IN California, 1906-1925
Dried ^ o
c "■
o
Canned "
<o
Fresh
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
a> (T>
3 S
O
CT»
O^
Ov
a.
a>
0^
&;
<J>
o»
(7>
o»
CT.
O
o
6
6
6
-• ?
§
s
00
2
i
CO
00
CO
s
s
to
CTV
s
CO
s:
S;
§;
CO
to
^
Ch
<o
a>
to
<o
<£>
o
<o
t-
r^
00
<o
CD
t^
CVJ
«>
r^
w
■;)•
w
to
r^
^
C\J
r^
to
lO
•-0
to
'I'
t-
w
in
CM
•*
^<
-On
ed
^
.^
"--
__ ^
.
^
/
^"~
Cot
met
iJ
Frt
^sh-
\
«..
.
— ,
"^
.^
"■^
I
.-^
'•^^
,.—
*^
.--'
•-^
-^•'
cj to «* to <o r-
Fig. 9. — Data from tables 19 and 20.
Percentage of California's Commercial Production Shipped Fresh, Canned,
and Dried, 1906-1925
Dried
Canned
c
) c
> CO 00
s> to
t
O CT> O
o
3
n ^ CVJ c
D O
a
O r-l
in <o in 3
3 S
5 S 3 3 S
S 5 ? 3 S S
^ 3 S
g 'O rH o w
D OJ
in 'i' CT. lO •*
O lO O OD ■# O
M in w
Pero
4 39
9 31
2 30
22
e ^
cxj CM ?} w o
s 5 ^ :? ^ s
* O^
CM lo CM in u>
OCT.«OOCOO .«M^
«o in o «o cvi to
[no
CD CT^ CO t- OJ
CO •* CO rH to r-
H r- o
90
70
/
'"«*_^
/
/
\
^-^
N,
Dri
e^
y
50
/
N
/
N
"
V
y
V
N
^
/
CoA
nee
''>)
\
Xj
>
*^.^
/
i
30
20
\
I
/
\
\
^
x"
N
^
/
^
^'^
rr6
sh^
>
^.y
•^,
lJ
^•'
N,
\
_^
— •-
^'
..-—
•—
— "•
~.
'
r ■
N
y
--^"
^_
o o o o
Fig. 10.— Data from table 20.
16
CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE
[CiRC. 1
in 1920 canned peaches became the most important, and have con-
tinued to be so since that year. The turning point in the relative posi-
tion of dried and canned peaches appears to have taken place in 1913,
Since then, the proportion of the total crop dried has steadily
decreased, and the proportion canned has steadily increased.
Figure 11 shows the trends cf the production of fresh, dried and
canned peaches in California.
Commercial Production of Fresh, Dried and Canned Peaches, California,
1906-1925
Dried
Canned
8 >«
§ S
o
^ 00 ■* to to
lO kO VO CT> t^
t
t>- u> lO
lO to iH
rH rH C\J
5: 5
r-i CM
Fresh
<o t- CO a»
o o o o
<J» O iH M to ■<* «n
fH CM CV2 CJ CVj CM CM
Years
Fig. 11. — Data from table 20. Figures for dried and canned peaches con-
verted to a fresh ton basis. Equations for lines of trend are: Dried, for years
1906-1915, 2/= 77.46 + 11. 72a;; for years 1916-1925, ?/ = 176.44 — 6.88a-;
Canned, log 2/ = 1.58271 -f .03996ar; Fresh, 2/ z= 17.177 + 1.067a;.
1926]
CROPS AND PRICES: PEACHES
17
Peach Acreage, California. — Comparable data on bearing and non-
bearing" acreage, for consecutive years, are available only since 1921.
This information is presented in table 1.
Table 1. — Estimated Peach Acreage, California, 1922-1925
1922 1923
Bearing 107,786 115,618
Non-bearing 22,518 24,579
New planting 18,788 28,885 10,484
Data from Table 21. Data for the census years of 1910 and 1920 are given in Table 15
1924
1925
20,947
131,508
28,455
42,914
There has been a steadj^ increase in bearing acreage during this
four-year period. Non-bearing acreage shows a large increase in 1925
over the previous years. This increase was caused mainly by the
amount of new plantings in 1923.
Percentage of California's Peach Acreage, Bearing and Non-bearing in
County
Fresno
Tulare
Sutter
Stanislaus
San Bernardino
Merced
Placer
San Joaquin
Riverside
Los Angeles
Kings
Santa Clara
Solano
Madera
Butte
Sacramento
San Diego
Yolo
Tehama
Yuba
San Luis Obispo
Percen-f
Bear/ng Nan -bear
^■i 7777-X
17.5 .8 ra
9.0
6.8
6.6
6.5
6.4
6.3
4.3
4.1
4.0
3.9
3.8
2.7
2.1
2.0
1.9
1.7
1.3
1.3
1.1
.9
12.2 ^} }}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}m}}}}}}m}}^ ZZZZZ
11.0 '
7.3
3.5
//////////////////////,
2.1 ^
mm
2.6
2.7
2.0
1.0
.9
1.2
.9
9 10 UL
772ZZ27ZZZZZ27ZZZ77ZZ7^ZZ2Z2ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ2\
zzzzzzzzzzzr
^»»»))\
Hf
3.7 ^^^9?
9 2H
13 14
J£ IU8
Fig. 12.— Data from table 21.
Figure 12 shows the percentage of bearing and non-bearing acreage
in the main peach producing counties in California in 1925. Fresno
County had the largest bearing acreage, followed by Tulare, Sutter,
Stanislaus, San Bernardino, Merced and Placer. Sixty per cent of
all bearing acres in California were in these seven counties. Merced
County had the largest number of non-bearing acres, followed by
Tulare, Sutter, Stanislaus, Sacramento and Yuba.
18
CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE
[CiRC. 1
Although data on new plantings, by counties, for a period of years
are not available, it is possible to ascertain, in a general way, what is
taking place in the different sections of the state, by computing the
number of non-bearing acres for each 100 bearing acres. The ratio of
non-bearing to bearing acreage in each of the main peach producing
counties is shown in figure 13.
Ratio of Non-bearing to Bearing Peach Acreage, Main Peach Producing
Counties, California, 1925
130
120
110 |— 1
100
90
60
70
60
60
40
30
20
10
L
Ratio necessary to maintain
present bearing acreage
hrHTTTnT
hd to
!i
lO ^ <• Tj.
« g o
<0 bO .H
^ a VI rt
5 -A
fa V)
I ^
Fig. 13.— Data from table 21.
An increase in peach production may be expected in those counties
which have more than 33 non-bearing acres for each 100 bearing acres,
and a decrease may be expected in those counties which have a ratio of
less than 33.
Clingstone and Freestone peach acreages are available only for the
year 1925. In that year there were 58,592 bearing and 36,768 non-
bearing acres of Clingstones, and 72,592 bearing and 16,430 non-
bearing acres of Freestones.* There were, therefore, 62 non-bearing
acres for each 100 bearing acres of Clingstones and 23 non-bearing
California Crop Keport, p. 21, 1924.
1926]
CROPS AND PRICES: PEACHES
19
acres for each 100 bearing acres of Freestones. These figures indicate
that there will be an increase in the Clingstone bearing acreage, and
a decrease in the Freestone bearing acreage during the next few years.
The decrease in the Freestone bearing acreage appears to be most
pronounced in those sections devoted mainly to the production of dry-
ing peaches. In Fresno County, for example, which has 17.5 per cent
of the bearing acreage in the state in 1925, there were only 2 non-
bearing acres for each 100 bearing acres.
CANNING PEACHES
Varieties of Canning Peaches. — Both Clingstone and Freestone
peach varieties are canned. Clingstone varieties are used almost
entirely for canning, while Freestone varieties are also dried and
shipped fresh. The Lovell is the main Freestone variety used for
canning, although a small portion of the Elbertas and Muirs are
canned. Elbertas, however, are used mainly for shipping, and Muirs
are used mainly for drying.
Peaches, Main California Canning Clingstone Varieties and Time of
EiPENiNG, Season 1925
Variety
Tuscan
Time of
Ripenbig
July 9-Aug.
12
Hauss
July
27.Aug.
24
Palora
July
2 9- Aug.
30
Johnson
July
30-/xig.
20
Peaks
July
30-Aug.
27
Orange
July
30-Aug.
27
Walton
July
31-Aug.
13
McDevitt
Aug.
11-Aug.
21
Albright
Aug.
11-Aug.
21
Phillips
Aug.
19-Sept
24
Levi
Sept.
11-Oct.
4
July Aug. Sept,
^ \^ 22 2g ? ],? 1,9 S6 ^ 9, 1)5 g?
Oct.
Q ,7 1^ 2; ;^6
Fig. 14. — Data from California Canning Peach Growers.
The Clingstone canning season normally extends from the second
week in July to the first week in October, as shown in figure 14. The
bulk of the peaches, however, are canned during August.
20 CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE [CiRC. 1
Canned Peach Production, California, 1906-1925
0)
Clingstone St- t>-cotooiocarHa>too'<^too»r-tt>-cMtovoin
"^ rH rH r-l rH rH C\J
Freestone Sw Tfooevji-<u)'*»iio^Qooc\i o<ooorHO caoo
XCM CMCVIr-lWCVl rH«\IWrHCMtOtO-^tOW«C\J C\JM
200 — -| i "n"? — ri^T'ffS
jjjQ ,., . " 4~ , ". . ".,_.. ,| ,■■■■ 1 ■ T/ ^> Hj /|
1 1 ^v i 1 ^i
^^^ =iz-i-' .1 r -;;-- =ji4s -Ii^-l! --|-j=; =^^- _|ii'- ---i--;- =*i-i : . : I ^^-4-^&^f^- I^F =*' ^"" :^^ :-;-i-T---
90 EE4=^ ;i-k =P L 1^4:^ = Fp i|i= :£|3^ =gi; [^r^ -i^ 4-i^ L^'-jfeFr ^-f -i- ^^1^; '1^ =i^-' '"i-;- ^H
60 -f-j-- ^E|i|: -^l-i "- -t -^ 2p^ ::il t-; 3=£ =t£ ^|=j- 3^ ^C B=^ i^-" '-: r-t ^ e3|,^ -^ i-M -^e
'^^ ^- J=^ eJEIe :z--^ eJ^ ^--jzp E^i; £^ ^■- ^^^ 4^_1^ irT -^ i= ^ 4i- i^: -4itE -eh:
^" =-E--EF3^3--S^--#S^^^ = 3EE£^|EE^-:^^-^^:i|^^
;; l|lil|il|II*|K|^tti:(
-n ^illBp^^fflt nffii W^P^tt^^^^
30 — -^x^k: p,^-,'- M-=-= ~~- — ^-^-^ H-=^-M- -- - +4- ^H^"-"^"^
Hd#PMMiTOPTffpjffirHli^ffM
i-:EEE|2iEEEEE^«E;EEEEEEEE:E|4||:EEE:EEEEEEEE+EE:^
■ 1 " " " " " 1 1 - . . . - _|
L i_ 1
1
^
10 ::::::::::::: x 'x x:.::.::.::^:.:
OC-a>0>OrHCMt0'!j"»0«i)t^00<y>OrHc\J(0^iO
O OOOrHrHrHrHr-trHrHrHrHrHCNJCMCMCJ MCM
0» CT> 0» CT» 0>
Years
Fig. 15. — Data from table 17. Freestone production shows no pronounced
secular trend. The equation of the trend of Clingstone production is log
2/ = 1.29031 + .05324a;.
Per Capita Production of Canned Peaches, United States, 1906-1925
OtO C\JCOr-l^<id*iO*OCMI>-Or-tO iTJCM iDO CMJN'^J*
o c- 00 a> o
O O O O rH
•H CV2 to
in vo c^
<J\ O iH CM « "* irt
rH CM CM CM CM CM CM
Years
Fig. 16. — Data from table 17. Data converted to a fresh basis. Production
figures divided by population for corresponding years. Equation for line of
trend is log y = .11394 + .0'2732a;.
1926]
CROPS AND PRICES: PEACHES
21
Canned Peach Production^ California. — The total canned peach
production in California increased 475 per cent from 1906 to 1925
(see %. 11). This increase was due largely to the rapid increase in
Clingstone peach production, which increased at the rate of 15 per cent
a year, as indicated in figure 15. There has been no definite upward
trend in the quantity of Freestone peaches canned.
Per Capita Production of Canned Peaches, United States.^The
per capita production of canned peaches, in equivalent of the fresh
product, increased from 1.2 pounds in 1906 to 3.9 pounds in 1925, an
increase of 247 per cent (see fig. 16).
Candied Peach Exports. — Export tonnage figures for canned
peaches are available only for the years since 1922. During these
three years for which data are available, the percentage of the canned
peach production going into export trade has steadily increased (see
table 2). Approximately 15 per cent of the 1924 crop was exported
as compared to 10 per cent of the 1922 crop.
Table 2. — Exports of Canned Peaches from the United States, 1923-1925
(Year Ending June 30)
Number of cases
Per cent of production
Year
exported
exported
1923...
895,475
9.8
1924...
825,810
11.1
1925...
940,820
14.9
Data from Table 9. The figure 61 was used in converting number of pounds to number of cases.
Main Foreign Markets for Canned Peaches. — In figure 17 it will
be noted that approximately 79 per cent of our total 1924 exports of
canned peaches was sold in the United Kingdom. Cuba was our next
Relative iMroPTAKTE cf our Foreign Canned Peach Markets, 1924
o o o <2 o o
^ w W ■<f tfS yj t~
United Kingdom 862,658 78.
