Coal oj P'sodce#tq
Apples and Pears
u th4 #ood aüLe4 Va2,
e9O#
PROGRESS REPORT ill
Gustav W. Kuhiman
Arthur E. irish
Agricultural Experiment Station
Oregon State College
Corvallis
Circular oF Information 486
June 1950
Coal oj P4odAcüy
Apples and Pears
us
Ihe hood Ruie, Va, (e9o#s
PROGRESS REPORT Ill
Gustav W. Kuhiman, Agricultural Economist
Arthur E. Irish, Fieldman
This report is a summary of detailed cost records kept on 21 fruit farms in the Hood River
Valley for the year 19149 with comparable data for 19147 and 19143. The cost of production includes
all items of expense incurred in producing and delivering the crop to the door of the packing
house or processing plant. Nb packing house costs are included.
Apple Production Costs
The cost of producing apples in 19149 on 20 orchards averaged 78 per loose box and 31.214 per
packed-box basis, exclusive of packing and storage costs (Table 1). Assuming packing and handling charges (from l.25 to $1.50) the total F.0.B. cost would be 2.142 or more per packed box.
Cost of Production, Hood River Valley, Oregon, 19147-19149.
Table 1. APPLES:
(Does not include cost of storage, boxes, packing, and shipping)
Item
Year
Year
Year
19147
19148
19149
3-year
average
Percentage
oi' average
25
20
16.2
572
353
16.2
563
360
Cents
33.1
Picking ............................12.5
Other harvest ...................... 6.9
52.5
Total labor
13.3
Materials
11.6
General expense
6.2
Depreciation on equipment
Interest on investment (5 per cent)
9.5
Cents
29.1
12.5
5.7
Cents
147.3
33.8
12.2
12.3
5.7
8.7
146.2
53.5
12.0
12.9
6.0
9.0
12.6
114.6
12.14
114.14
6.0
9.1
10.5
Total cost per loose box ......... 93.6
37.2
78.2
36.3
100.0
Number of orchards in study ..........
Acreage of apples per orchard ........15.2
214
Yield per acre, loose boxes
5142
Yield per acre, packed boxes .........323
Costs per loose box for:
Preharvest labor
214.2
9.5
5.1
561
3149
Cents
23.3
11.5
5.9
Per cent
33.14
13.3
6.3
7.0
139.1
123.5
139.14
Cost per packed-box basis*
1514.14
* Growers received about 432 per ton (equivalent to 20 cents return per packed box grown)
for the low-grade apples taken to the cannery.
The cost per box of apples produced in 19149 was about 10 per cent less than in 19148 with
approximately the same yield per acre. See Table 2 for the labor requirements by operations and
the itemized costs per acre for the apple orchards studied.
1/ Fruit growers, processors, and the Hood River Branch Experiment Station requested the Oregon
Agricultural Experiment Station to conduct a cost project on representative orchards in the
The cooperating growers
Hood River Valley. Arthur E. Irish of Hood River served as fieldinan.
kept daily records on their respective enterprises.
2
Table 2. APPLE PRODUCTION COSTS, Rood River Valley, Oregon, 19147-19149.
(Does not include cost of storage, boxes, packing, and shipping)
Man hours
Cost
I
l9L
Item
19147
19147
l9145
19149
Labor per acre
Pruning .
31.6
39.2
33.1
$ 29.71
$ 38.96
5.2
5.63
Brush removal .
6.8
6.72
5.8
2.6
1.1
Rand cultivating
2.27
3.18
3.5
Machine cultivating ...
14.21
14.6
14.0
14.1
14.147
2.14
2.29
Fertilizing; mowing ...
1.7
1.58
1.5
11.2
20.0
11.2
Irrigating ....
11.67
19.35
11.2
18.6
Spraying
17.62
15.70
15.3
143.02
Thinning
30.14
37.15
143.14
149.5
8.81
6.149
Propping
9.6
14.8
6.5
22.10
20.8
25.0
31.07
Maintenance .....
