University of California College of Agriculture Agricultural Experiment Station Berkeley, California PRELIMINARY SUMMARY OF MARKETING OF GLOBE ARTICHOKES by E. A. Stokdyk 1931 (5 pages) (Replaced by California Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin $2h) Contribution from the Gianni ni Foundation of Agricultural Economics Mimeographed Report No. 6 University of California College of Agriculture Berkeley, California Preliminary Summary of MARKETING GLOBE ARTICHOKES* E . A ♦ St oicdyk September, 1931 *An Experiment Station bulletin will soon be issued. This paper is a summary lof that bulletin. Contribution from the Giannini Foundation of Agricultural Economics if /Jt £ j / '/Je/J i & ir*/?/ ■ V J & Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2014 https://archive.org/details/preliminarysumma06stok SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS The commercial production of globe artichokes in the United States is con- fined to a few counties in California along the Pacific Coast. The industry was well established by 1900, the area devoted to the crop amounting to approximate- ly 750 acres. The peak in acreage was reached during the 1925-26 season when it was 11,700 acres. Since then, the acreage has declined to 7,550 acres. The production of artichokes has tended to vary directly with the acre- age. The peak of production was attained in 1925-26 with 1,470,000 boxes but declined to approximately 900,000 boxes in 1930-31. The shipping season for artichokes is principally from September 1 to May 1; with February, March, and April the months of largest shipments. Between 25 and 30 per cent of the total shipments are shipped in cars containing other vegetables. These are reported as "mixed vegetables" in the Federal-State market news service reports. Total shipments amounted to 937.9 carloads in the 1929-30 season and 837.9 carloads in the 1930-31 season. Of the total fresh production of artichokes in the 1930-31 season, Califor- nia markets used 513 carloads or 38 per cent. The remainder, 826 carloads or 62 per cent, was shipped to various cities in the United States and Canada. A total of 120 cities received shipments direct from California. The quantity sold in many of the cities was small, totaling only 0.1 carload during the season. Four- teen eastern cities received 5 carloads or more but only six cities - New York, Chicago, Boston, New Orleans, Philadelphia and Buffalo - received 25 carloads or more . There is a tendency toward a direct relation between the number of persons of Italian origin residing in the cities receiving artichokes directly from California and the number of carloads of artichokes received in those cities. 2. A number of cities with a large population of Italian origin are, however, not receiving direct shipments of artichokes. It may he possible through trade pro- motion to develop direct business in artichokes in some of these cities. The principal trade channels for artichokes for sales in cities east of the Mississippi are: Producer-shipper-receiver- jobber-retailer or push-cart peddler-consumer. In New York City, the push-cart peddler plays a most import- ant part in the distribution of artichokes. For sales in cities west of the Mississippi (except California) the principal trade channels are: Producer- jobber in San Francisco or