Per
Cases Cent 2-
Cwba
Canada
Germany
France
Belgium
Netherlands
All Others
Total
54,562 5.0
45,411 4.1
16,567 1.5 pi
14,005 1,3
IS, 906 1.3
13,585 1.2
75,209 6.8
1,095,923 100.0
Fig. 17.— Data from table 3.
most important foreign market in 1924, followed by Canada, Germany,
France, Belgium and Netherlands. The amount of canned peaches
exported by the various countries, varies from year to year, as shown
by table 3.
22 CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE [CiRC. 1
Table 3. — Exports of Canned Peaches from the United States by Importing
Countries, 1922-1924
(Number of Cases)
Country 1922 1923 1924
United Kingdom 815,725 482,988 862,658
Cuba 12,985 52,261 54,562
Canada 31,933 38,594 45,411
Germany 1,734 2,280 16,587
France 24,981 9,839 14,005
Belgium 3,001 2,550 13,906
Netherlands 5,521 4,697 13,585
All others 54,083 66,538 75,209
Total 949,963 659,747 1,095,923
Data from Table 10.
Plaices and Purchasing Power of Canning Peaches. — High prices
for peaches do not necessarily mean prosperity, nor low prices,
depression for the peach grower. Prices are only high or low by
comparison. If the price of peaches is high as compared to the things
the peach grower must buy, he is prosperous ; if they are low as com-
pared to the things he must buy, he is not prosperous. Consequently,
money prices must be converted to purchasing power in order to
know the relative position of the peach growers.
The index of wholesale prices compiled by the United States Bureau
of Labor Statistics is used in converting prices of peaches to purchasing
power. This index is now based upon 404 price series. The purchas-
ing power of peaches, therefore, indicates the value of peaches in
exchange for all commodities at wholesale prices compared with pre-
war exchange values.
The relative purchasing power of canning Clingstone and Freestone
peaches, f.o.b. growers' shipping points are shown in figure 18. Two
types of changes are apparent in each of these curves, (1) a long-time
downward movement, and (2) short-time fluctuations.
1. Long-time changes are known as secular trends. Forces deter-
mining secular trends are essentially those which operate steadily and
persistently from year to year, such as increases in population,
improvements in the standard of living, changing habits of consump-
tion, and improvement in methods of production. Consequently the
concept of secular trend is a smooth, regular, long-term movement,
that ' ' which would be recorded if the effects of all accidental and con-
flicting forces could be eliminated, leaving only the effect of normal
growth. ' ' *
The secular trends of the relative purchasing power of both Cling-
stone and Freestone peaches have been constantly downward. From
* Mill, Frederick Cecil, Statistical Methods, p. 256, 1924.
1926]
CROPS AND PRICES: PEACHES
23
1911 to 1925 the relative value of Clingstone peaches declined 11 per
cent, and Freestone peaches declined 27.9 per cent. The reason for
the greater decline in Freestone peaches is to be found chiefly in the
changing demand of the consumers.
Relative Purchasing Power of California Canning Peaches, F.O.B.
Growers' Shipping Points, 1906-1925
Clingstone
Freestone
W r-t
^3?^SSS^S5
% % ^
O O cvj M to
a XT- ^ ^ t~
o
2 ;
«5
240
/
\
160
r ■
\
Clir
gsf
,ne^^
\
/
\
S&
'.ulc
r^
-enc
\.
/
\
\
/
120
\
/
Jl
\
/
\
/
\
80
40
n
\
"**^
V
^
n-"
— ^
r—
-Vi
^
\
/
^
\
X'
160
120
/
\
/
\
\
/
Se
~ulc
■r 7
'-en<
^
Fn
?es-i
one
-^
\
\
/
_:.
^
1
/
— —
\
/
\
80
40
\
^
"^
r^^
^
N to ^
O i-l <\J to ■*
CM W CM C\J W
Fig. 18. — Data from table 26. Equations for lines of trend are: Clingstone,
2/= 101.026 — .718:k; Freestone, y~96A — 1.5x.
2. The actual values fluctuate about the secular trend, being some-
times above and sometimes below it. These fluctuations are caused in
part by cyclical changes and in part by accidental changes. The
cyclical fluctuations are characterized by more or less regular swings
through alternating periods of depression and prosperity. The acci-
dental changes are irregular and are, therefore, incapable of being
foreseen.
In the analysis of peach prices, the cyclical and irregular fluctua-
tions are not separated, but it must be borne in mind that the move-
ments included under the term cylical fluctuations include the
irregular changes as well as the periodic swings through the business
cvele.
24
CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE
[ClRC. 1
The short time movements in the prices of Clingstone and Free-
stone peaches are very definitely related, as shown in figure 19. A
change in the price of one is accompanied by a similar change in the
price of the other. If the price asked for Clingstone peaches is high
Cyclical Fluctuations in the Relative Purchasing Power of California
Canning Peaches, T.O.B. Growers' Shipping Points,
1906-1925
/;
\
^'
\
^
Ci
ingi
■for,
')
Fre
?stc
-^'
'
\
/
\
/
/
\/
\
/
><
\
^T"
____„„
f
""i
^^
\
A
^
■f
■^.
f
^
f'
' s
■^
"^
1
r
Fig. 19. — Data corrected for secular trend.
as compared to the price asked for Freestone peaches, consumers will
buy less Clingstones and more Freestones. The willingness of the con-
sumers to substitute one kind of canned peaches for the other brings
about an early and exact adjustment between the prices of them.
Belation Between C miners' Opening Prices and Growers' Prices. —
The opening price which canners quote to the jobbers is generally,
although not always, the best index of what they believe the consumers
will pay for peaches. Does this price at which the canners expect to
sell the finished product bear any significant relationship to the price
they pay the growers for canning peaches ? This relationship is illus-
trated in figure 20. Two tendencies are apparent : first, that the move-
ments of the price series are in the same general direction ; and second,
that the canners ' opening prices fluctuate less than the prices received
by the growers.
1. The secular trends in both cases have been downward. From
1911 to 1925 canners' opening prices, converted to a purchasing power
basis, declined 14.7 per cent, and growers' purchasing power declined
11 per cent. The cyclical fluctuation in the purchasing power of the
two commodities also bear a close relationship ; that is, each change in
1926]
CROPS AND PRICES: PEACHES
25
Eelative Purchasing Power of California Clingstone Peaches,
1911-1925
Years
Fig. 20. — Eelative value f.o.b. growers' shipping points: decline in secular
trend ^11 per cent; relative variation = 35.1 per cent. Data from table 26.
Eelative value canners' opening quotations on No. 2% Choice: decline in
secular trend =14.7 per cent; relative variation = 12.4 per cent. Data from
the California Packing Corporation's Annual, July, 1925, p. 6.
the values of No. 2% Choice is accompanied by a similar change in
values received by the growers. This indicates that the price which
the grower receives is largely determined by the price which the
canners believe the consumers will pay.
2. From 1911 to 1925 the relative variation in the purchasing
power of growers' peaches was 35.1 per cent, while that of No. 2%
Choice was only 12.4 per cent. The reason why the canners' prices
are more stable than growers' prices is that the price of peaches is
only one of the costs that enter into the finished product. Other costs
such as labor, sugar, and cans do not necessarily fluctuate in the same
direction nor to the same amount as the prices canners receive for the
manufactured product.
Relation Between Production and Purchasing Power of Canning
Peaches. — The amount of Freestone peaches that will be canned during
a given year will depend in part upon the price offered for canning
peaches as compared to the price offered for dried and fresh peaches.
When the price offered for canning peaches is relatively higher than
that offered for dried and fresh peaches, a portion of certain varieties
of Freestone peaches which are normally dried and shipped fresh will
be sold to the canners. This tendency is illustrated in figure 21, which
shows that a high price for canning Freestone peaches tends to be
accompanied by a large pack and vice versa.
26
CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE
[CiRC. 1
Cyclical Fluctuations in the Production and Relative Purchasing Power
OF California Canning Peaches, 1906-1925
f2
♦1
,
rt ee^onips
1
/
\
/
_x
,t>n>duii-io\ /
\..
/
/
f ^
\
\
i
/
/
\
>
^
\
/
\
// ^
^)(
\
^
\
\
\
/
/^
1
\'
/
-,\
> —
N...
y
-2
>
/
\
f
\ LA- 'Revive Pc rch^sinc^
Po^>\
-^
/^
/
j
L
C//
igs
to/7«
•s
♦<-
\/
\
/
S^A
roi/c
fc-f-U
>/7
/j
r'\
i
♦1
-1
-?.
i
\
/
y
/
\
/
\
/
\
\\'^
\
^^^
s,^
\
.\
/
/'
f
>
f-^.
V
>
f
\
/
>
\
/
>>
•*>
>
/^
^Rehrf-i\)ie Pcrchosin^ P<->we)r
/
8 S §
>Hr-4t-lr-(<-i r^»-«r^N CJCVl CMCMCM
O) o> o>
Years
Fig. 21. — Data corrected for secular trend.
The only outlet for the bulk of the Clingstone peaches is canning,
and, therefore, it might be expected that the growers would receive a
high price for a small crop and a low price for a large crop. But such
is not the case as shown in figure 21. Because of other complicating
factors there seems to be no definite prevailing relationship between
production and price. The possibility of varying the pack of Freestone
peaches according to the price offered is one of the important compli-
cating factors. If the Clingstone peach crop is small, making for a
high price, the possibility of obtaining a large quantity of Freestone
peaches will prevent the price from going as high as it otherwise
would ; and conversely, the withdrawing of a portion of peaches which
are normally canned when the Clingstone crop is large prevents the
price from going as low as it otherwise would.
A second complicating factor is the influence of a carryover on
the following year's price. In 1922 the production of Clingstone
peaches was large, and the growers obtained a high price, mainly
because the canners were able to dispose of the small crop of 1921 on
an advancing price level. The price which the canners paid the
growers, however, was too high to enable them to dispose of the crop
profitably. A declining price trend developed, resulting in a carry-
over of approximately 2,000,000 cases. Although the 1923 Clingstone
1926] CROPS AND PRICES: PEACHES 27
crop was much smaller than that of 1922, canners were not willing to
buy after their unfortunate experience with the previous crop, and it
was with considerable difficulty that peach growers were able to obtain
$30 per ton as compared to $60 per ton in 1922. A similar situation
prevailed with most of the canning fruits in California.*
A third complicating factor is the competition of other canned
fruits, particularly pineapples, pears, apricots, and cherries. The size
of the packs of these fruits and the prices at which they are offered to
consumers exert an important influence on the price at which a given
sized pack of canned peaches can be sold.
These three illustrations indicate that the factors determining the
price of peaches are extremely complex. A detailed study of them,
however, is beyond the scope of this circular.
DRIED PEACHES
Muirs and Lovells are the main varieties of peaches utilized for
drying. Muirs are primarily used only for drying, but Lovells are
also used for canning and fresh shipments.
The bulk of dried peaches are produced in the San Joaquin Valley,
mainly in the counties of Fresno, Tulare, Merced, Stanislaus and
Kings.
Production of Dried Peaches. — The production of dried peaches
from 1906 to 1925 is shown by the upper curve in figure 22. There
are two distinct trends apparent in this curve, (1) an upward trend
during the first half of the period, and (2) a downward trend during
the latter half of the period. In 1915 the trend of production was
approximately 136 per cent higher than in 1906, and in 1925 it was
35 per cent lower than in 1916.
Exports of Dried Peaches. — In figure 22 it will be noted that
exports of dried peaches increased more rapidly than production dur-
ing the period from 1906 to 1915. Since 1915 the trend of exports has
declined, this decline being at approximately the same rate as the
decline in production.
The exports of dried peaches as a percentage of the total production
are shown in figure 23. The secular trend of per cent exported was
upward during the first half of the period, and during the latter half
of the period it remained at approximately the same level.
* Interview F. B. Scliinitt, California Canning Peach Growers, Feb. 15, 1926.
28
CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE
[CiRC. 1
United States' Dried Peach Production and Exports, 1906-1924
Prod. 1
i
§
§
8
§
CM
§
o
s
1
g
ca
§
§
i.
8
o
§
i
1
i
i
i
o
in
i-i
to
O
CM
in
CM
CM
?5
in
to
s
CO
CVj
CJ>
to
o
CM
in
to
CM
i-t
CM
CO
CM
^
CM
JS
Q
Exports
o
S5
in
o
to
to
r-i
CM
in
CM
to
to
CM
i
1
r-4
CO
Oi
it
•>
CO
O
to
-.
1
I-* r-i :0 CM
tOlOC*tO'^CvJCM«0»-<lOCM tOCM
40.000 G ■,^. f^ ~~^ -i i.
^^- to^^^'^^^-%-^-^^^
p:^" ■■■' -
' J5 7Cij far J "^^
IttB^syii^lli^^
rnj ^j* ^^ T"-^ ^^'^ '-'' ^f^ ^^ -^\
20,000 -rjr-T^ ^S ^^ ^r #
|liii=^l||^|p
^gi-:i-i^-it
l^EilB^it^-
"'"=-'#^t3Ei:=p
^ 1 # ' 1
III ' '
]/ 1 1 j
! i
M '
m \ i '
II 1
M 1 r T ^
ill ' i
_ _ Li .. T
i 4 1 _LLxL IL
1 n nnn f' ' ' 1 M
1 1 1 TI T--n
• i 1 1 1' 1 : it
r':-':' -1-:^ :;-' k;
9,000 ,..,^-: .:--;:p^^^
8,000 -^n^n^^^^J
I^BirHE-^-T-^
ii|%E^:i^-,^^
6,000 -7:^--— -^^|=^^i
-tepSBiP^Hp
5,000 : ; ^ : ;^ . ^
4,000 -^^E-— ^
3,000 ^-^--^--|^|
^M|i
3.000 i^l^lH^
i^ppMI
^ = ±#i?±^
T ^'i 1 f! 1 Ti "i
1 1 1 1 1 1 ' i i ' 1 '
i 1 1 i
1 1 ' i 1 i ' 1 '
n '^ M 1
..^ j_4_i^D_j^ jTpij
.i..rrr-r:: _^. z " jjt -Jl±]
' i J ! L L 1.
