Analyzing the Current Returns and Potential Market by Harvesting Method for West Texas Cotton

Analyzing the Current Returns and Potential Market by Harvesting Method for West Texas Cotton

West Texas have begun to use picker harvesters1.

• But, a key question is if doing this will be more profitable.

•Currently available economic analysis 2,3 does not take into

consideration the changes in ginning cost associated with harvest

method.

Yield lbs/planted acre in Texas

Yield share by states

•Short fiber content by number was low overall for picker harvest system.

•Trash content was significantly lower for picker harvesting and ginning method for all

three years.

•Nep size and Nep count were significantly lower for the picker harvest system for all

three years.

Short Fiber Content by No.(%X10)

Neps per Gram

Trash Content (Cnt/g)

Year Picker Stripper

2009 East/Memphis 2 Traditional

2010 East/Memphis 2 Traditional

2011 South Texas East/Memphis1

Hence, picker harvested cotton fibers can at least meet the

quality standards of market segment East/Memphis 2

(average premium 40).

Little difference in return by harvest system in traditional markets.

Picker harvested West Texas cotton quality meets higher segment.

Conclusion

Choice of harvest method in cotton production

surprisingly has many economic consequences by

altering economic returns and quality of final product.

In particular, picker harvest and ginning practices

1. Determine quality differences between by harvesting method.

2. Compare profits based on the CCC loan rate and AMS prices.

3. Determine if improved markets served is possible.

may be useful to preserve and enhance the fiber quality of long staple

varieties used in West Texas. This article looks at differences in cost and

price premium for sample drawn from cotton bales produced at

commercial quantities that were ginned based on harvest method, and

evaluated in the years 2009, 2010 and 2011. Results suggest cotton

farmers may want to reconsider typical stripper harvesting and ginning

practices for irrigated cotton because there seems to be potential for

reaching higher market segments. Comparatively, picker harvesting

is costly but provides the quality of yield in demand

by higher end market segments, especially in

demand for ring spinning purposes.

References1. Wanjura J. D., W. B. Faulkner, G. A. Holt, M.G. Pelletier, 2011. Influence of Seed Cotton Extractor Cleaners and Cleaning Rate on

Gin Turnout and Fiber Quality, American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers, 2011 Louisville, Kentucky,

August 7-10, 2011, 1111287.

2. Faulkner, W.B., Wanjura, J.D., Shaw, B.W., Hequet, E.F. 2009. Effect of harvesting methods on fiber and yarn quality from irrigated

cotton on the High Plains. Proceedings of the American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers International

(ASABE)Meeting. June 29-July 2, 2008, Providence, RI. Paper No. 083283.

3. Bowmen, R., and Kelly, M. 2010. “Picker Vs Stripper Harvest or Comparisons.” System Agronomic and Economic Evaluation of

Cotton Varieties in the Texas High Plains, 2010 Final Report: 20-40.

Product Flow from Field to Market by Harvest Method

• Global demand - fibers for

ring spinning applications.

• Texas - largest producer of

cotton in US but is producing

for rotor spinning.

• Some cotton producers in

Increased market needs to be met with sufficient volume .

Production of irrigated, picker harvested cotton appears promising.

Current Profit ($/acre)

Seed Cotton Yield(lbs/acre)

Lint Yield (lbs/acre)

Potential Market Segment

•On average, the picker system yielded 63.94 lbs/acre lint and 910.69 lbs/acre seed

cotton less than the stripper harvest system.

•The profit is not much different in the current market.

•Potential market analysis is important as the current market premium is certainly not

rewarding the quality differential of picker harvested cotton.

Yield and Profit by Harvest Method

Quality Difference by Harvest Method

PickerStripper

Higher return Higher quality specification

Cotton field ready to harvestPicker Harvest System Stripper Harvest System

“New varieties improved returns to West Texas cotton farmers by $ 1

million a year.” - Dr. Carl Anderson. But, are West Texas cotton farmers

receiving potential returns with traditional stripper harvesting methods ?

Rationale

Cotton is a natural fiber with substantial quality variability

P= f (Micronaire, Length, Length Uniformity, Strength, Leaf, Color

grade)

where, P is the base price adjusting for quality premium (or discount).

Using varieties with strong genetic potential

Irrigated production

Harvesting costs evaluated

Ginned with appropriate sequence to maintain fiber quality

Objectives

Methods

Abstract

Introduction

Market

Producer

Seed cotton yield with

• Less Trash

•More fiber per unit volume to be transported to the gin

Seed cotton yield with

• More Trash

• Less fiber per unit volume to be transported to the gin

Ginning sequence with one stick machine and one lint cleaner

Ginning sequence with two stick machine and two lint cleaner

Lint yield with

• Higher Micronaire

• Lower short fiber content

Lint yield with

• Lower Micronaire

• Higher short fiber content

Harvest Cost

Volume

Quality Premium

Market Pricing

Ginning Cost

The two systems differ in:

Is the quality difference recognized by current market ?

International Cotton Research Center

Janani R. Thapa, Conrad P. Lyford, Eric Hequet, Jeff JohnsonDepartment of Agriculture And Applied Economics

College of Agriculture Science and Natural Resources