Los Angeles - shipper of mixed vegetables - jobber or wholesaler in smaller cities - retail outlets - consumer. The trade channels for sales in California cities are numerous and varied because producers in vary- ing circumstances attempt to take the shortest route economically feasible in reaching the consumer. In most respects the existing trade channels are adequate; the marketing problem being principally one of expediting the movement through the existing channels by active trade promotion. The shipment of artichokes in carloads of mixed vegetables has been an important method of introducing the product in sev- eral areas, ^his method of distribution can and should be stimulated. Further- more, it is desirable that as many agencies be utilized at terminal markets as can render efficient service rather than to attempt to restrict the number of agencies. In one respect, the trade channels have been inadequate; namely, prior to the 1930-31 season no agency existed to coordinate the distribution of ship- ments to the larger eastern markets. The results that were obtained by the Control Board in the 1930-31 season appear to justify the permanent establish- ment of such a body. The trade relations between producer and shipper have been influenced by custom, law, and the type of land tenure prevailing in the industry. Shippers handle the products of growers on consignment, receiving a commission for their 3. services. An improvement in producer-shipper relations could be made by the rendition of more detailed account sales which would permit the grower to check each item of expense and judge the reasonableness of the charges made for the various services in the marketing process. There is a tendency for the major fluctuations in artichoke prices in the several important markets to coincide. Ho\vever, at times prices in one market have been considerably higher or lower than in other markets. Consequently, the prices received by growers from sales in the principal markets were at times nearly equal, while at other times there was considerable variation. Part of the variation was due to differences in quality and part to differences in the supply of artichokes on each of the markets at a particular time. Prices in Chicago, Boston, Philadelphia, Los Angeles and San Francisco were found to be more closely related to the prices prevailing in New York City than to any other factor. The principal factors affecting New York prices were found to be the supply of artichokes (arrivals plus carryover) on that market and the prevailing prices of lettuce. Several cooperative marketing organizations have played an important part in the history of the artichoke industry. For one reason or another all have ceased operations. The California Artichoke Growers' Cooperative Association, organized in 1930, included 95 per cent of the growers. Its objectives were (1) the balancing of supplies on eastern markets through a Control Board, (2) the stimulation of demand by advertising, and (3) the handling of that portion of the product which was sold in California cities except San Francisco. The packing and grading of artichokes is conducted by growers on their farms as contrasted with the practice of grading and packing in central packing sheds which is prevalent in the handling of other vegetables. This results