1 i ! ■ : ' 1 . ! 1 L !
^1 n 1 1 1 1
1 J 1 M t 1 i
TiTii-J -i^f'^ ^
T n ±r xt 1 r
1 AAA / n- 1 j III
1 1I '-i 1 r 1 ! 1 -tTl
T'Ti li-- -n-iT
1,000 i ; = / ^L ' i ! ;
:;-! "i-;^ -&:^ .^ i- ^-:v
900 • / ;. ^
700 -^/— — -:-^ — -
600 -jiy 1 ::5- j-Mlii;-
^-f-^^H:::^-- T- ^ -^.^^
-T-^^-r;-^^-^.^
500 L^^W-l-h"[44- 1 Ml!
^h^t;-^-^S
COO>Or-«CM lO'^lO
i-irHCMCMCM CMCMCM
Years
Fig. 22. — Data from table 9 and 18. Equations for lines of trend of dried
peaches are: 1906-1915, 2/ = 14.12 + 2.13a;; 1916-1925, 2/ = 32.08 — 1.25rr.
The five-year average, 1920-1924, exports of dried peaclies was
3306 tons or 13.1 per cent of tlie total production. Tlie percentage
exported varied from year to year, which indicates that the amount
of peaches exported depends largely upon the conditions in the foreign
markets rather than upon the size of our production.
1926]
CROPS AND PRICES: PEACHES
29
Percentage of United States' Dried Peaches Exported, 1906-1924
Years
Fig. 23. — Data from tables 9 and 18. Equation for line of trend is
y ■= 13.944 + A15x —■ .058x', origin 1915.
Main Foreign Markets for Dried Peaches. — As shown in figure 24,
Germany was the most important market for our dried peaches in
1924, taking 43.2 per cent of our total exports. The United Kingdom
Eelative Importance of our Foreign Dried Peach Markets, 1924
Tons
Germany 2,712
United Kingdom 1,079
Canada
Netherlands
Sweden
France
Other countries
Total
513 8.2
6,276 100.0
Fig. 24.— Data from table 4.
was next in importance, followed by Canada, Netherlands, Sweden,
and France. These six countries purchased 91.8 per cent of our total
exports in that year.
The amount of dried peaches that each country imports from the
United States varies from year to year as indicated in table 4. Our
exports to Germany and the United Kingdom have increased steadily
during these three years. Germany and Netherlands show an espe-
cially large increase in 1924 over the two preceding years. Canada,
Sweden, and other countries have imported approximately the same
30
CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE
[CiRC. 1
amount during the three years. Our exports to France in 1923 and
1924 were decidedly less than in 1922.
Table 4. — Exports of Dried Peaches from the United States by Importing
Countries, 1922-1924
(Number of Tons)
Country
Germany
United Kingdom.
Canada
Netherlands
Sweden
France
Other countries...
1922
1923
1924
183
305
2,712
222
574
1,079
1,062
803
922
105
45
723
301
247
275
541
40
52
468
314
513
Total
Data from Table 10.
2,328
,276
Per Capita Consumption of Dried Peaches. — In equivalent of the
fresh product, the trend of per capita consumption of dried peaches
in the United States increased from 1.6 pounds in 1906 to 3 pounds
in 1915, and then declined to 1.8 pounds in 1924 (see fig. 25).
Per Capita Consumption of Dried Peaches, United States, 1906-1924
(Equivalent Fresh Pounds)
WCV|«0 t-(0<0<0 OOir^OO <OOi OOOJOO tOOCM
.»•••••• •••• •••••• •»•
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
/
\
/
/
\
/
/
■<Se^
afar
■ tr
snd
/
V
^
^^
r
"y
[^
>^
7
y"
z
>
^
/
/
^
^
^
^
K^
Pe
r o
7ph
'a c
'orn.
um^
yfio
n^
\
f
^
/
% 5
a
■> C
I I
> I
\ 7
\ %
^ ^
■* r
1* If
■\ r-
a
3 t
-t r
c
-1 r
% %
c
>
4 O
I Cv
i «
Fig. 25. — Exports subtracted from production, and the result divided by
the United States' population. Equation for line of trend is
2/ = 3.0033 + .0112ic — .0166a;-, origin 1915.
Purchasing Power of Dried Peaches. — The trend of purchasing
power of dried peaches, f.o.b. growers' shipping points, shows a steady
decline during the 20-year period (see fig. 26). In 1925 the line of
trend was 14 per cent lower than in 1911.
1926]
CROPS AND PRICES: PEACHES
31
Eelative Purchasing Power of California Dried Peaches, F.O.B. Growers'
Shipping Points, 1906-1925
•,is<
rW-iQO
O
to
ir>
c-
1i«
^rt o>
o
CO
to
iJ^"-*
CM
f-H
^
240
200
160
120
60
40
^
\
A
J
\
4
^s
?cuK
ir "
/
\
>
=^
I—
N
■
^A
^
--
^
CM CO «il< in
O r^ <M W ^ «>
W CM M M «M gJ
Years
Fig. 26. — Data from table 26. Equation for line of trend is 2/ ^ 108.1 — 1.09a:.
The relation between production and purchasing power of dried
peaches is shown in figure 27. A high production is generally, though
not always, accompanied by a low price and vice versa.
Cyclical Fluctuations in the Production and Eelative Purchasing Power
OF California Dried Peaches, 1906-1925
+ 3
+ 2
. ^
^Pu
-Chi
7Sfn
7 P
ywe
r-
\
\
/
\.
/
/
\
+ 1
V
\
y
/
s
\
/
V
/
\;
s
V
- 1
- 2
- 3
/
>
\
A
^-^
V
>
\
/
/
\
/
\
^
A
t
>
s
/
\
\
A^^
Pro
due
Hof
r
5 c
I \
^ \
-1 r
:J I
% \
3 ;s
1-
>
t
H r
-1 r
i> c
5 •-
■1
1 cv
1 c\
1" in
' 3
Years
Fig. 27. — Data corrected for secular trend.
Figure 28 shows the close relationship between the prices of can-
ning Freestone and dried peaches. The general tendency is for a
change in the price of one to be accompanied by a similar change in
the price of the other. This is because some varieties of Freestone
peaches, particularly the Lovell, may be either canned or dried.
32
CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE [CiRC. 1
Cyclical Fluctuations in the Eelative Purchasing Power of California
Dried and Canning Freestone Peaches, 1906-1925
♦3
+1
^
\
/
/
\
V
k
Orn-d-
T
\-
^
/\
f
\
y
\
^
/
\
\
/
/
\
y
\
^
^_
f
\
^
^
/
f
M::r
-1
-2
-3
-^.
1
-^/r-fi'€'i/-0^e
g
I
> c
D a
3 C
->
H ;
H r
j;
1 I
1 u
■<i-i,HrHi-<<MCM(MCJCMC\J
Years
Fig. 28. — Data corrected for secular trend.
FEESH PEACHES
Varieties of Shipping Peaches in California. — There are approxi-
matelp 28 varieties of peaches produced in California, which may be
shipped fresh. The Elberta is easily the most important of the ship-
ping varieties, making up perhaps 80 per cent of the total. Other
varieties in order of their importance are Lovell, Salway, St. John,
Triumph, Crawford, Levi, Phillip, and Tuscan.*
Peaches, Main California Shipping Varieties and Time of Eipening
Variety
Time of
ripening
June July • Aug.
03airooo>o>o~Jwo -J
Sept.
N> 03 »-• to to
»«>• •-• -5 t^- l-> <D
Triumph, Semi-cling June 12-June 30
St, John Free
Crawford Free
Tuscan Cling
Elberta Free
Lovell Free
Salway Free
Phillip Cling
Levi Cling
June 28-July 15
July 10-Aug. 13
July 15-July 27
July 21-Aug. 6
Aug. 1-Aug. 20
Aug. 2 5-Sept.l5
Aug. 26-Sept.l5
Sept. 2-Sept.25
Fig. 29. — Data from the California Fruit Exchange.
* Interview, F. A. Harlow, Jr., California Fruit Exchange, Feb. 15, 1926.
1926]
CROPS AND PRICES: PEACHES
33
Of the nine varieties listed above, Triumph ripens earliest, as
indicated in figure 29. The Elberta has a short ripening period, from
July 21 to August 6. Considering all varieties of peaches the ripening
period normally extends from June 1 to September 25.
Shipping Districts for Fresh Peaches in California. — The principal
districts in California from which fresh peaches are shipped are the
upper San Joaquin Valley in the section surrounding Atwater, Living-
ston, and Denair; Placer County; sections in Fresno and Tulare
counties; and the Suisun district in Solano county.
Production of Fresh Peaches, United States and Californiu. — The
trend of total fresh peach production in the United States has
increased but slowly as shown in figure 30, the increase from 1906 to
1925 being only 3.2 per cent. This increase is considerably less than
Production of Fresh Peaches, United States and California, and
United States Population, 1906-1925
Peaches: w
Years
Fig. 30. — Data from tables 19 and 20. Equations for lines of trend are:
United States, 2/ = 804.37 + 1.34it:; California, i/:= 17.177 + 1.067a;.
that of the United States population — the population having increased
13.3 per cent. During the same period, the trend of California's inter-
state fresh peach shipments increased from 17,177 tons to 37,450 tons,
^n increase of 118 per cent.
34
CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE
[CiRC. 1
Fresh Peach Exports. — The tonnage of fresh peaches exported
from the United States is small, amounting to less than 1 per cent
of the total fresh peach production, or approximately 2 per cent of
the total fresh peach carlot shipments (see table 5).
Table 5. — Fresh Peaches, United States, Exports, Production, and Shipments,
1922-1924
Exports
Total United States
Per cent exported of —
Year
Production
Shipments
Production
Shipments
I
II
III
1922-23
6,585
7,533
8,086
969,089
767,217
1,012,338
378,972
323,868
407,628
.68
.98
.80
1 74
1923-24
2 33
1924-25
1 98
Sources of data :
Column I. See Table 9.
Column II. See Table 19.
Column III. See Table 24. The figure 12 is used in converting number of cars to number of
tons, as there are approximately 12 tons of peaches to a car.
Per Capita Production of Fresh Peaches. — Figure 31 shows that
the trend of per capita production of fresh peaches has been steadily
downward, declining from 18.4 pounds in 1906 to 14.5 pounds in 1925,
a decrease of 21.6 per cent.
Per Capita Production of Fresh Peaches, United States, 1906-1925
i-l W lO to lO
Pounds
30
20
15
cy>
«
in
o
■#
N
(O
o
in
ot
) o
r-
•<t
CT> r- to ca to
,
V
/
V
p
• Ca
o/i-c
HSHC
»/7
r
/
\
^
/
\
J
J:
\
fi
ir i
-4
-enc
J
\
/
\
T
7
^
1
j
f—
r
\
1
\
/
^
r^
-N
o •-• <^
O r-* est
c\J W C\J
rig. 31. — Data from table 19. Production figures divided by population for
corresponding years. Equation for line of trend is 2/^=18.44 — .21a;.
1926]
CROPS AND PRICES : PEACHES
35
California's Interstate Fresh Peach Shipments. — As shown in
figure 30 the interstate shipments of fresh peaches from California
have increased 118 per cent since 1906. The trend of interstate ship-
ments is characterized by a uniform amount of increase, rather than
by a uniform rate of increase. During this 20-year period, there has
been a normal increase of 1067 tons per year.
The yearly shipments are sometimes above and sometimes below
the secular trend. Although these fluctuations are caused in part by
the fluctuations in the total peach production in California, a more
important cause is the fluctuations in peach production in all states
other than California. Whenever the peach production in other states
is above normal, there is a tendency for California's interstate ship-
ments to fall below normal ; and conversely, whenever the production
is below normal in the other states, California's shipments are above
normal. Tliis condition is illustrated in figure 32.
Cyclical Fluctuations, Fresh Peach Production, 1906-1924
+3
+2
+1
-1
-2
-3
'Frt
'sh
oea
7h /
^rac
'uc-t
<on
- Al
/
Stt
7-f-es
o/
'yer
i-ho
n C
7//fc
'rnic
}
/
--.
/
V
i
\
/
V
"v^
J
\\
y
^";
<
••
< y
y
V
\
\
\
/
\
A,
A
/
"^
/
\
/
\
n
/
\
t
Col
ifor
nia
Tnt.
?rsi
"■ai-f.
5h
f'pmt
yn-i-5
f
>
\
\
f
""^
Years
Fig. 32. — Data corrected for secular trend.
Seasonal Variation in California's Interstate Shipments. — As indi-
cated in figure 33, the fresh peach shipments from California normally
begin the first week in June and continue for approximately 20 weeks,
until the third week in October. The bulk of the peaches, however, are
shipped during the ninth, tenth, and eleventh weeks, which are usually
the last week in July and the first two weeks in August. The ship-
ments during this period are confined almost entirely to the Elberta
variety. Consequently it is with the Elberta that the growers of
peaches for fresh shipments are most interested.