31.7
12.6
21.26
12.92
Supervision ...... ....
8.7
15.7
$166.55
186.0
Total preharvest ....
167.0
179.63
1140.14
67.52
67.7
71.140
Picking
i9.3
79.14
36.6
30.3
27.8
37.16
32.148
Other harvest
235.9
$2814.31
$270.143
256.6
Total labor .......... 302.0
Materials per acre
Fertilizers ..............................................$ 114.03
5.53
Irrigation water
147.62
Sprays
7.83
Miscellaneoussupplies.. ...........................
Totalmaterials ........................................$75.01
General expense per acre
Building repair
$ 14.79
Machinery repair . ...............................
9.09
Machinehire
3.014
Gas and oil
Electricity; water; wood fuel; office
Liability, fire, and motor insurance
9.1.10
7.25
6.37
12.85
Propertytaxes
Cash to operate .......................................... 10.00
Total general expense .............................. ....
Depreciation per acre
Buildings (not including operator's dwelling)
$ 12.67
20.83
Machinery
Total depreciation ..................................... $ 33.50
Interest per acre (5 per cent)
Buildings ..s.....I.ø .......
$ 9.67
11.03
Machinery ....... . . . . . . . ............ . ............ . .......
30.69
Orchard .................................................
Total intere st .............. . . . ................ . . . . . . .
$ 51 39
$507.00
Total cost per acre .........................................
Cost per loose box .........................................
.914
$
..
Cost per packed box*
$ 1.514
Acres per orchard ... .......................... ..... ......
15.2
Loose boxes produced per acre ..... ............... . .....
5142
Packed boxes produced per acre . ..... .. ......
328
$ 114.61
5.20
39.17
9.61
$68.59
$
2.98
10.00
3.28
12.09
19149
8 31.52
14.60
.87
14.00
1.61
11.12
11.145
26.68
14.148
26.05
114.83
$137.21
514.13
28.91
$ 11.56
6.11
141.65
9.98
$69.30
$
3.32
8.16
6.90
11.61
8.146
8.147
10.714
7.01
16.29
10.00
$ 73.85
17.140
$ 12.32
22.38
$ 314.70
$
9.36
11.55
30.59
51.50
$1499.07
.87
$
$
1.39
16.2
10.00
$ 72.86
$ 10.27
21.86
$ 32.13
$
8.5Li.
10.22
30.61
$ 1.1.9 67
$141414.26
$
$
.78
1.214
16.2
568
360
355
*Orowers received about $32 per ton (equivalent to 20 cents return per packed box grown) for
the low-grade apples taken to the cannery.
572
3
Pear Production Costs
Winter pears
The cost of producing winter pears in 19149 on 21 orchards averaged 96 per lug box and .31.10
per packed-box basis, exclusive of packing and storage costs (Table 3). Assuming packing and
handling charges (from l.25 to $1.50) the total F.OB. cost would be $2.35 or more per packed bcc.
Table 3.
WINTER FEARS: Cost of Production, Hood River Valley, Oregon, 19147-19149.
(Does not include cost of storage. boxes. ackin. and shiDpin')
Item
Number of orchards in the study
Acreage of winter pears per orchard
Yield per acre, loose lug boxes
Year
Year
Year
19147
19148
19149
214
214
21
11.8
398
363
10.9
388
386
Cents
13.3
5.9
Cents
26.0
9.8
6.3
Cents
29.0
11.7
6.3
148.6
142.1
147.0
146.0
15.5
16.3
17.0
8.3
13.2
96.1
16.14
7.8
13.8
101.2
19.6
17.7
9.0
15.8
109.7
15.9
16.0
8.1
114.3
114.0
102.3
100.0
1114.3
120.3
109.9
1114.8
1459
Costs per loose lug box for:
Preharvest labor
Picking
Cents
3L14
12.1
Other harvest ........................ 6.8
Total labor ........................50.3
Materials ............................ 114.3
Cost per packed-box basis
Percentage
of average
10.7
Yield per acre, packed boxes ...........1406
General exiense
Depreciation on equipment
Interest on investment (5 per cent)
Total cost per loose lug box
3-year
average
114.5
29.14
141414
14314
8.3
Per cent
11.14
6.2
A 10 per cent increase in yield for 19149 over 19148 was accompanied by a 9 per cent decrease
See Table 5 for the labor requirein cost per lug box and per packed-box basis, respectively.