in anon-uniform pack and tends to limit f.o.b. sales. There is considerable di- versity of opinion as to the desirability of packing artichokes in central packing 4. plants. However, in view of the fact that with many other vegetables it has "been found advantageous, it warrants consideration and experimentation. Two advertising campaigns were conducted which were financed by the major- ity of producers, one during the 1923-24 season and the other in the 1930-31 season. The first campaign stimulated sales in several cities; the second which was confined principally to New York City resulted in an increased demand for the larger sized artichokes. The experience gained in advertising artichokes and similar commodities point to the desirability of expending the larger part of the advertising budget in inducing retailers to stock and display the product. The canning of artichokes has become an important phase of the artichoke industry; the pack in the 1930-31 season amounting to approximately 55,000 cases. It has been the experience of canncrs that the canned product, once introduced in a market, sells readily. It is probable that the canned product can be used successfully to introduce the artichoke in areas that arc not acquainted with it. A consideration of the marketing problems which were found, the conditions under which the commodity is produced and marketed, and the trade relations which have become established, points to the desirability of the formation of a per- manent organization composed of both growers and shippers, which for convenience will be called The Artichoke Growers' Exchange. The primary functions of the Exchange would be (l) the direction of shipments to eastern markets with the ob- jective of balancing supplies on the various markets, (2) expediting the move- ment of the product through the various trade channels by active trade promotion, (o) stimulation of demand and development of new markets for both the fresh and canned product through advertising, (4) standardization of packing and grading, (5) regulation of trade practices and relations, and (S) collection and dissemina- tion of current market information. The organization of the Exchange might be along the lines suggested in figure 9. Growers and shippers would be members. Growers selling through a 5. particular shipper would elect one or two members to the Control Foard and each shipper would be a member of the Control Board. This body would employ a Market Director whose function would be to execute their policies. The Control Board might also perform the functions of a Board of Directors for the Exchange, thus avoiding possible conflict between two governing bodies. The Exchange might be financed by a nominal membership fee and a small assessment per package on the products marketed through the shipper members of the Exchange* CI 4 rt- »-e P 3* 3- *1 cs> fl> *< 3 o* CD i->* o P <+ ® V o o c+ P t-t> i—" <<* p o o <1 p *S CO CD p •-J P CD ♦J p3 >-« ►J P* scs O * rt- i-J. a o r-f- 3 H- O 3 P <: <D 13 ra ciT -1 o ffl t— ' P H- o 3 3- CD CD • H* 3 d- o ct> a V— 1 c+ to rv) o tn 3 1 ro 3 1 CT> P 03 09 CD rt- P CD (71 3 O 3 CD • CO rt- o o CD Kj it ^ o o 0 0 > <0 0 Rail Shipment s of Cal ifornia Artie hokes By Months, 1929-50 and 1951 Seas ons ( In car loads of ' 504 boxes) 1929-30 season 19 30-51 sea son Straight Mixed Total St raight Mixed Total Month cars* cars** cars Month cars* cars** cars S © pt ember 5 11,0 16.0 September 47 21.4 63 .4 October 31 30.7 61.7 October 83 25.9 108 .9 Hovember 39 22.9 61.9 November 23 30.0 53 .0 Bee ember 23 44.7 67.7 December 16 32 . 