36
CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE
[Cmc. 1
Seasonal Variation in California Interstate Fresh Peach Shipments
o
700
Or-IOiCMinrH
r-ICOlO COr-llAlOr^ O>t-(MO
r-*t~ lO^in to \Si r-t ■^ KO \0 (M r^ (O
600
500
400
300
200
100
i-«oj tO'^m top-oooo i-i«Mto\i< loujt- coa>o
Weeks in Shipping Season
Jvine July August Sept.
October
Fig. 33. — Data from California Fruit News. Seasonal variation computed
for years 1917-1925. Data for years 1921-1925 given in table 22.
Relative Importance of the Principal Fresh Peach Producing
States. — Fourteen states ship approximately 92 per cent of the total
United States fresh peaches, as shown in figure 34. Georgia, alone,
Carlot Shipments of Fresh Peaches by States
(Average 1920-1924)
Cars
Itlt
Georgia
9,178
33,0
New York
4,135
14.9
California
2,862
10.3
Colorado
1,354
4.9
New Jersey
1,175
4.2
Arkansas
1,147
4.1
Michigan
1,075
3.9
Ubah
949
3.4
Washington
877
3.2
North Csirolina
859
3.1
Illinois
705
2.5
Ohio
474
1.7
Texas
399
1.4
Tennessee
285
1.0
All others
2,319
8.4
Fig. 34.— Data from table 23.
shipped 33 per cent of the total, and New York shipped 14.9 per cent.
California is third in imi)ortance as a fresh peach shipping state,
although its shipments were only 10.3 per cent of the total.
1926]
CROPS AND PRICES: PEACHES
37
During the particular period in which the bulk of her crop is
marketed, however, California is a more important factor in the fresh
peach market, as shown in figure 35. California's interstate shipments
averaged approximately 19 per cent of all fresh peaches shipped
during August for the five-year period, 1921-1925.
Percentage of Monthly Shipments op United States' Fkesh Peaches
Shipped by California During California's Shipping
Season, 1921-1925
—^ O <0 00 00 lO
Fer. • • •
cent <^ ;:^ o
C r-4 bP cues
^ -i < co>*
Fig. 35. — Data from table 24. The solid black bars represent the percentages
of the total yearly carlot shipments shipped by California.
Figure 36 shows the main fresh peach producing states arranged
according to the time of shipment. The vertical scale shows the num-
ber of cars shipped by each state, and the horizontal scale shows the
length of the shipping period. Although the time at which each state
ships will vary to some extent from year to year, there is a strong
tendency for the states to maintain their relative positions.
The data presented in this chart show clearly that California's
fresh peaches are subjected to considerable competition from other
areas. During the first week in August, 1925, the three states,
Georgia, Arkansas, and North Carolina each shipped approximately
the same number of cars as California. The individual shipments
from other states were not heavy during this period, but the aggregate
amounted to a considerable volume.
38
CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE
[CiRC. 1
H ^=
b£
1926]
CROPS AND PRICES: PEACHES
39
California's Fresh Peaches are Widely Distributed. — California's
fresh peaches are distributed among a larger number of markets than
are other deciduous tree fruits.* Many markets having a population
of only 5000 take one or more full carloads of peaches, although it is
impossible to sell a carload of cherries, plums, or pears in them. The
wide distribution of California's fresh peaches is also illustrated by
the fact that only 1189 cars or 40.5 per cent of the 2934 cars of peaches
shipped from California during the four months of June, July,
August, and September, 1925, were unloaded in the 31 cities outside
of California, in which unloads were reported to the Bureau of
Agricultural Economics.
Principal Markets for California Fresh Peaches. — The larger pro-
portion of California fresh peaches are marketed in the area west of
Chicago and north of Omaha. In this area the Bureau of Agricultural
Economics reports unloads in only the nine markets given in figure 37.
Nine Important Markets for California Fresh Peaches, 1925
Fig. 37.— Data from table 6.
Of the 1189 cars that California unloaded in the 31 markets in 1925,
909 or 76.5 per cent were unloaded in these nine markets. These
figures corroborate the experience of the California Fruit Exchange,
which states that the bulk of its Freestone peaches are marketed in
this area.*
* Interview, F. A. Harlow, Jr., California Fruit Exchange, Sacramento,
Feb. 15, 1926.
40
CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE
[CiRC. 1
States Which Compete Directly With California. — What states
ship peaches to the same market at the same time as California? Table
6 gives the answer to this question in detail for 1925. Since California
markets the major portion of her crop in August — in 1925, 71.2 per
cent of the California peaches unloaded in the nine markets were
unloaded in August — table 6 is confined to that month.
Table 6. — Fresh Peaches; Carlot Unloads in Nine Cities by States of Origin
During August, 1925
Ark.
Calif.
Colo.
Ga.
111.
N.J.
City
Cars
Per
cent
Cars
Per
cent
Cars
Per
cent
Cars
Per
cent
Cars
Per
cent
Cars
Per
cent
Chicago
113
4
24
14
29
16.9
6.3
16.9
13.2
32.6
148
19
49
83
56
164
71
37
22
22.1
30.2
34.5
78.3
62.9
87.7
79.8
20.1
21.0
39
34
11
4
3
5.8
54.0
7.8
3.8
3.4
81
12.1
223
33.4
12
1.8
5
3.5
24
2
16.9
1.9
Portland
St. Paul
8
9.1
6
6.7
2
2.2
Seattle
Total
192
11.7
649
39.8
97
5.9
86
5.3
251
15.4
12
.7
Tenn.
Mich.
Ind.
Utah
Wash.
All other
City
Cars
Per
cent
Cars
Per
cent
Cars
Per
cent
Cars
Per
cent
Cars
Per
cent
Cars
Per
cent
Total
Chicago
21
3.1
11
1.6
9
1.3
6
1
11
3
1
19
1
147
83
.9
1.6
7.7
2.8
1.1
10.2
1.1
79.9
79.0
7
1.0
670
5
7.9
63
2
1.4
2
1.4
9
6.4
5
3.5
142
106
89
Portland
4
1
2.1
1.1
187
St. Paul
89
Seattle
184
Spokane
105
Total
23
1.4
13
.8
18
1.1
5
.3
272
16.6
17
1.0
1635
Data from Bureau of Agricultural Economics, U. S. D. A.
In August, 1925, 1635 carloads of peaches were unloaded in the
nine markets, of which 649 or 39.8 per cent were from California.
More than 10 other states unloaded some peaches in one or more of
these nine markets during that month. Washington is the largest
single competitor of California in this area, followed closely by Illinois
and Arkansas. Washington's competition, however, is confined chiefly
to the cities of Portland, Seattle, and Spokane, while Illinois is an
important competitor in Chicago and Milwaukee, and Arkansas' com-
petition is most keenly felt in Chicago, Omaha, Milwaukee, and
Minneapolis.
1926] CROPS AND PRICES: PEACHES 41
In this area, Portland was the most important market for Cali-
fornia peaches, followed by Chicago, Minneapolis, St. Paul, Omaha,
Milwaukee, Seattle, Spokane, and Denver. California was the most
important factor in the cities of Portland, St. Paul, Minneapolis,
Omaha, and Milwaukee. In Seattle and Spokane, Washington was a
more important factor than California. Illinois unloaded more car-
loads of peaches in Chicago, and Colorado unloaded more carloads in
Denver than did California.
The Market for Fresh Peaches is Nation-wide. — Although Cali-
fornia has her own particular market, to which she is more accessible
than many of her competitors, and in which she sells the bulk of her
crop, these markets are by no means secure. Other sections can and do
send peaches to these markets whenever the price is sufficiently higher
than in their own particular markets to justify the additional expense.
The development of railway facilities, such as refrigeration and
fast freight, has made it possible for each of the main producing areas
to reach the principal markets in the United States. Whenever, there-
fore, a section has a larger crop than can be sold in its own particular
markets, it sends the surplus to markets which another section
normally considers peculiarly its own. Likewise, when a section has a
short crop its marketing area is narrowed, and the more distant
markets which it normally supplies are then supplied from other
sections. Those states which market their peaches during the same
period are, therefore, potential competitors, even though they are
separated by the width of the United States. Thus in 1924, when
Georgia had a relatively large crop and California had a relatively
small crop, Georgia unloaded over three times as many carloads of
peaches in Chicago during August as did California. On the other
hand in 1925, when California's crop was larger and Georgia's crop
smaller than in 1924, California unloaded almost twice as many
peaches in Chicago during August as did Georgia.
Purchasing Power of Elherta Peaches. — The secular trend of the
purchasing power of Elberta peaches f.o.b. growers' shipping points
declined 26 per cent from 1911 to 1925 (see fig. 38).
Growers received less for their peaches in 1922 than in any other
year during the 20-year period, with the exception of 1915. Since 1922
the purchasing power has increased steadily approaching in 1925 the
relatively high points of 1916 and 1921.
42
CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE
[CiRC. 1
Relative Purchasing Power of Elberta Peaches, F.O.B. Growers' Shipping
Points, 1906-1925
JSm r^ N iH r-» i-I i-«
CM a» M N
240
9 Art
y
\
160
/
\
120
80
\
V
_>
Seau/of Tnrnd^
\
/
\
=
-
^
/
S
y
V
/
-7*
^
^
^^^
^
A.
-i-.
^*"^
40
/
N
^^
^
^
■^
Fig. 38. — Data from table 27. Equation for line of trend is
2/ = 82.75 — 1.55ic, origin 1911.
Close Relation Between Peach Prices in the Various Markets. —
The fact that the main markets for peaches in the United States are
reasonably accessible to every producing area is responsible for the
close interrelation of prices paid for peaches in each of the markets.
Marketing organizations watch all of the markets carefully, and if,
for any reason, they believe that a higher net price will be obtained in
one market than in another, they act accordingly.
It is true, of course, that prices in two or more markets do not
always move in the same direction or to the same extent, but there is
a strong tendency toward the same general movement as is seen in
figure 39.
Purchasing Power of California Elberta Peaches, New York and Chicago
Auction Markets, 1919-1925
New York wSgcDwjjjjjjg
Chicago So- s 35 5 S S3
120
Oe-^tO 0<010<T>4 C\J<010<T> OtOrtCgtO'*
in <o CM lO M I
O >/C Tg O
Ai?u V3/-/(-^
*Sk:-
^-?^
^s
:5;
''^\
■4^
^ ::;
^
entlog
-1 a>
S
S{R5
>0 CM
g'-ssss" gj-" J4 sjs
CM -H 00
lO rH (O
S
li'^ ^^^
Month
1
1
ft ill
II
i
u
Year
1919
1920 1921
1922
1923
CO m CM <n •*
1925
Fig. 39, — Data from the New York Daily Fruit Eeporter and the Chicago
Fruit and Vegetable Reporter. Prices are the weighted daily average prices
for all grades.
1926] CROPS AND PRICES: PEACHES 43
There are numerous reasons why markets get out of line with each
other. One important reason is the lack of knowledge on the part of
marketing organizations. When a car of peaches leaves California, the
shipper does not know what the conditions in a particular market will
be upon its arrival. He can postpone the selection of a particular
market in which to sell until the car reaches a diversion point, but even
then he can not be sure how many cars from other sections will arrive
in each of his available markets at the same time as his own. Neither
does he know the exact demand situation in each of the markets ; that
is, how many peaches can be sold at certain prices. Competition of
other fruits and vegetables, and weather conditions, all uncertain
factors, must be taken into consideration. Because of these indeter-
minate factors, it is not surprising that shippers make mistakes.
Seasonal Variatien in Prices of California Elbert a Peaches . —
Figure 39 indicates that there is no particular time during the ship-
ping season when California growers may normally expect a higher
price for their Elberta peaches in New York and Chicago than at any
other time. Some years, as in 1921, the price was highest at the
beginning of the season, but in other years, as in 1923, the price
advanced during the season.
The price paid for California peaches at any particular time is
influenced by the total volume of peaches offered at that time. Conse-
quently, the same variety of peaches of equal quality will sell at
approximately the same price. Thus, California growers will receive
the same price for their peaches as is paid for peaches from other
states, assuming of course that they are of the same variety and
quality.
Figure 40 shows the prices obtained for Eastern peaches at New^
York and Chicago for the year 1923-1925. The general tendency indi-
cated in this chart is for prices to fall during the first part of July,
which is the time when a large volume of peaches are being shipped
from the Southern states (see fig. 36). As the volume of shipments
decreases, the tendency is for prices to increase. In 1925, prices
increased considerable during August. In figure 36 it will be noted
that the total shipments were decreasing during this period. For the
years 1923, 1924, and 1925, California peaches would have met less
competition, and higher prices would have been obtained in New York
and Chicago if they had been marketed later. There are not sufficient
data available, however, to determine if this condition is likely to
prevail in the future.