ments by operations and the itemized costs per acre for the winter pear orchards studied.
Bartlett (cannery) pears
The cost of producing cannery pears in 19149 on 20 orchards averaged 31.214 per lug box and
See Table 6 for itemized costs.
353.1414 per ton (Table 14).
Table 14.
BARTLETT (CANNERY) PEARS: Cost of Production, Hood River Valley, Oregon, 19147-19149.
(Includes all costs, delivered to the cannery door)
Item
Number of orchards in the study
Acreage bearing pears per orchard
Yield per acre, loose lug boxes
Year
Year
Year
19147
19148
19149
23
214
20
14.7
5.2
258
5.2
5.9
363
295
8.14
6.7
Dollars
Dollars
Dollars
263
Yield per acre, tons ................... 5.3
Costs per loose lug box for:
Preharvest labor
Picking
Dollars
.60
.11
........................ .08
Other harvest
Total labor .........................79
Materials
General expense
Depreciation on equipment
Interest on investment (5 per cent)
Total cost per loose lug box
Cost per ton
3-year
average
.26
.26
.12
.21
Percentage
of average
Per cent
.12
.08
.09
.06
.52
.11
.07
.71
.28
.28
.60
.70
146.14
.214
.25
.12
.20
15.9
16.6
7.9
13.2
100.0
.145
.23
.18
.20
.10
.16
1.614
1.614
1.214
1.51
$714.60
$72.31
$53.hh
$66.78
.114
314.5
7.3
14.6
Table 5. WINTER PEAR PRO1JCTION COSTS
(Does not include cost of storage,
Hood River Valley, 19147-19149.
boxes1
packing. and shipping)
Man hours
Item
Labor per acre
Pruning .. ..... .
Cost
19117
l91&8
19149
1j9.9
1414.6
143.1
1.16.00
$ 142.77
$ 113.11
14.6
14.1
14.60
14.143
3.89
2.3
2.7
2.18
1.8
9.8
12.7
1.6
3.2
1.2
10.6
8.7
1.99
2.82
1.90
.1
--
Brush removal .........
14.9
Hand cultivating ......
2.5
Machine cultivating ...
3.6
Fertilizing; mowing ...
2.2
Irrigating ..... ........ 114.5
Spraying
114.1
Thinning . .
1.8
Propping . .......... ...
6.8
Maintenance
25.0
Supervision . ......... .
20.1
Total preharvest ....
145.11
Picking
61.i.5
Other harvest .........
31.14
Total labor . ......... 2141.6
Materials per acre
$
3e140
2.02
9.714
5.143
3.21
21.27
13.66
$117.06
214.147
5.9
3.6
22.9
214.60
8.6
113.5
66.0
22.7
202.2
12.3
111.3
$1144.27
Fertilizers . ........ . ........ .............. ........
Irrigation water .......................................
rays . ............ . ....................................
Miecellaneoussupplies..... ........ .......... ..........
Total materials ...... ........ ....... ........
General expense per acre
Building repair ............ ............ ......... I
Machinery repair
chine hire ............................................
Gas and oil ............... ......
E1ectricitr; water; wood fuel; office
Liability, fire, and motor insurance
26.61
55.36
31.33
$230.96
$114.39
5.75
37.44
.
. . .
Totalinterest ........................................
Totalcostperacre
Cost per loose box
Costperpackedbox
Acres per orchard .. .... .