2 48 o . £j January 12 37.5 49.5 January 12 40.0 52 .0 February 130 41.2 171.2 February 56 73.1 129 il March 254 24.3 278.3 March 235 33 . 2 268 .2 April 211 20.6 231.6 April 102 8.1 110 .1 Totals 705 232.9 937.9 Totals 574.0 263.9 337 .9 * Carloads containing 400 boxes or more were tabulated as straight cars but the contents were converted to a standard car basis by dividing by 504. ** Carloads containing less than 400 boxes were tabulated as mixed cars but the contents were converted to a standard car basis by dividing by 504. Source of data; Compiled from records of shippers, Pacific Fruit Express, Southern Pacific and Western Pacific Railroads. TABLE 2 Comparison of Artichoke Shipments as Reported by Federal -State Market News Service and as Compiled from Shippers' and Carriers f Records 1929-30 1930-31 Month Federal-State Shippers' and Federal-State Shippers and records* carriers 1 records-/ records* carriers 1 records-//- September 16.0 16.0 DO . u DO . October 57.0 61.7 91.0 108.9 November 101.0 61.9 36.0 53.0 December 93.0 67.7 45.0 48.2 January 23.0 49.5 39. 0 52.0 February 137.0 171.2 130.0 129.1 March 262.0 278. 3 260.0 268.2 April 213.0 231.6 101.0 110.1 Total 906.0 937.9 767.0 337.9 * Compiled from bi-weekly reports of the Federal -State Market News Service, Artichokes , San Francisco, California. # Compiled from the records of shippers, the Pacific Fruit Express, and the Southern Pacific and Western Pacific Railroads. TABLE 3 Distribution of Artichokes 1930-31 Season - September to April (In carloads of 504 boxes) (1) Shipped by rail to points outside of California -26 (2) Unloads in San Francisco 431 (3) Rail shipments from San Francisco ^25 (4) Consumed in San Francisco trade area 40F ( 5) Unloads in Los Angeles 189 (6) Rail shipments from Los Angeles 16 (?) Consumed in Los Angeles trade area 173 (8) Truck shipments to points in Sacra- 32 mento, San Joaquin and Santa Clara valleys (9) Apparent California consumption 513 (10) Total fresh shipments 1,339 (674,356 boxes) Sour co of data: (1) Compiled from records of shippers, Pacific Fruit Express, Southern Pacific and Western Pacific Railroads; (2) Monthly Unload reports, Federal-State Market Hews Service, Fruits and Vegetables, San Francisco, Calif.; (3) Same as (1); (4) Computed from (2) and (3); (5) Monthly Unload reporte, Federal -State Market News Service, Fruits and Vege- tables, Los Angeles, Calif.; (6) Compiled from records of shippers of carloads of mixed vegetables; (7) Computed from (5) and (6); (8) Cour- tesy Mr. J. Fassio, Secretary, California Artichoke Growers* Coopera- tive Association; (9) Computed from (4), (7), and (8); ( 10) Computed from (1) and (9). TABLE 4 Distribution of Rail Shipments of California Artichokes 1929-50 and 1950-31 Seasons (in carloads of 504 boxes) State and city- Arizona - totals Clifton Flagstaff Phoenix Prescott Tuscon 1929-50 season 1050-51 season Straight Mixed Total cars cars cars Straight Mixed Total cars cars cars 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.4 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 