44
CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE
[Cmc. 1
Eastern Peach Prices, by Weeks, New York and Chicago, 1923-1925
Kew York oiotoiocoocooioeocoio ooocoio cooooooooffltocotoinoajtoooj ooi^iooio^cortinoointOioin to n>£>
ChlCd^O WOtOOCDCOOOOlOtOOO^OcOlOtOCOm toOinaDQDlOa)in<DtOCOaDCO(DtOCOCO lOtOintOlOinoOi^COtQiOiOOGD lOCDCO
4Jto«ootO^'Oocot^<i>>noc\Jcor-iHcoto ,-t»AewGOcocMrHc*-io<-i<-i(Z)'^*^rHcoto t^rHC\j^c>jNtninr-'i5r-(Cvjoj^co e^ ^o^^
I I M I I I
Week r-iooiocaCT.<otoo
ending '^ '-"^ ^mw
i I I M I I I I I I I 1 I I I
I
1924
Fig. 40. — Data from Crops and Markets. Prices at a given date are for the
most important variety offered at that particular time.
California Fresh Peaches on an Eastern Shipment Basis. — Cali-
fornia produces a larger amount of fresh peaches than is consumed
within the state, and is, therefore, on an Eastern shipment basis. Dur-
ing the past 20 years, the interstate fresh peach shipments have
increased steadily, despite the rapid increase in the state's population.
Being on an Eastern shipment basis, the prices paid for peaches
consumed in California will normally be lower than the Eastern prices
by the cost of transportation. The competition of sellers within the
state will tend to lower the price so that they will receive approxi-
mately, the same return as they receive for peaches sold outside the
state.
For this reason, the prices received by California growers for fresh
peaches are determined by factors over which they have little control.
The important factors on the demand side are (1) the level of pros-
perity in the consuming markets, (2) the weather conditions at the
time the fruit arrives, and (3) the competition of other fruits and
vegetables. On the supply side the important factor is the total
amount of peaches offered for sale, which in turn depends upon the
total production of fresh peaches in the United States.
COST OF PRODUCING CANNING PEACHES, STANISLAUS
COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, 1925
By a, a. JUNGEEMAN, Farm Advisor, Stanislaus County, and
L. W. FLUHARTY, Farm Management Demonstrator
Data on the costs of producing canning peaches in Stanislaus
County were collected in the peach growers contest which is conducted
by the horticultural department of the Stanislaus County Farm
Bureau. The contest began on October 1, 1924, and continued for one
year. Complete labor and cost records were kept by each contestant
for the entire period.*
Total Cost of Froducing Canning Peaches. — Table 7 indicates that
the average cost of producing canning peaches in the 16 full bearing
orchards in Stanislaus County during 1925 was $318,77, or $27.25
per ton.
Table 7. — Cost of Producing Canning Peaches on 16 Full Bearing Orchards,
Stanislaus County, California, 1925t
Cost per Cost per Percentage
Item acre ton of cost
Labor 1159.00 $13.64 49.9
Spray material 4.70 .41 1.5
Water tax 5.69 .48 1.8
County taxes 6.80 .53 2.1
Miscellaneous expense 2.48 .21 .8
General expense not included above 39.40 3.37 12.4
Depreciation and interest on improvements except trees 1.00 .08 .3
Depreciation and interest on equipment 18.20 1.55 5.6
Depreciation and interest on orchard 40.00 3.43 12.6
Risk of doing business 41.50 3.55 13.0
Total 318.77 27.25 100.0
Labor was the largest single item of expense amounting to one-half
of the total cost. The next highest item of expense was risk of doing
business, followed by depreciation and interest on orchards, and gen-
eral expense. All other items, including spray materials, water, county
taxes, miscellaneous expenses, depreciation and interest on improve-
ments, and depreciation and interest on equipment, made up only
12 per cent of the total cost. The grower's actual cash outlay for labor,
together with operator's labor, spray material, water, county taxes,
miscellaneous expenses, and general expenses was $218.07 per acre, or
$18.64 per ton. These items made up 68.5 per cent of the total cost.
* In all considerations of this study, the reader must keep in mind that an
item of 15 per cent of the total cost of doing business is included to cover
risks. This item was included at the suggestion of the contestants who con-
tended that the growers who had full bearing orchards would lose 1% crops
in every 10 years from frosts, pests, etc.
t Interest on investment in land is not included in costs.
46
CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE
[CiRC. 1
Depreciation and interest on improvements, equipment, and orchards,
tog-ether with risk of doing business, made up the balance of the
expense.
Lahor Costs of Cultural Operations. — A summary of the average
labor costs per acre of cultural operations is shown in table 8.
Table 8. — Labor Costs per Acre for Specific Cultural Operations, 16 Full
Bearing Orchards, Stanislaus County, California, 1925
Operation
Pruning
Brush disposal
Spraying
Plowing
Irrigation
Cultivation
Thinning
Propping
Picking
Hauling from orchard.
Hauling to cannery
Cover crop
Labor per acre
M
53.7
9.6
14.7
3.2
10.7
13.5
77 3
8.1
116.0
11.2
3.6
H
4.2
11.3
8.1
6.4
5.9
10.3
16.6
4.9
21.1
23.1
5 2
10
Cost per
acre*
$20.00
4 85
8.25
3 40
4.39
18.55
31.87
3.12
48.56
4.02
15.60
2.30
Per cent of
labor cost
12.8
2.2
5 2
1.3
2.7
11.5
20 4
13
30.4
10
10 3
1.1
M = Man hours. H = Horse hours. T = Tractor hours.
* The total of items in this column is greater than the average labor cost in Table 7 because certain
operations were not performed on the total acreage in the contest.
Canning Peach Yields, 16 Full Bearing Orchards, Stanislaus County,
Tons California, 1925
25
Legend : —
Av. yield per acre .
Per acre yield at 953.20 per ton
necessary -to pay all expenses.
20 1_ Esfimot&d a\/eroge yi'efd -for
5tanf5/aus County .
15
10
Orchai'd No.
Yield Per
Acre
Fig. 41. — Average yield per acre, 11.7 tons,
ton necessary to pay all expenses, 10.3 tons.
Stanislaus County, 5.75 tons.
Yield per acre at $33.20 per
Estimated average yield for
1926]
CROPS AND PRICES: PEACHES
47
Peach growers will be interested in table 8 because it shows the
average cost of specific cultural operations for orchards where such
operations were performed during the year. For example, the average
cost of plowing was $4.39 per acre on the acreage where this operation
was performed.
Pruning, cultivation, thinning, picking, and hauling to the cannerj^
amounted to 85.2 per cent of the total labor costs. The thinning and
picking operations alone made up 50.6 per cent of the total.
Yields. — There was a considerable variation in the peach yields
obtained in the different orchards, ranging from a low of 4.4 tons per
acre to a high of 24 tons per acre (see fig. 41).
The average yield on the 16 orchards was 11.7 tons per acre. One-
half of the growers produced less than this average, while the other
half produced more than the average. Fourteen of the 16 growers
obtained a yield higher than the average for the county which was
estimated at 5.75 tons per acre.
Cost of Producing a Ton of Canning Peaches, 16 Full Bearing Orchards,
Stanislaus County, California, 1925
Dollars
pet* ton
40
Legend
Setting pn'ce per ton
Totot cost per ton
Labor and costi expense
per ton
© o
p. o
4JO U7
W+> 1-4
Fig. 42. — Average selling price per ton, $33.20. Average total cost per ton,
$27.25. Average labor and cash expense per ton, $18.74.
48
CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE
[CiRC. 1
If canning peaches were sold at $33.20 per ton, it would require a
yield of 10.3 tons per acre to pay the average total cost of production.
To pay the average cash expenses alone, a yield of 6.6 tons per acre
would be required.
Cost Per Ton. — The cost of producing a ton of canning peaches on
the 16 orchards in Stanislaus County in 1925 ranged from $15 to $41
(see fig. 42). The average cost was $27.25 per ton. The average price
received for canning peaches in 1925 by the 16 growers was $33.20
per ton. At this price nine of these growers made a profit, while
seven of them operated at a loss. Only two of the sixteen growers
produced peaches for less than the average labor and cash expenses,
which amounted to $18.74 per ton.
Influence of Yield on Cost of Production. — The general tendency
apparent in figure 43 is for a high yield to be accompanied by a low
cost and for a low yield to be accompanied by a high cost. Although
there are exceptions to this tendency, it is quite evident that the
possibilities of raising peaches at a low cost are greater when the yield
is high than when it is low.
Relation of Yield per Acre to Cost of Production, 16 Full Bearing Orchards,
Stanislaus County, California, 1925
40
30
20
10
_ _ _LLLlL
Mil
Orchard No, 16
12 15
o o
Cost per
ton
Yield „
per Acre §
14
13
o
o
CO
10 5
Q Q
o o
Fig. 43. — The solid black bars represent yield per acre, and the outline bars
represent the cost per ton.
1926] CROPS AND PRICES: PEACHES 49
APPENDIX
FOREIGN PEACH STATISTICS
At the present time it is impossible to present detailed information
on the foreign peach situation, because the available data are so
fragmentary. Peaches are a relatively unimportant crop in many
countries, and consequently peach statistics are not separately
reported.
The information which is presented here was obtained from the
Department of Commerce by Mr. Leonard B. Gary, District Manager
of the Bureau of Foreign and Domestic Commerce of the United States
Department of Commerce at San Francisco.
Table 9. — Exports of Peaches from the United States, 1907 to 1925 (Year
Ending June 30)
Year Dried (pounds) Canned (pounds) Fresh (pounds)
1907 1,757,650
1908 1,148,598
1909 ' ^ 2,403,430
1910 ' 2,617,069
1911 y 1 1 7,125,014
1912 4,425,803
1913 ; ' 6,529,633
1914 6,712,296
1915 14,464,655
1916 13,739,342
1917 8,187,588
1918 5,862,605
1919 4,834,738
1920 12,755,907
1921 3,573,175
1922 6,259,781
1923 5,585,621 54,623,983 13,170,000
1924 12,974,647 50,374,387 15,065,000
1925 4,668,434 57,390,043 16,172,000
Data from Bureau of Foreign and Domestic Commerce, United States Department of Commerce.
Data on the amount of canned and fresh peach exports are not available for the earlier years.
Table 10. — Exports of Peaches from the United States by Importing Countries,
1922-1924 (Calendar Years)
FRESH PEACHES
Exported to: 1922 (pounds) 1923 (pounds) 1924 (pounds)
United Kingdom* 28,835 140,470 295,325
Canada 12,237,728 13,999,008 14,945,709
Mexico 389,560 576,185 268,035
Cuba 266,046 271,482 432,508
Other countries 55,572 61,953 132,770
Total 12,977,741 15,049,098 16,074.347
DRIED PEACHES
United Kingdom* 443,668 1,147,868 2,157,079
Germany 366,288 609,347 5,424,024
France 1,081,575 79,061 103,723
Netherlands 209,034 89,337 1,446,970
Sweden 603,972 494,356 549,002
Canada 2,123,426 1,606,149 1,843,428
Other countries 935,960 629,734 1,027,641
Total 5,763,923 4,655,852 12,551,867
50 CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE [CiRC. 1
Table 10. — (Continued)
CANNED PEACHES
Exported to: 1922 (pounds) 1923 (pounds) 1924 (pounds)
United Kingdom* 49,759,201 29,462,281 52,622,141
Germany 105,803 139,102 1,011,818
France 1,523,831 600,190 854,308
Netherlands 336,768 286,539 828,674
Belgium 183,057 155,549 848,236
Sweden 216,010 249,779 440,829
Norway 302,284 181,405 62,8^2
Denmark 271,806 356,976 298,371
Canada 1,947,912 2,354,245 2,770,080
Cuba 792,072 3,187,924 3,328,302
British India 262,909 361,142 233,955
.Japan 214,820 282,722 235,706
New Zealand 702,956 508,422 412,490
Other countries 1,328,322 2,118,315 2,903,564
Total 57,947,751 40,244,591 66,851,366
* Includes Ireland.
Data from Bureau of Foreign and Domestic Commerce, United States Department of Commerce.
A letter from Mr. L. A. Wheeler, Foodstuffs Division, Department
of Commerce, under date of November 24, 1925, gives the following
information: '^The countries of Australia and the Union of South
Africa, so far as I have been able to ascertain, are the only ones besides
the United States to produce peaches on any considerable scale."
The available acreage and production data in Australia are shown
in table 11.
Table 11. — AustraUa — Production and Acreage of Peaches
Bearing trees Non-bearing trees Production
Year (acres) (acres) (bushels)
1919-20 28,895 8,599 2,695,912
1920-21 24,100 5,994 1,848,323
1921-22 24,089 5,693 1,951,450
Data from Bureau of Foreign and Domestic Commerce, United States Department of Commerce.
The number of peach trees in the Union of South Africa in 1921
was 5,446,440, of which 4,406,780 were bearing and 1,059,660 were
non-bearing. The production of dried peaches in 1923 was 2,394,336
pounds. There are no fignres on the production of fresh peaches.
With regard to export competition from these two countries, Mr.
R. S. Hollingshead, Assistant Chief, Foodstuffs Division, Department
of Commerce, in a letter, under date of December 1, 1925, says:
"1 do not believe there is much argument to the fact that competi-
tion for California peaches is increasing and will continue to do so.
This is due to the growing production in Australia and British South
Africa. As far as I know these are the most important potential
sources of large supplies of peaches which may go into world trade.
So far, the Australian industry has been rather unsuccessful, but there
is a possibility of improvement in the situation as more business-like
methods of operating are applied. The South African situation is in
1926] CROPS AND PRICES : PEACHES 51
process of development through the activities of the local agricultural
authorities. I believe that conditions are such that a considerable
production in that territory can be expected as time goes on. ' '
The available export figures from the Union of South Africa and
Australia by importing countries are given in tables 12 and 13.