Loose lug boxes produced per acre ........................
Packed boxes produced per acre .............................
-
9.148
.06
52.914
23.140
114.80
115.149
143.75
$193.40
27.90
$157.17
$16.10
$11.67
5.52
11.87
6.31
37.10
13.85
167.52
$
714.214
$65.93
$
$
2.50
140.75
10.214
14.67
11. 13
1.86
11.07
6.82
7.60
Propertytaxes
13.30
Cash to operate ............................................10.00
Total general expense .................................
$ 66.45
Depreciation per acre
Buildings (not including operator's dwelling) . .........
$ 13.63
Machinery
22.02
Total depreciation ............................. . .......
$35.65
Interest per acre (5 per cent)
Bi1gs ...... .......... . ...... .. ...........
$ 10.06
Machinery . . . . . . . ...... . .............. . . . . . . . . . . . . .......
11113
Orchard . . . . . . . ........ . . . . . . .............. ...... .
1.314
3.29
1.21
10.69
12.99
20.14
27.0
193.0
19119
114.09
12.99
1.58
6.20
514.7
19148
19147
$
2.80
8. 75
9. 53
3.15
12.80
8.69
7.87
6.26
12.00
9.16
8.00
17.59
10.00
$ 75.34
16.514
10.00
$ 70.30
$ 12.81
23.26
$ 11.22
$36.07
$36.76
25.514
142.37
141.17
9.12
11 29
38.06
$63.56
$62.55
$55.47
114614.144
$436.59
$ 1.10
$ 1.20
11.5
398
363
$1426.67
.96
$
$ 1.01
$ 1.114
10.7
1459
1406
$
9.81
11 90
$
$
1.10
10.9
14414
388
S
Table 6.
BARTLETT PEAR PRODUCTION COSTS: Hood River Valley, Oregon, l9LL7-l9l9.
(Includes all costs delivered to the cannery door)
Man hours
I
Item
Cost
I
19147
19145
19149
23.5
37.0
142.2
$ 22.00
$ 36.95
14.2
14.8
3.14
14.12
14.514
14.9
14.0
3.7
14.33
3.71
$ 142.55
3.22
3.22
3.14
14.2
3.50
1.73
3.145
14.214
]J4.9
3.3
1.3
7.8
1.32
7.91
16.2
114.0
143.3
27.8
5.1
21.3
5.9
l.Ll
12.53
9.78
38.89
Labor per acre
Pruning
Brush removal
Hand cultivating .
Machine cultivating ....
Fertilizing; mowing ....
Irrigating
Spraying .............. .
Thinning
Propping ............. ..
Maintenance
Supervision
Total preharvest .....
11.6
25.1
15.8
165.1
Picking ...... ........ ..
314.1.
1.8
19147
1.14
12.14
19149
19145
9.1
114.57
114.85
114.38
1414.1
37.12
214.141
5.0
26.1
9.9
161.5
10.214
214.89
14.65
23.114
19.72
$157.07
29.15
20.37
$206.62
8.23
5132.69
31.03
20.05
$153.77
28.85
12.31
*161.92
33.00
22.79
$217.71
3 12.07
5.01
$
16. 71.i.
$ 11.149
5.25
Miscellaneous supplies ....................................10.06
141.55
10.143
5.65
36.31
11.79
69.33
3 73.97
3 65.214
Other harvest ........... 21.2
Total labor ....... ... _
220.14
132.3
35.7
20.0
191.0
Li.l.2
21.5
2214.2
14.92
Materials per acre
Fei1izers ...........
Irrigation water
Sprays ................
142.19
Total materials
General expense per acre
Building repair
Machinery repair
chine hire
Gas and oil
Electricity; water; wood fuel; office
..........
Liability, fire, and motor insurance
Property taxes ..........................................
Cashtooperate
3
14.51
$
10.23
2.88
lO.Li.7
7.73
10.19
12.63
..........................................10.00
Total general expense ...................................3 68.614
Depreciation per acre
Buildings (not including operator's dwelling)
.........