Arkansas - totals 0 0.4 0.4 0 0.2 0.2 El Reno 0 0.1 0.1 0 0.0 0.0 Ft, Smith 0 0.1 0.1 0 0.0 0.0 Hot Springs 0 0.1 0.1 0 0.1 0.1 Little Rook 0 q.i 0.1 0 0.1 0.1 California - totals 6 3.1 9.1 11 1.2 12.2 Chi co 0 0.1 0.1 0 0.0 0.0 Eureka 0 0.1 0.1 0 0.1 0.1 hos Angeles 6 2.5 3.5 11 0.9 11.9 lit, Shasta 0 0.1 0.1 0 0.1 0.1 Santa Rosa 0 0.1 0.1 0 0.0 0.0 Vfetsonville 0 0.1 0.1 0 0.0 0.0 Weed 0 0.1 0.1 0 0.1 0.1 Colorado - totals 0 1.5 1.5 0 0.4 0.4 Denver 0 1.3 1.3 0.1 0.1 Grand Junction 0 0.0 0,0 0 0.1 0.1 Pueblo 0 0.1 0.1 0 0.1 0.1 Trinidad 0 0.1 0.1 0 0.1 0.1 Florida - totals 0 1.4 1.4 0 1.0 1.0 Augusta 0 0.1 0.1 0 0.0 0.0 Jacksonville 0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 Miami 0 0.3 0.3 0 0.2 0.2 Orlando 0 0.1 0.1 0 0.1 0.1 Pensacola 0 0.1 0.1 0 0.1 0.1 Tampa 0 0.6 0.6 0 0.5 0.5 "Test Palm Beach 0 0.1 0.1 o 0.1 0.1 Table 4 continued - (part 2) 1929-30 sea son 1930-31 ^e ! : f.0j Sxaxe ana. cixy Straight Total Straii jht Mixed Totn 1 cars cars cars car s cfcir s o r c • Georgia - totals 0 1) • 6 u • o n n c n r Atlanta 0 \J « 1 U.J. u i n >j . u J • o AUg usra o O.J- 0 1 o a vaimcixi 0 0.1 0.1 0 0. 1 •J • X o.i Idaho - totals o • 0.5 0 0.5 0.5 0 0.1 0.1 o 0.1 0.1 Idaho Falls n u 0.1 0.1 0 0.1 0.1 T j»v/1 K"fa on 5* O w V/J»4 o 0.0 0.0 0 0.1 0.1 Pocatello 0 W . J. 0.1 0 0.1 0.1 i win rails 0 0.1 W.J. n 1 U . i Vfallaee 0 0.1 0.1 o 0.0 0.0 Illinois - totals 57 50.9 107.9 70 50.9 120.9 Chicago 57 50.9 107.9 70 50.9 120.9 Indiana - totals 0 0.1 0.1 0 0.3 0.3 Indianapolis 0 0.1 0.1 0 0.2 0.2 La Fayette 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.1 0.1 Iowa - totals 0 0.2 0 o L 0 0.2 0.2 Cedar Rapids 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.1 0.1 Des Moines 0 0.1 0.1 0 0.0 0.0 Sioux City 0 0.1 0.1 0 0.0 0.0 Vfeterloo 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.1 0.1 Kansas - totals 0 0.2 0. o Li 0 0.2 0.2 Garden City 0 0.1 0. 1 0 0.0 0.0 Hutchinson 0 0.0 0. 0 0 0.1 0.1 Wichita 0 0.1 0. 1 0 0.1 0.1 Kentucky - totals 0 1.0 1. 0 0 0.0 0.0 Lexington 0 1.0 1. 0 0 0.0 0.0 Louisiana - totals 26 10.5 36. 5 31 5.5 39.5 Alexandria 0 0.0 0. 0 0 0.1 0.1 Baton Rouge 0 0.0 0. o 0 0.1 0.1 La Fayette 0 0.1 0. 1 0 0.0 0.0 Monroe 0 0.3 0. 3 0 0.0 0.0 Nevf Orleans 23 10.0 *Z £ 0 01 6.0 39.0 Shreveport 0 0.1 0. 1 0 0.3 0.3 Table 4 continued - (part 3) 1929-30 season 1930- 31 season State and city Straight Mixed Total ^>trai ght Mixed Total cars cars cars car s car 3 cars Maryland -total s 4 1.5 5.5 3 3. 2 6.2 Baltimore 4 1.5 5.5 3 7 rj • 2 6.2 Massachusetts- total s 64 11.7 75.7 41 14. 8 55.8 Boston 64 11.7 75.7 41 14. 8 55.8 Michigan-totals 12 6.0 18.0 10 7. 8 17.8 Detroit 12 5.9 17.9 10 7. 6 17.6 Flint 0 0.1 0.1 0 0. 1 0.1 Sault Ste Marie 0 0.0 0.0 0 0. 1 0.1 Minnesota-total s 0 0.2 0.2 2 1. 6 3.6 Austin 0 0.0 0.0 0 0. 1 0.1 Duluth 0 0.0 0.0 0 0. 1 0.1 East Grand Forke 0 0.0 0.0 0 0. 1 0.1 Hibbing 0 0.1 0.1 o 0. 1 0.1 Mankato 0 0.0 0.0 0 0. 1 0.1 Minneapolis 0 0.1 0.1 0 0. 1 0.1 St. Paul 0 0.0 0.0 2 0. 9 2.9 WilljBar 0 0.0 0.0 0 0. 1 0.1 Mi ssiasippi -ifcot&l s 0 0.2 0.2 0 0. 0 0.0 Columbus 0 0.1 0.1 0 0. 0 0.0 Jackson 0 0.1 0.1 0 0. 0 0.0 Missouri-totals 7 5.2 12.2 7 6. 5 13.5 Kansas City 3 0.6 3.6 2 2. 8 4.8 St. Louis 4 4.6 8.6 5 3. 7 8.7 Montana-total s 0 0.7 0.7 0 0.8 0. 8 Baker 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.1 0. 1 Billings 0 0.1 0.1 0 0.1 0. 