Table 12. — Exports of Fresh Peaches from the Union of South Africa
(Figures in Boxes)
1920 1921 1922 1923 1924
United Kingdom 46,749 88,283 108,449 125,048 92,399
Belgian Congo 7 27 584 341 340
Portuguese East Africa 1,012 1,428 2,461 4,206 3,074
Southwest Africa* 1,073 610 915 1,076 2,180
United States 492
Other countries 8 6 1,694 116 768
Total 48,849 90,846 114,103 130,787 98,761
* Shipments to Southwest Africa not considered exports after 1921.
Dried and Canned Peaches not listed separately.
Data from Bureau of Foreign and Domestic Commerce, United States Department of Commerce.
Table 13, — Exports of Dried Peaches from Australia
(Pounds)
1922-23 1923-24
United Kingdom 707,680 160,077
New Zealand 35,832 10,901
Dutch East Indies 3,188 460
Other countries 7,699 3,859
Total 754,399 175,297
Fresh and canned peaches not listed separately.
Data from Bureau of Foreign and Domestic Commerce, United States Department of Commerce.
The trade statistics of those countries in which we market the bulk
of our peaches do not list the import of peaches separately, with the
exception of Germany. For this reason it is impossible to obtain data
on the competition of foreign countries in our main foreign markets.
Germany's total imports of fresh peaches are shown in table 14.
Table 14. — Germany 's Imports of Fresh Peaches
Year Pounds
1920 29,321
1921 30,864
1922 162,259
1923 24,471
1924 8,392,912
Data from Bureau of Foreign and Domestic Commerce, United States Department of Commerce.
52
CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE
[CiRC. 1
Table 15.— Peaches— Number of Trees, United States, by States, 1909, 1919,
and 1924
New Hampshire
Massachusetts
Rhode Island
Connecticut
New York
New Jersey
Pennsylvania
Delaware
Maryland
Virginia
West Virginia
North Carolina
South Carolina
Georgia
Florida
Ohio
Indiana
Illinois
Michigan
Iowa
Missouri
Nebraska
Kansas
Kentucky
Tennessee
Alabama
Mississippi
Louisiana
Texas
Oklahoma
Arkansas
Colorado
New Mexico
Arizona
Utah
Nevada
Idaho
Washington
Oregon
California
United States.
1S09
Bearing
and non-
bearing
100 trees
928
3,167
701
8,003
46,741
25,801
45,624
13,895
23,028
23,661
28,658
35,228
16,859
121,405
4,477
52,257
32,758
35,995
58,983
13,740
79,924
14,523
50,156
33,561
43,544
40,162
24,512
12,195
126,966
73,585
97,449
13,994
3,207
840
11,955
113
2,860
15,650
7,814
122,386
1,367,729
Bearing
trees
57,571
154,592
39,342
461,711
2,457,187
1,216,476
2,383,027
1,177,402
1,497,724
1,585,505
1,424,582
2,661,791
1,336,142
10,609,119
290,850
3,133,368
2,130,298
2,860,120
2,907,170
1,010,749
6,588,034
1,188,373
4,394,894
2,245,402
3,163,737
3,177,331
1,726,298
903,352
9,737,827
4,783,825
6,859,962
793,372
136,191
51,415
544,314
6,329
73,080
536,875
273,162
7,829,011
,506,657
Non-
bearing
trees
35,213
162,114
30,795
338,608
2,216,907
1,363,632
2,179,386
212,117
805,063
780,551
1,441,188
861,042
349,790
1,531,367
156,782
2,092,300
1,145,479
739,358
2,991,010
283,308
1,404,429
263,882
620,709
1,110,744
1,190,727
838,866
724,895
316,132
2,958,813
2,574,680
2,884,927
606,001
184,466
32,562
651,233
5,049
212,995
1,028,141
508,179
4,409,562
42,266,243
1919
Bearing
and non-
bearing
100 trees
1,045
4,817
865
6,294
36,969
28,207
47,984
5,578
12,826
23,620
27,016
30,708
12,076
120,470
3,231
38,944
14,280
18,510
27,748
1,909
30,752
1,357
11,234
23,615
30,401
20,907
13,489
6,401
61,025
35,177
43,314
4,791
1,919
1,286
5,828
96
2,050
6,994
4,428
104,247
872,640
Bearing
trees
81,287
346,260
61,125
495,750
3,038,023
1,936,632
3,563,726
464,514
997,086
1,578,253
2,049,862
1,976,756
871,976
8,655,051
206,155
2,924,177
860,024
1,011,325
2,010,022
129,939
2,358,925
95,629
844,498
1,671,044
2,349,656
1,544,700
855,158
408,178
4,461,717
2,879,945
3,342,387
446,943
154,968
101,855
554,202
5,940
178,434
649,085
412,936
9,057,760
65,646,101
Non-
bearing
trees
23,200
135,426
25,366
133,577
658,868
884,067
1,234,708
93,336
285,486
783,733
651,742
1,093,993
335,599
3,391,851
116,913
970,183
568,046
839,712
764,838
61,043
716,325
40,118
278,914
690,483
690,359
546,024
493,651
231,909
1,640,848
637,762
988,966
32,158
36,923
26,681
28,551
3,721
26,648
50,254
29,911
1,366,941
21,617,862
1924
Bearing
and non-
bearing
trees
312,978
438,493
3,419,685
2,385,318
3,820.839
501,111
1,152,843
2,225,742
1,817,729
3,615,127
1,432,144
14,639,437
290,590
3,841,973
2,129,168
4,365,302
2,806,821
2,071,372
4,177,036
1,964,956
1,110,159
414,380
3,817,492
2,351,767
4,427,156
395,389
133,953
92,515
634,403
678,910
14,461, 206
Sources of data: Years 1909 and 1919— 14th Census of the United States, 1920, Vol. V, p. 864. Year
1924. 1925 Farm Census. Preliminary state summaries.
1926]
CROPS AND PRICES: PEACHES
■^ oi CO t-^ cc o ►^ >^ h^ o* fr^ hP^ "^ h^ >— * »^
Cn^OOOtOCnlOOOsOOO
_ _ _ _ Ol 00 -) to
>t^OC0-J«;Otnc0^l00K-C0H-O5C0>
OOOOtOOOO>OiOOJcOOOCntfi.OiOOCnOOOiOls3i-'(
k-OJ to COCOO5tO>-'i*».00CO^J00 ^ltOlOCOK-^lH-K-^03h(^tOtO>^tOO»*i-OitO
otsoooi— 'oe;iooc3*.tno^oa5i*>.02^ioic>JOHP>-ioi— '>f^Oito4i->f»-c»iooH-;r "
~~ _--- - - _____ ,(35OO00O^J0i02Cn'
ooo^o>wci03*>.oooooi
lOOOt0^02003;OtO^J
ts2 to ^ to
oo to Ol to o
CO OOiH-1— '0503-<IOOtOC3tO<:ri ^I I— iO>— 'I— '00^10050iOiO:*>->
t0tnCXlC0ts5t0i*».COO05t0^>— 4^Ot0OC»00Cncr^JlOc^Q0Cn^tl0050COI
CO>*».*^Cn>fi.^OCOOOOOa500»t^OtOCnCnOCnOOOOOOOtOi-'0000(
14^ ts3 CO i-i 00 k- t*^ O I-' ^ »*^ 00 to CO OS tfl CD to cc
>*>.co ooc;iCno>tooiOa3to>f^>fi-co^i^tocococo^jco
C:5t0004».-JtOOOO^OOOOOCnOOtOC00002^
toooiootoioototocotococcai)*^.
a>k-^]K-ooooccoc2c;tH-cni
C0CO4^)-i CO l-'0^lOH-COkfi.C002CO^I>-'-^>*>-
OOOOOOtO 00050tOOOlOCOCnh4i.H->(:^0005CDOO-l*>.CntOCnOOOOC5a300H-COO>*».4^CO*'>
^J^J05OC0OO05tnOO02C5OOOOOt0Ot0-jCji00C000CnC5C002>— tOOO^OOtOl
■ to to ^ to
' 02 '-C 4^ O >*»• en 02 >
.C04^h— CO^COOOO^^.i-'COOOcrk-^COtoOOOtOK'CO I—
05000502 I— i05Cnciit*».ooooirf^h;*a5toji-tooi— 'a2^i*'4i.^jcoc5cnaiOirf>.4»-4^^jCDCotocncn
OOt005t0^at004^0000H-CROOOOlOOOtOO>f»-0000^40*>.Cn>*^OOOOt0 4^0lOitnCDtOOO
*>. ^J to 00 01 *>■ 1— ' (
^ito ^j to
tO-J4^ ^
>*>■ CO ^4 h-
o 00 ^a ^j
cc- to CD to
. OS !*>. 00 00
rf^ 00 ^
»*>■ CO h-
ocoo
^J *. cn to
OOOOOOOOOOrfi-OOOCOO
tOOOOOCDCjiOiOtOO
tOCnCntO 001— 'tO^JCOcDOlCO^J
OOrf^cO 004».OtOht^tOtOOO-^I
0>*^OiC005>t'0"" — " —
■ to O 4i. K- to <
*>•>*>. 05>-'OOCOCJi^l02CntOl— 'Oil
►*>-Cn00^4^CCCD^a5000tOOCnt
. _._ -.^oooi
COOlO^-OCOtOOOOtOOOOOtnOCllOl
tn CD CO CD
l-i CO CO
» k- ^ 00 Ol CD O Oi I
'00020^00cDtO>*^000^10i
CD I— ' ^J >— ' -^J 00 *- CO to to CO 'to CO CO COl— >Cntn05 COCO^JtsS I-*
►—o^acn 0501 i-'oooioas toco, toooto cocn^itocococn02kf^*»cncn oi4!>.ocd ooto
Otnt0Orf».C04>.00OtnOO*'t0 O-fc Orf^OOOOOOSCSCnOOOirf^OOtOCO-^IO-^IOOcDCncD
tOtOI— l^.*"" tOH-l-»)-i4i.,_. I—toco
_ CD O O >— ' CO 00 O to 05 CO\tO l*>.^ 05 0» I— '"^ 00 O ^J ^1 (*>. Co"oi o"h*>- l_
opooiif>- _ ootooo»^^itooo7ji^p>:^woooo4^oci»qocooi+>-i^i:-q>cptocnooc2too
O CO CD to
000>*>"
iCnOOOOOOOOOCnOtO(
)Oi— 'OOOOOrf^OOtnOOitf^CnOOOOtoOOOtO
OOCTlCOtO 00 l-i •^i'h- oVi H- to ^J >*>■ >*>. O ">-' 05 (*>■ CO K-To Cn to tn Cn Oi to'cD osVi to to
COOCOOO O^JOOCni— »COO^IO>^a02C/<^a>»^>*^*^tO^J4i-ODt04^tnCT:tOOCOt004^0COCOO*>.
OOCOtOCntoOCDOOtOOtnOcDOOOOCnOOtntntna>0000003rf».i-iCn^JtOOb0^tnO
' OOOtOO*
-_ 3 00 ►*>. CD CO 00 I— ' CO 00 tn CD Cn 05 CO ^J Cn I— ' to
jococnoco 03 o>Op— '>*»-torf».oocoo^a^)>-'tn-^tototn
'OOOOOOH-OOtOif^OOO^-ltOOO^JOCnOCnOOOOcoOO
k- 4^ to CD -J to ^a to t*». tn to 00 tn 02 to H- h- to ^j tn K- CO to I-' O ^J CD to to
■03tntn00itn-~ji— '1— 1— '^J^JCO^ji— >cDO00OH-Oi*»-OO05rf»-tnOi*^t0i-'C0i— 'to
"" ■ ■toototoooocn(*»-oootootnoooooooi*^
iotnosoooocntotoe;»o>
53
H
>
w
M
W
^
l-J
H
Cl
ts-
1
1
^
hr)
(/J
T)
P
02
B
i:i
tJ'
U>
Q
c
M-
3
-
rr
V!
rn
ri-
P
§.
cr»-
54
CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE
[ClRC. 1
Table 17. — Canned Peach Production, United States and California, 1906-1925
California
United
Year
Clingstones
Freestones
Total
equivalent
fresh tons
Per cent of
United
States
canned
pack
States.
Total
equivalent
Cases
Equivalent
fresh tons
Cases
Equivalent
fresh tons
fresh
tons
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
1906
740,000
715,025
1,614,870
998,245
1,560,050
1,494,925
1,791,235
1,751,100
3,918,035
2,407,650
2,597,390
3,607,568
3,122,458
5,096,249
5,205,511
4,162,849
7,844,912
6,591,335
5,366,598
9,258,587
17,209
16,629
37,555
23,215
36,280
34,766
41,657
40,723
67,861
55,992
60,404
83,897
72,615
118,517
121,058
96,810
182,440
153,287
124,805
215,316
990,250
1,039,585
1,112,300
692,500
944,650
894,600
686,940
1,014,025
1,092,200
831,875
1,202,940
1,554,393
1,393,595
1,962,700
1,547,687
1,633,418
1,314,597
872,676
963,621
1,198,314
23,029
24,176
25,868
16,105
21,969
20,805
15,975
23,582
25,400
19,346
27,975
36,149
32,409
45,644
35,993
37,987
30,572
20,295
22,410
27,868
40,238
40,805
63,423
39.320
58,249
55,571
57,632
64,305
93,261
75,338
88,379
120,046
105,024
164,161
157,051
134,797
213,012
173,582
147,215
243,184
72
75
77
80
81
82
83
84
86
87
87
88
88
89
93
98
98
97
97
97
55,886
1907
54,407
1908
82,368
1909
49,150
1910
71,912
1911
67,770
1912
69,436
1913
76,554
1914
108,443
1915
86,595
1916
101,585
1917
136,416
1918
119,346
1919
184,451
1920
168,872
1921
137,548
1922
217,359
1923
178,951
1924
151,768
1925
250,705
Sources of data:
Columns I and III. Years 1906-1909, California Fruit Grower, Annual Statistical Numbers,
1907-1910. Figures corrected by figuring all cases of No. 10 tins on basis of 6 cans per case. Years 1910-
1924, California Annual, July, 1925, p. 10, of the California Packing Corporation. Data for years 1910-
1917 compiled from records furnished by H. C. Rowley, and data for years 1918-1924 compiled from
records furnished by the Canners' League of Cahfornia. Year 1925, Canners' League of California Bui.