3 12.12
20.80
Machinery ...............................................
2.79
9.82
2.80
12.30
9.15
3
2.50
7.25
10.38
9.11
7.914
8.214
16.59
10.00
* 71.39
17.58
10.00
$ 73.147
$ 12.23
$
9.52
22.79
21i.146
$35.02
$33.95
3
$ 514.67
9.72
12.02
37.31
$ 59.05
Totalcostperacre
$1432.15
$1423.20
$14WJ.I4
Cost per loose-lug box
Cost per ton
$ 1.614
3 714.60
3 1.614
$ 72.31
5.2
S.9
258
$
$
$32.92
Totaldepreciation
Interest per acre (5 per cent)
Bldings ...............................................
Orchard
Total interest
9.514
31i..16
Acres per orchard .............................
Tonsproducedperacre ......................................
Loose boxes produced per acre
3
10.97
Machinery . .
..............................
14.7
5.8
263
3
9.01
12.37
36.66
$ 55.014
1.214
53.1414
5.9
8.14
363
Age of the Trees
The orchards typically have trees of varying ages ranging from a year up to maturity (Table 7).
The usual practice followed by most growers is to replace any dead or undesirable trees and thus
tend to perpetuate the orchards. Therefore, depreciation on orchard investment was not included
in computing the cost of producing fruit.
Table 7.
AGE OF TREES:
Distribution on 21 Farms Studied, Hood River Valley, Oregon, l9L9.
Age of trees
Apples
Winter
pears
Per cent
Per cent
Less than 6 years
6 to 9 years
10 to lt years
12
11
6
71
100
12
8
10
lL years and over ...............70
All trees
100
.................. .
W j 114.0
U LLk)
UI.
US C0 flflQ
11') U SILLS. 12U.CLL LIZ
Bartlett pears
Total
Bearinga
Per cent
Per cent
27
31
0
10
3L
Lh
100
100
LI.JILI}JIA USL% LU 01 .15
p4. J'J.L¼. U3.J&Z IJOUWOC JLJC LI%JILIJCS .1.115
trees comprised an abnormally high proportion of the total Bartlett pear plantings on the farms
studied.
About four-fifths of the apple trees were 10 years old or over. Over three-fourths of the
In the case of the Bartlett pears only Ii.2 per cent of
winter pear trees were 10 years or older.
the trees had come into full bearing. One-third of the trees were just beginning to produce,
In order to make
while more than one-fourth were less than 6 years old when this study began.
the three orchard enterprises studied more nearly comparable, the latter group of trees (less
than six years old) was excluded in computing cost of production. Thus 16 per cent of the
Bartlett pear trees covered in the cost study were less than full bearing age (under 10 years),
and L per cent of the trees were in full bearing.
Varieties
Newtown and Delicious (Red, Striped, and Golden) comprised the major portion of the apple
D'Anjou is the principal winter (storage) pear, and
acreages on the farms studied (Table 8).
the Bartlett is the canning pear.
Table 8.
VARIETIES OF TREES:
Distribution on 21 Farms Studied, Hood River Valley, Oregon, l919.
Winter pears on farms studied
Apples on farms studied
Variety
Newtown
Delicious
Variety
Percentage
314
D'Anjou .........
Bosc ...................
Easter
Ortley ...... . ...... ...
5
Spitzenherg ............
14
Cornice
Other ..................
14
Other
Total
100
Total
Percentage
86
10
2
1
1
100
7
Orchard Invesfmenf
The capital value represented by the plantings was estimated by the growers from a conConsideration was given in the appraisal to the age and variety
servative, long-term standpoint.
of trees and to the location and character of the land.
The present (depreciated) values of buildings (other than operator's dwelling) and all
dther equipment were allocated proportionately to the various enterprises according to the use
made thereof (Table 9).
Table
9.