1 Bozeman 0 0.1 0.1 0 0.1 0. 1 Butte 0 0.1 0.1 0 0.1 0. 1 Great Falls 0 0.1 0.1 0 0.1 0. 1 Havre 0 0.1 0.1 o 0 . 1 c. 1 Helena 0 0.1 0.1 c 0.0 0. 0 Miles City 0 0.1 0.1 0 0.1 0. 1 Missoula 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.1 0. 1 Table 4 continued - (part 4) 1929-30 seas on Zj 0\ i — O X sos. sot; State and city Straight Tot n 1 O 1/ I o J. i 1 v.. iu J. AU Li Tol-h 1 cars cars cars cars cars oars Nebraska-total s 1 0.5 1.5 2 0.2 2.2 ft** €IY\A T CI 1 Q VlH VIi clIIU JLoXcillU VJ . 1 0 1 o O 0 Hastings 0 0.1 0.1 0 0.0 0.0 Borth Platte u 0.1 U . -L U 0 . 1 Vj . 1 Omaha 1 0.2 1.2 0 0.1 2.1 Nevada— totals U 0.1 Oi 1 U • X u • 1 Reno 0 0.1 0.1 0 0.1 0.1 Hew jers ey T/Oxai s lo 0.0 lOiU i O Pi x • u Jersey City 0.0 13.0 1 0.0 1.0 Sew Mexico -totals 0 n i U . 1 0. 1 0 0.0 0.0 Gallup 0 U» J. 0.1 0 0.0 0.0 North Carolina-totals 0 0.1 0.1 0 0.1 0.1 0 0.1 vj W.J. worth Uekota-totals 0 0.3 0 . 3 0 0.4 0.4 Bismarck 0 U . 1 0.1 0 0.1 0.1 Fargo 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.1 0.1 wrand rorks 0 U . I 0.1 0 0.1 0.1 Minot 0 0.1 0.1 0 0.1 0.1 New York-totals 460 99.4 559.4 347 127.8 474.8 Buffalo 23 9.7 32.7 19 8.8 27.8 New York 419 83.6 502.6 310 113.6 423.6 Port Jervis 0 0.0 0.0 4 0.0 4.0 Rochester 16 6.1 22.1 14 5.4 19.4 Syracuse 1 0.0 1.0 0 0.0 0.0 Utica 1 0.0 1.0 0 0.0 o.o Ohio-totals Cincinnati Cleveland 13 2 11 9.9 22.9 13 10.6 23.6 1.0 3.0 3 1.7 4.7 8.9 19.9 10 8.9 18.9 Table 4 continued - (part 5) 1929-30 season 1930-51 season State and city Straight Mixed Total Str&Iiht Mixed Total cars cars cars cars cars carp -Oklahoma -total s 0 0.5 0 .5 0 r\ W .5 0. Ardmore 0 0.0 0 .0 0 0 .1 0. 1 Chickasha 0 0.1 0 .1 0 0 .0 0. 0 Enid 0 0.1 0 .1 0 0 .1 0 . 1 Lawton 0 0.1 0 .1 o 0 .0 0. 0 Oklahoma City 0 0.1 0 .1 0 o .1 0. 1 ■ Tul sa ' ■ ' 0 0.1 0 .1 0 0 .1 0. 1 Wood«ard 0 0.0 0 .0 0 0 .1 0. 1 Oregon-totals 0 1.3 1.3 0 2.9 2.9 Kl&ia&th Falls 0 0.1 0.1 o 0.1 0.1 ; . t& Grande- 0 0.1 0.1 0 0.1 0.1 Mar shfield 0 0.1 0.1 p. 0.0 0.0 .-. Medford 0 0.2 0.2 0 0.2 0.2 Pendleton 0 0,1 0.1 0 0.1 0.1 Portland 0 0.6 0.6 0 2.3 2.3 : ; S&leia 0 0.1 0.1 0 0.1 0.1 Pennsylvania-t otals 40 18.7 58.7 33 17.0 50.0 Philadelphia 29 10.5 39.5 24 7.7 31.7 Pittsburgh 11 8.2 19.2 9 8.9 17.9 ^ilkes-Barre 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.4 0.4 South Carolina -totals 0 0,2 0.2 0 0.1 0.1 Charleston 0 0.1 0.1 0 0.0 0.0 ' Greenville 0 0.1 0.1 0 0.1 0.1 South Dakota-totals 0 0.1 0.1 1 0.2 1.2 Aberdeen 0 0.1 0.1 1 0.1 1.1 Rapid City 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.1 0.1 tennessee-totals 0 0.3 0.3 0 Columbia 0 0.1 0.1 0 Memphis 0 0.2 0.2 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Tejcas-total* 1 1.7 .7 1 0.9 1.9 Amarillo 0 0.1 0 .1 0 0.1 0.1 Beauiaont 0 0.1 0 .1 0 0.1 0.1 Corous Christi 0 0.1 0 .1 0 0.1 0.1 Dalias 0 0.1 o .1 0 0.1 0.1 El Paso 1 1.0 2 .0 c 0.2 0.2 Galveston 0 0.1 0 .1 0 0.0 0.0 Houston 0 0.1 0 .1 1 0.2 1.2 San Antonio 0 o.c 0 .0 0 0.1 0.1 Wichita Falls 0 0.1 0 .1 0 0.0 0.0 Table 4 continued - (part 6) lye y - OU s e a s or> I ycL-i x r> ft L s r- o ti State and city Straight Mixed Total Straight Iviixed Total car s car s car s c c..r s cars car s Utah-totals U a o A Q p. u r a A A Provo 0 0.7 0.7 0 0.0 0.0 ugaen U a a A A K .1 A 1 A 1 Salt Lake City 0 0.2 0.2 o 0.3 0.3 Virginia-total s 0 A 1 A 1 U • 1 "1 1 A A 1 A 1 . u Roanoke u A 1 A 1 1 A A 1 A Washington-total s 1 1.4 2.4 0 1.6 1.6 cexi lngnam a w A \J 0 n J . V.