No. 674-A, Jan. 12, 1926.
Columns II and IV. Conversion factor, 43 cases canned peaches = 1 ton fresh peaches.
Column VI. Years 1909, 1914 and 1919, 14th Census of United States, Vol. X, p. 76. Years 1921
and 1923, Biennial Census of Manufactures, 1921 and 1923. Other figures interpolated.
Column VII. Calculated by letting figures in Column V equal corresponding percentages in
Column VI.
1926J
CROPS AND PRICES: PEACHES
55
Table 18. — Dried Peach Production, United States and California, 1906-1924
Value
California production
Year
United States
California
Per cent of
United States
produced
outside of
California
Dried tons
Equivalent
fresh tons
I
II
III
IV
V
1906
$2,423,080
$2,915,595
$12,109,624
$4,165,932
$6,468,975
$2,422,043
$2,888,962
$12,074,246
$4,165,932
$6,468,975
.04
.9
.3
10,000
15,000
23,000
20,000
25,000
17,250
29,000
37,500
35,100
32,250
28,000
39,000
20,000
35,000
27,000
21,000
28,000
26,000
24,500
16,000
55,000
1907 . ...
82,500
1908
126,500
1909
110,000
1910
137,500
1911
94,875
1912
159,500
1913
206,250
1914
193,050
1915
177,375
1916
154,000
1917
214,500
1918
110,000
1919
192,500
1920
148,500
1921
115,500
1922
154,000
1923
143,000
1924
134,750
1925*
88,000
* Preliminary estimate.
Sources of data:
Columns I and II. 14th Census of U. S., Vol. X, p. 79, and Biennial Census of Manufactures, 1921
and 1923.
Column IV. Years 1906-1923. Armsby's Weekly Letter, Jan. 1916, and CaHfornia Annual, July,
1925, p. 14. Year 1924. CaHfornia Fruit News, Annual Statistical Number for 1925.
Column V. Conversion factor: 1 ton dried peaches = 5.5 tons fresh peaches.
Note: Practically all of the dried peaches are produced in CaHfornia as shown in Column III.
Although the census figures on tonnage do not agree exactly with the figures given in Column IV for the
years 1919, 1921 and 1923, they also indicate that practically all of the dried peaches are produced in
California.
56
CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE
[CiRC. 1
Table 19. — Production of Fresh, Dried, and Canned Peaches, United States,
1906-1925
Canned
Dried
Fresh
Per cent of United States
Total production
peaches
peaches
peaches
total production
Year
1000
Equivalent
Equivalent
bushels
Tons
fresh tons
fresh tons
Tons
Canned
Dried
Fresh
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
VIII
1906
44,104
1.058.496
55.886
55.000
947,610
5 3
5 2
89.5
1907
22,527
540,648
54,407
82.500
403.741
10
15.3
74.7
1908
48,146
1,155,504
82,368
126,500
946,636
7 1
10.9
82.0
1909
35,470
851,280
49,150
110,000
692,130
5.8
12.9
81 3
1910
48.171
1,156,104
71,912
137,500
946.692
6 2
11.9
81.9
1911
34,880
837,120
67,770
94.875
674,475
8 1
11.4
80.5
1912
52,343
1.256,332
69,436
159.500
1,027.296
5.5
12 7
81.8
1913
39,707
952,968
76,554
206.250
670.164
8
21.6
70.4
1914
54,109
1,298,616
108,443
193,050
997,123
8.3
14.9
76.8
1915
64,097
1.538,32«
86,595
177.375
1.274.358
5.6
11.5
82.9
1916
37,505
900.120
101,585
154,000
644,535
11 2
17.1
71.7
1917
48,765
1,170,360
136,416
214,500
819,444
11 6
18.3
70.1
1918
33,094
794,256
119,346
110.000
564,910
15
13.8
71.2
1919
53,178
1,276,272
184,451
192,500
899,321
14.4
15.0
70.6
1920
45.620
1.094.880
168,872
148,500
777,508
15.5
13 5
71.0
1921
32,602
782.448
137,548
115,500
529,400
17.5
14.7
67.8
1922
55,852
1,340,448
217,359
154,000
969,089
16 2
11.5
72 3
1923
45,382
1,089,168
178,951
143,000
767,217
16.4
13.1
70.5
1924
54,119
1,298,856
151,768
134,750
1,012,338
11.7
10.3
78.0
1925
46.565
1.117,560
250,705
88,000
778,855
22.4
7.9
69.7
Sources of data:
Column I. U. S. D. A. Yearbook, 1924, p. 679. Year 1925, preliminary estimate.
Column II. Conversion factor: 1 bushel = 48 pounds.
Column III. See Table 17.
Column IV. See Table 18.
Column V. Columns III + IV subtracted from Column II,
1926]
CROPS AND PRICES : PEACHES
57
Table 20. — Commercial Peach Production, California, 1906-1925
(Equivalent Fresh Tons)
Per cent of California
Total
Canned
Dried
Interstate shipments
commercial production
Shipped
fresh
Year
-
Cars
Tons
Canned
Dried
I
II
Ill
IV
V
VI
VII
VIII
1906
101,662
40,238
55,000
584
6,424
39.6
54
6.4
1907
130,994
40,805
82,500
699
7,689
31.1
63.0
5.9
1908
211,703
63,423
126,500
1,980
21,780
30
59.8
10 2
1909
177,909
39,320
110,000
2,599
28,589
22 2
61.8
16
1910
223,447
58,249
137,500
2,518
27,698
26
61.6
12.4
1911
174,770
55,571
94,875
2,027
24,324
31.8
54.3
13.9
1912
236,584
57,632
159,500
1,621
19,452
24.5
67.3
8.2
1913
299,307
64,305
206,250
2,396
28,752
21.4
69.0
9.6
1914
312,039
93,261
193,050
2,144
25.728
29.9
61.9
8.2
1915
272,981
75,338
177,375
1,689
20,268
27.5
65
7.5
1916
265,299
88,379
154,000
1,910
22,920
33.4
58
8.6
1917
363,730
120,046
214,500
2,432
29,184
33
59.0
8
1918
252,668
105,024
110,000
3,137
37,644
41.6
43.5
14.9
1919
389,949
164,161
192,500
2,774
33,288
42.0
49.4
8.6
1920
343,327
157,051
148,500
3,148
37,776
45.8
43.2
11.0
1921
290,305
134,797
115,500
3.334
40,008
46.4
39.8
13.8
1922
394,792
213,012
154.000
2,315
27,780
54
39.0
7.0
1923
360,694
173,582
143,000
3,676
44,112
48.2
39.6
12 2
1924
304,021
147,215
134,750
1,838
22,056
48.5
44.3
7.2
1925
366,596
243,184
88,000
2,951
35,412
66.2
24.1
9.7
Sources of data:
Column II.
Column III.
Column IV.
Column V.
carload.
See Table 17.
See Table 18.
California Fruit News, Annual Statistical Numbers.
Conversion factor. Years 1906-1910, 11 tons = l carload; years 1911-1925, 12 tons = l
58
CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE
[CiRC. 1
Table 21. — Peaches, California Estimated Acreage by Counties, Bearing and
Non-bearing, 1922-1925
1922
1923
1924
1925
Non-
Non-'
Non-
Non-
Bearing
bearing
Bearing
bearing
Bearing
bearing
Bearing
bearing
The State
107,786
22,518
115,618
24,597
120,947
28,455
131,508
42,914
District No. 1:
Humboldt
60
20
100
10
110
5
115
5
Mendocino
100
100
100
100
125
80
131
82
District No. 2:
Shasta
800
400
800
400
800
400
500
300
Siskiyou
43
10
90
15
90
15
100
9
District No. 3:
Lassen
40
5
40
5
40
5
40
5
Modoc
21
2
30
7
30
7
30
7
District No. 4:
Alameda
100
30
105
30
65
30
155
350
Contra Costa
650
30
200
2
464
32
275
6
739
38
137
24
751
43
543
Lake
41
Marin
23
20
25
15
35
6
38
5
Monterey
50
85
86
46
100
32
307
Napa
100
285
975
25
394
55
100
506
975
25
501
382
100
549
1,051
50
379
520
100
651
1,155
San Benito
179
San Luis Obispo
483
San Mateo
7
3,000
38
700
27
3,000
44
700
71
3,100
16
536
80
4,980
32
Santa Clara
536
Santa Cruz
150
50
175
25
175
25
200
100
Sonoma
612
179
650
25
650
125
400
225
District No. 5:
Butte
2,281
123
2,281
123
2,650
240
2,710
460
Colusa
74
27
74
27
74
27
81
20
Glenn
317
112
312
111
368
107
403
325
Sacramento
1,840
490
2,086
1,074
2,341
1,335
2,541
2,000
Solano
7,000
780
7,176
706
3,000
700
3,602
506
Sutter
5,220
3,719
6,150
4,394
7,579
2,502
8,981
5,870
Tehama
1,552
64
1,552
64
1,472
493
1,699
266
Yolo
747
85
1,414
860
1,420
600
1,714
755
Yuba
660
395
810
245
1,055
575
1,435
1,955
District No. 5a:
Fresno
25,150
1,010
25,150
250
24,000
125
23,000
450
Kern
554
92
554
92
600
250
800
430
Kings
4,631
382
4,700
800
5,200
800
5,131
1,047
Madera
1,414
709
1,848
202
1,641
1,251
2,792
629
Merced
5,900
2,578
5,900
4,233
8,409
3,365
8,409
7.838
San Joaquin
4,130
922
4,684
1,238
5,000
1,157
5,685
463
Stanislaus
4,150
553
6,463
1,543
7,915
3,579
8,708
3,910
Tulare
8,120
1,222
9,342
117
9,449
3,110
12,559
6,497
District No. 6:
Amador
174
14
178
10
178
10
183
5
Calaveras
83
13
85
11
30
10
85
10
El Dorado
500
120
287
10
500
120
307
10
600
120
207
10
600
100
150
Inyo
10
Mariposa
24
6
24
6
24
6
24
6
Nevada
140
35
145
30
150
25
140
25
Placer
7,963
364
S,203
299
8,215
976
8,345
1.113
Tuolumne
150
120
124
10
124
10
130
10
District No. 8:
5,986
1,137
6,198
1,122
6,198
1,122
5,309
1.459
Orange
Riverside
200
53
10
3,070
2,661
2,990
2,219
5,142
1,243
5,385
1,384
San Bernardino
6,880
1,556
7,380
1,350
7,690
1,601
8,630
1,869
1,500
626
1,625
587
2,155
530
2,257
420
Santa Barbara
165
20
175
22
197
65
200
75
Ventura
45
38
70
14
83
32
84
55
Estimated acreage planted in state: 1921, 6,057; 1922, 18,788; 1923, 28,885; 1924, 70,484.
Sources of data:
E. E. Kaufman — Mimeographed reports, June 20, 1922, and April 12, 1923; California Crop Reports
1923 and 1924.
1926]
CROPS AND PRICES : PEACHES
59
Table 22. — Weekly Carlot Shipments of Fresh Peaches from California,
1921-1925
1921
1922
1923
1924
1925
Month
Week
ending
Cars
Week
ending
Cars
Week
ending
Cars
Week
ending
Cars
Week
ending
Cars
5
12
19
26
3
10
17
24
31
7
14
21
28
4
11
18
25
2
4
11
18
25
2
9
16
23
30
6
13
20
27
3
10
17
24
1
3
10
17
24
1
8
15
22
29
5
12
19
26
2
9
16
23
30
6
47
75
30
24
71
123
561
1259
724
252
116
91
129
105
43
14
3
1
8
15
22
29
6
13
20
27
3
10
17
24
31
7
14
21
28
1
3
27
60
51
12
19
69
301
966
517
166
43
15
15
10
15
1
44
60
13
34
46
199
632
370
151
74
64
68
37
16
20
3
7
14
21
28
5
12
19
26
2
9
16
23
30
6
13
20
27
3
July
55
22
4
15
30
152
809
1232
535
277
70
43
42
25
7
45
41
14
August
September
15
40
169
448
816
615
352
137
44
65
87
32
11
Total*
3,318
2,290
3,670
1,832
2,934
* The totals given here are less than the total shipments for the year, as
are shipped in October.
Sources of data: California Fruit News.
few carloads of peaches
Table 23.— Fresh Peaches Carlot Shipments by States of Origin, 1920-1925
State
1920
1921
1922
1923
1924
Average
1920-24
1925^
Georgia
New York
Cahforniaf
Colorado
New Jersey
Arkansas
Michigan
Utah
Washington
North Carolina.
Illinois
Ohio
Texas
Tennessee
All others
Total
5,987
4,635
3,148
1,091
1,022
56
2,358
366
221
379
557
1,025
76
154
2,363
10,330
2,967
3,334
1,223
5
607
176
805
1,117
594
35
88
1,024
217
470
7,370
6,862
2,315
1,428
1,595
1,563
1,650
1,261
990
1,452
1,683
620
32
248
2,512
8,701
2,777
3,676
1,254
1,790
724
1,087
1,203
1,645
215
390
625
102
53
2,747
13,504
3,436
1,838
1,772
1,461
2,785
105
1,109
412
1,657
860
14
763
752
3,501
9,178
4,135
2,862
1,354
1,175
1,147
1,075
949
877
859
705
474
399
285
2,319
23,438
22,992
31,581
26,989
33,969
27,793
13,543
3,009
2,951
747
1,044
2,293
254
88
992
1,968
579
469
1,082
605
1,004
30,628
* Year 1925 subject to revision,
t California interstate shipments.
See Table 20.
Sources of data:
Years 1920-1923.
Years 1924-1925.
U. S. D. A. Statistical Bulletin, No. 8, pp. 41-50, 1925.
Copies from Bureau of Agricultural Economics.
60
CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE
[CiRC. 1
Table 24. — Carlot Shipments of Fresh Peaches by Months, United States
and California, 1921-1925
Year
Month
United States
Cars
California interstate shipments
Cars
II
Per cent of
United States
III
1921
1922
1923
1924
1925
Total
June
July
August
September
Total
June
July
August
September
Total
June
July
August
September
Total
June
July
August
September
Total
June
July
August
September
23,028
4,012
8,725
5,225
3,562
31,521
3,184
7,540
8,613
10,489
26,989
2,384
8,867
6,804
8,147
33,969
1.873
12,722
11,223
6,802
30,628
4,953
14,788
6,095
4,169
3,334
78
1,010
2,132
2,315
64
178
1,985
63
3,676
173
2,377
922
198
1,838
103
843
816
70
2,951
103
1,255
1,381
195
14 5
2.0
11 6
40 8
2 8
7 3
2
2 4
23
.6
13 6
7.2
26.8
13 5
2.4
Sources of data:
Column I. Years 1921-1923, U. S. D. A. Yearbook, 1924, p. 681. Years 1924-1925, Bureau of Agri-
cultural Economics. Figures for 1925 subject to revision. Original figures revised by subtracting
California total carlot shipment from total United States shipments and adding California interstate
shipments to the result. The number of cars shipped during the four months do not equal the total
shipment, as some peaches are shipped during May and October.
Column II. California Fruit News.
]926
CROPS AND PRICES : PEACHES
61
O a,
r ^
i"
1
cr
o
o
0^
5'
D
3
-D
o
a
i
1
73
J
-!
.J
3
p
Q
<!
3
■T
3 C
■no
2:5
•D
■-1
p
3
■6 —
? 3
^p
1
S3'
Birmingham
Boston
Buffalo
Chicago
Cincinnati
Cleveland
Columbus
Dallas
Denver
Detroit
Fort Worth
Indianapolis
Kansas City
Louisville
Los Angeles
Memphis
P ^
^p"
to
"^
en
to
en :
00
H-^
-
: ; C5:
to
CCrf>.»*^
:
p
■-J
05
C-l
(3
s
^
-J
en
CJi
OO
cm
^co
to
to i^
tOOOK-
rf^ ►—
CO
oo^i tog;
05
^^00.^
P
en
en
.
g
p
g[3
CO CO -■> ^
H^ OCn H- O2 00
l—Oi
CO tOH-"' 0^ t005l— 'TtO^I
CO to 1— -^-1 : CO h*^ to to en ^ cc to H-
P
>
c
GO
2
CO
Oi.
1— to
Cn I-'
to : h^^ to OO ft^
tf^ en rf^ CO to ;
to
^co oto i— to
^
i
^
^
8
en
H-
S
>«^
o^ to
02 -^J
g^SicoSlES
!*». 1— ' 01 to to : ^J CO to ^I to rfi' >4^ to
OiCOh^^OCn-jO; i-'(X>rf^OH->*^oioa. rf^
»^
9
3
H
05
§
to
CO
to ;
: to ff^bo
CO
CO
^ ^;
to
oto
9
3
C
3
to
o
CO
COCO to ■ to to
H- oo en o to -1 , H- Ol H^ 1— en
F-as to
to
H-
J g;
CO
^01^
C_|
Ol
CO
to
1
^
g
s^gg^^^^al
^§
2K
en
05
(-"j : eo: eotoH-2^en
p
>
c
in
to
^
H-
*-
eof4i.
oo;
03
to
CO ►-' CO Ol :
03
en
to:
p
3
§
-<1
o
^
^
^^I^g^oofecntoi; cofeSo-g^
eni-'>t>.02i-': tf>.: CoeoH-^oot^^
to:
p
E
CO
►t^
oo
H-en to
en:
<o
H- to
CO
00
'-': : ^:
eo^-
1
e-i
3
1
1^
s
1
!-• to CO
to O CD to 00 to
CO
ol^too
H-: : to: en
OlCOOl
3^
o
§
o
tococn -ji— 1 C51— ' tn
H-totO-.JCnOJH-i-'Cnh^OtOOsaii-'
00^ ^
eo^^i-'O
coento^o: Cnt^H-ooi^cD
to:
p
;>
^
CO
o
^
-^
tooo
CO to
i ^c
ifs^toCoSn-'en^^en
^
CO
eo
CD
to to
H-
9
3
1
i
i
o
to
to
S?
-J
i
00
00 to
Ol
to
to ►—
o> to
to O)
a
~j
oo
35
OS
g
-
oo
JO CO OS
0^
^
-
to
en
^
to
to ^
3
E
62
CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE
[CiRC. 1
Table 26. — Prices and Purchasing Power of California Canning and Dried
Peaches, F.O.B. Growers' Shipping Points, 1901-1925
All
Canning peaches
Dried peaches
com-
Clingstone
Freestone
Price,
Year
modity
index
cents
per
Relative
price
Relative
value
Price
Relative
Relative
Price
Relative
Relative
pound
per ton
price
value
per ton
price
value
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
VIII
IX
X
1901
81
$33
114
141
$31
126
156
4 75
100
123
1902
86
23
79
92
19
77
90
4 25
90
105
1903
87
25
86
99
21
85
98
4.75
100
115
1904
87
45
155
178
37
150
172
6.25
132
152
1905
88
41
141
160
29
118
134
4.75
100
114
1906
90
49
169
188
33
134
149
8.50
179
198
1907
95
66
228
240
46
187
197
9.50
200
210
1908
92
22
76
83
20
81
88
4.50
95
103
1909
99
18
62
63
20
81
82
4.00
84
85
1910
103
22
76
74
22
89
86
3 75
79
77
1911
95
44
152
160
36
146
154
7.50
158
161
1912
101
24
83
82
22
89
88
4.50
95
94
1913
102
30
103
101
22
89
87
4.00
84
82
1914
100
25
86
86
21
86
86
4.00
84
84
1915
103
12
41
40
10
41
40
3.00
63
61
1916
129
29
100
78
23
93
72
6.00
126
98
1917
180
35
121
67
29
118
66
8.25
174
97
1918
198
50
172
87
34
138
70
11 00
232
117
1919
210
88
303
149
58
236
112
14.88
314
149
1920
230
100
344
148
64
260
113
12.25
258
112
1921
150
35
121
81
27
110
73
7.50
158
105
1922
152
57
196
129
45
183
120
7.35
155
102
1923
156
29
100
64
25
102
65
4 75
100
64
1924
152
43
148
97
25
102
67
5 35
112
74
1925
162
33
114
71
30
122
76
8.25*
174
107
Sources of data:
Column I. Bureau of Labor Index converted to a 5-year base (1910-1914). Published in the Supple-
ment to the Agricultural Situation, June, 1925, pp. 54-62.
Column II and V. Data compiled by the California Canning Peach Growers' Association from
prices paid by canners north of the Tehachapi Pass prior to 1922, and from prices paid by the association
subsequent to 1922. The prices are the weighted average prices for all grades.
Column VIII. Data compiled by the California Peach and Fig Growers from prices paid by packers
prior to 1916, and from prices paid by the association subsequent to 1916. The prices are the weighted
average prices for all grades. * 1925 price estimated.
Columns III, VI and IX. Average 1910-1914 = 100.
Columns IV, VII and X. Relative prices deflated by the All Commodity Index. The term value is
used to denote purchasing power.
1926]
CROPS AND PRICES : PEACHES
63
Table 27. — Elberta Peaches, Relative Purchasing Power, F.O.B. Growers'
Shipping Points, 1906-1925.
(Per standard box)
Chicago
New York
Aver-
age
Rela-
tive
Rela-
tive
Freight
Freight
f.o.b.
price
value
Year
Auction
Com-
and
F.o.b.
Auction
Com-
and
F.o.b.
price
mission
refriger-
ation
price
price
mission
refriger-
ation
price
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
VIII
IX
X
XI
1906
1.16
.081
.349
.73
1.21
.085
.407
.718
.724
160
178
1907
1.20
.084
.326
.79
1.61
.113
.407
1.090
.940
208
219
1908
.326
.326
1.03
.85
.072
.060
.407
.395
.551
.395
.551
.448
122
99
133
1909
.89
.062
.502
100
1910
.89
.062
.326
.502
1.12
.078
.336
.706
.604
133
129
1911
.97
.068
.305
.597
.85
.060
.315
.475
.536
118
124
1912
.72
.050
.309
.361
.66
.046
.319
.295
.328
72
71
1913
.309
.309
.319
.319
1914
.69
.048
.333
.72
.050
.351
.342
76
76
1915
.56
.039
.309
.212
.53
.037
.319
.174
.193
43
42
1916
.91
.064
.309
.537
.92
.064
.319
.537
.537
118
91
1917
.88
.062
.309
.509
.82
.057
.321
.442
.476
105
58
1918
1.27
.089
.371
.810
1.05
.074
.384
.592
.701
155
78
1919
1.11
.078
.371
.661
.85
.060
.384
.406
.534
118
56
1920
1.27
.089
.384
.797
1.09
.076
.396
.618
.708
156
68
1921
1.30
.091
.487
.722
1.18
.083
.499
.598
.660
146
97
1922
.80
.056
.446
.298
.79
.055
.458
.277
.288
64
42
1923
.90
.063
.446
.391
.82
.057
.458
.305
.348
77
49
1924
.97
.068
.446
.456
1.05
.074
.458
.518
.487
108
71
1925
1.14
.080
.446
.614
1.12
.078
.458
.584
.599
132
82
Sources of data:
Column I. Years 1906-1916. California Fruit News. Average of daily prices during August. Year
1913 missing. Years 1917-1925. Compiled from Chicago Fruit and Vegetable Reporter by the Stewart
Fruit Company. Weighted average of daily prices.
Columns II and VI. Commission 7 per cent of gross sales price.
Columns III and VII. Compiled by the Pacific Fruit Express from Freight and Refrigeration
Tariffs.
Column V. Years 1906-1916. California Fruit News. Average of daily prices during August.
Year 1913 missing. Years 1917-1925. Compiled from New York Daily Fruit Reporter by the Stewart
Fruit Company. Weighted average of daily prices.
Column IX. Average of Columns IV and VIII.
Column X. Average 1910-1914 = 100.
Column XI. Relative prices deflated by the All Commodity Index.
64
CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE
[CiRC. 1
CONTENTS
Summary, 3.
The general situation, 7.
Peach acreage, United States, 7.
Peach production. United States, 7.
Main peach producing states, 8.
Changes in peach producing areas, 8.
Utilization of the United States peach
crop, 12.
California's place in the peach industry,
13.
Utilization of the California peach crop,
14.
Peach acreage, California, 17.
Canning peaches, 19.
Varieties of canning peaches, 19.
Canned peach production, California, 21.
Per capita production of canned peaches,
United States, 21.
Canned peach exports, 21.
Main foreign markets for canned peaches,
21.
Prices and purchasing power of canning
peaches, 22.
Relation between canners' opening prices
and growers' prices, 24.
Relation between production and pur-
chasing power of canning peaches, 25.
Dried peaches, 27.
Production of dried peaches, 27.
Exports of dried peaches, 27.
Main foreign markets for dried peaches,
29.
Per capita consumption of dried peaches,
30.
Purchasing power of dried peaches, 30.
Fresh peaches, 32.
Varieties of shipping peaches in Cali-
fornia, 32.
Shipping districts for fresh peaches in
California, 33.
Production of fresh peaches, United
States and California, 33.
Fresh peach exports, 34.
Per capita production of fresh peaches,
34.
California's interstate fresh peach ship-
ments, 35.
Seasonal variation in California's inter-
state shipments, 35.
Relative importance of the principal
fresh peach producing states, 36.
California's fresh peaches are widely
distributed, 39.
Principal markets for California fresh
peaches, 39.
States which compete directly with Cali-
fornia, 40.
The market for fresh peaches is nation-
wide, 41.
Purchasing power of Elberta peaches, 41.
Close relation between peach prices in
the various markets, 42.
Seasonal variation in prices of California
Elberta peaches, 43.
California fresh peaches on an eastern
shipment basis, 44.
Cost of producing canning peaches, Stani-
slaus County, California, 1925, 45.
Total cost of producing canning peaches,
45.
Labor costs of cultural operations, 46.
Yields, 47.
Cost per ton, 48.
Influence of yield on cost of production,
48.
Appendix — Foreign peach statistics, 49.
Tables, 52.
20m-4,'26