-' 0 0 Pullman 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.1 0.1 £>eaxt;ie 1 1 A 9 A c • U u Ai O u * y A Q u . y Spokane 0 0.2 0.2 0 A, ** 0.3 a u A A A A A U A 9 A 9 Walla Walla 0 0.1 A 1 o 0.1 0.1 iieBv * xrgxniu.— x>t> otx j. a U . u A O A u n i VJ • J. A 1 W.J. Charleston 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.1 0.1 Wi scons in-t o t a 1 s 0 0.1 0.1 0 0 . 1 0. 1 Milwaukee 0 0.1 0.1 0 0.1 0.1 ftyoming-t otal s 0 0.1 0.1 0 0.3 0.3 Casper 0 0. 1 0.1 o 0.1 0.1 Laramie 0 u .0 C»l 0.1 oheridaii 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.1 0.1 Canada-total s 0 1.1 1.1 0 1 . 9 1 . 9 Calgary 0 0.1 0.1 0 0.1 0.1 Edmonton 0 0.0 0 . 0 0 0.1 0.1 Pernie 0 0 . 1 0.1 0 0.0 0.0 Lethbridge 0 0.0 0 . 0 0 0.1 0.1 Medicine Hat 0.1 0.1 0 0.0 0.0 Montreal 0 0.1 0.1 0 0.0 0.0 Kelson 0 0 . 1 0.1 0 0.1 0,1 Sorth Bay o 0.1 0.1 0 0.1 0.1 Ottawa 0 0.1 0.1 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.1 0.1 0 0.1 0.1 Saskatoon 0 0.1 0.1 0 0.1 0.1 Toronto 0 0.1 0.1 0 1.0 1.0 Winnipeg * 0 0.1 0.1 0 0.1 0.1 TOTALS 705 232.9 937.9 674 263.9 857.9 Source of date: Records of shinpe rs, pre ific Fruit Exn*"r;r TABLE 5 Carloads of Artichokes Received in Important Cities and Persons of Italian Origin Residing in Those Cities Number of carloads Number of persons of artichokes re- of Italian origin ceived in 1930-51 season. 1 2 New York 423.6 302,946 Chicago 120.9 124,184 Boston 55 6 77,105 ilew Orleans 39.0 21,818 Philadelphia 31 7 136,793 Buffalo 27.8 34,955 Rochester 19 .4 36,731 Cleveland 18.9 35,687 Detroit 17.6 29,047 Pittsburgh 17.9 32,596 St. Louis 8.7 18,234 Baltimore 6.2 15,489 Kansas City 4.3 7 . 304 Cincinnati 4.7 5,691 Source of data: Col. 1; From table 4. Col. 2; Fourteenth Census. Population. Vol. II. Table 9 1920. City TABLE 6 Cities in the United States With a Considerable Number of Persons of Italian Origin Which Are Not Receiv- ing Direct Shipments of Artichokes in Volume Number of persons Number of persons City of Italian origin City of Italian origin Bridgeport, Conn. 17,586 Scranton, Pa. 7,6*0 Denver, Colo. 7,135 Springfield, Mass. 8,706 Hartford, Conn, 14,307 Syracuse, N. Y. 13,681 Jersey City. N. J. 33,767 Trenton, N J. 13,657 Milwaukee, Wis. 7,843 Washington D C . 7,500 New Haven, Conn. 34,553 Wi lmingt on , Del. 6,967 Newark, N. J. 63,589 Y/orcester, Mass. 8,769 Patterson, N. J. 22,936 Yonlcers, N. Y. 9,892 Providence, R. I. 42,018 Young st own, Ohio 11,677 Source of data; Fourteenth Census. Population. Vol. II. Table 9, p. 928. 1920. Sample Account Sale JOHN DOE AND COMPANY Packers and Shippers of artichokes Davenport, Calif. Feb. 13, 105 1 Sales Account for Hi chard Hoe, Grower No. 190 II i L l i.i i|i)Ji.P.-i'L~g- Invoice No. 70 Car Mo. PFE 31995 Date Loaded Jan. 18, 1931 Destination New York Date Sold Jan._ 30, _ 1931 Number oi ~ boxes Description 7 Artichokes & 5.50 $38.50 12 " © 5.00 60.00 iii " © 4.00 36. 00 * 23 Total Gross Price $134.50 Charges Freight ...... 1.7525 $21.07 Freight on Top ice ® . . .0357 1.00 Refrigeration c ....... .1736 5.00 .04 1.12 Cartage © ............. .07 1.96 Demurrage '& i:one 0.00 P.eceiver's Commission © 1% 9.42 Shipper 1 s " 05 "6% 4.04 !/lar::et Director ci-: . .015 .42 Total Charges $44 . 03 Uet Proceeds $90.47 o » o »-* a. p c+ P d" O P- d d" H» O 3" o !V CD O o 9 01 o o M» P c+ H" O 3 w p 3 d p o « o o o p o d 3 o o c d d- CD o 3" M» O P OS o S3 d- O 3 C3 CD a" CD 3 CD CO- CD ct- C+" 2 3* P P- ca »-> 3* P p o d tv p 3 & ho 3 4* W c. t — ' -5 P CD -j • • • (—• ro ro o O p CO- o O O IT • • « O <Ji ro cn cn ->3 ro ro CO cn cn a ro ro ro O O O 1 • • J— 1 t— ' o C. a. o o O tx « • o o b o X *>• 4^ o I— 1 V- " p en to 00 • • h- ■ O o o o o o o co- o o p tn Q Q KJ rS ro C/-3 C*J CO cn 00 •^3 ^ ^r- o -J CO CO p cn tn O d • • * i— ' o O o o o O o p n> o o b tn • o h- 1 (— 1 t— ■ if* CO CO oo CO CO cn o o rfa. cn cn p ro >— ' O d Oi -J 1— 1 • • • o cn p ro C0- o ttf • • O oo o X t— i o o> CD cn ►fs. ~J oo d CD 3* ct- >-3 o -d t-» O i->- M O 'I "d a> O 3/ 3 *-S w O 3 i-3 O p o 3* P cm o M o CO - — *> 3* 1-4 3 *d T3 C3 H" P 3 era t— 1 O > P co- ft" ca H' O o 3" h> o !V ■cn a O M ry O o X 3 H) 03 si r p < td 3 o CO- 3 ~d oo cr o o d X rt" o O o f— > H- d3 o O 3 o (_>. C P 3 Co- ca d- o O P d p c+ a 3 a 01 TABLE 9 Cartage Charges on Artichokes in Several Cities (In boxes of 40 pounds and half boxes of 20 pounds) City Box Half box Baltimore #0.05 $0.03 Boston 0.05 0.04 Buffalo 0.05 0.03 Chicago 0.05 0.03 Cincinnati 0.05 0.03 Cleveland 0.07 0.03 Detroit 0.05 0.05 Hew Orleans 0.04 0.03 Uew York 0.07 0.04 Philadelphia 0.05 0.04 Pittsburgh 0.05 0.03 St . Louis 0.05 0.03 *m » i in i, i i .it mm tn i i 1 .turn ifn ■ MaMBWpaHMtoBa i a mum ta> ■aca m .mmit aomasmxsrms: Source of data: .United Artichoke Grov/ers Association, San Francisco, California. Courtesy Mr. J. L. Debenedetti . Fig .-3. The prices received from sales in Eastern markets were at times nearly equal, while at other times there was considerable variation. Part of the variation was due to differences in quality and part to excessive or meager ,!^ P :i 6 V n J ^^J** ™**ket. Beginning January 15, 1931, shipujeat regulation ^practiced, which had the effect of equalizing prices received" from sales in various cities. 0 *0 -4 Cu tr p |*> H> O O •T3 <» O o sf a "3 ra HO ^ €6*1(8 «f Cf* *1 <t * o *i o CO en CO (B Cfi 3} (!) *t *t H* (6 cm • »-t> o o 6 9 a o 3 *1 w a. n» ct- o o t-» ±? ° J- ff a H» (6 CB CO f-i h. a ft M M H- C M O O 9» 3 ct- O m p. o ^ 1 (0 (->. n- 3 p o a 1 (D o "J Bos fop p*r Sosto/7 overage fine* p*r k>o%-$ " I 8 } | J w 1 kH ' - • »ni ■ I 1 ft «» *• * i s < M - a* 1 » 0 * > Nr. $ «* * i ■ ; -ft ■Wife ^ ft * i k> 1 0 'I r or I mm 40 8 t J? * ^ • \ • • • v r* . i 1 f % o >». *o • W 0 ■ ft fivf K ,» ' * ft -~§ I ^ < ft * t ' ..«L ,. • • ft i i 1 ! 1 8 1 i_) o, f*.*m Sec A o oo a • - o r /ram S&C& X < o . ft 3 <* o X. N 0 > Ti*.. " j_.E iu Canned Pack of Globe artichokes in California 1924-25 to 1930-31 Seasons Season Cases of artichokes packed 1924- 25 15,000 1925- 26 16,500 1923-27 30,000 1927- 28 27,415 1928- 29 34,798 1929- 30. 41,626 1930- 31 55,522 Sources of data: 1924-25 to 1926-27 seasons computed from data furnished the author by ft. W. Ayer & Son, San Francisco, California. 1927-28 to 1929-30 seasons, data from the Canners* League of California, San Francisco, California, 1930-31 season, compiled by the author from replies to ques- tionnaires sent to artichoke earners. (Some data on canned artichokes are given in terms of tons of the raw product, In converting tonnage figures to a case basis, 30 cases are the equivalent of one ton. )