ORCHARD INVESTM!NT: Average Value of Capital Investment on 21 Farms Studied,
Hood River Valley, Oregon, l9L9*
Item
Orchard
Value
per
orchard
3 9,907
$
Buildings ...............2,86
$
612
Bartlett pears
Winter pears
Apples
Value
Value
per
per
acre
orchard
8,262
3
Value
per
acre
Value
per
orchard
761
3 14,3L7
Value
per
acre
$
733
177
1,976
182
1,067
130
3,302
2Ot
2,I451
226
l,I71
21L8
3,238
200
2,171
200
1,186
200
$]J,863
319,312
$1,193
Total investment .....
* See Table 10 for acreages per orchard studied.
$1,369
8,071
31,361
uipment
Cash for operating ..
$
Apple enterprise
The estimated werth of the capital, represented by the apple enterprise on the 21 farms in
the study, averaged $19,312 per orchard. Nearly half of the total capital investment for apple
production, or $612 per acre, was for the plantings.
Buildings (exclusive of the operator's dwelling) averaged $2, 86 per apple orchard. The
equipment inventory, averaging 33,302 per apple orchard, includes irrigation equipment as well
It does not include the automobile (charge
as the machinery, tractors, trucks, and small tools.
for the uSe of automobiles was computed on a mileage basis).
Winter pears
The investment for winter pears averaged $]J.i,863 per orchard. The value of the plantings
averaged 38,262 per orchard or $761 per acre. The investment in buildings and equipment per acre
of pears was similar in amount to that shown for apple orchards In this study.
Bartlett (canning pears)
The investment for bearing Bartlett pears averaged
$L,317 each or $733 per acre.
5,07l
per orchard.
Plantings represented
Land Use
The size of the 21 farms in the study averaged 57 acres per farm (Table 10). Orchard plantings comprised 35.14 acres per farm.
This was 814 per cent of the total cropland or 62 per cent of
the total farm acreage.
The remainder of the cropland was chiefly in hay or used as pasture.
Much of the untillable acreage is steep, rocky, and covered with trees nd brush.
Table 10.
Utilization of the Land on 21 Farms Studied,*
Hood River Valley. Orecon. 1919.
FRUIT FAR1.S:
Number
Land Use
of
farms
20
21
21
Other ...................13
21
Total orchard
Apples
3artlett pears
Winter pears
Acreage
per farm
reporting
Acres
16.2
Average
acreage
per farm
Acres
15.14
Percentage
of total
farm area
Per cent
27.0
7.6
7.6
13.14
10.9
10.9
19.1
2.6
2.5
1.5
--35.14
62.1
Other cropland
11
3.5
14.14
7.7
21
2.2
Farinstead
2.2
3.9
Nontillable
16.6
26.3
19
15.0
--57.0
Total. ................ 21
100.0
acres in orcnaru, appie trees occupieu i).!4 acres per jarm. roai. pear winter
ne
.z
ui
and canning) acreage slightly exceeded the apple orchards with 13.5 acres per farm.
Thirteen of
the 21 growers in the study had cherry olantings. These averaged 2.5 acres per farm reporting
cherries.
Purpose and Nature of the Study
The purpose of this study was to obtain information from growers that would provide basic
facts on yields and on costs of production. This information, when carefully adjusted to reflect
changes occurring in yields and in the price level of farm production cost, provides a basis
whereby cost of production can be readily estimated for any given year if no changes have occurred
in production techniques.
The cost of production reported herein is the average-acre cost of the entire plantings in
the study. Thus, the man-hours-per-acre (See Tables 2, 5, 6) is a figure that is applicable to
the entire acreage of a crop within an area such as a county and indicates the average amount of
labor that may be required per acre for all of the acreage in that crop in the area even though
each acre nay not have been covered by each operation. The same holds true of the other items
of cost.
Acknowledgments
The authors gratefully acknowledge the fine cooperation received froffi the 21 growers who kept
detailed daily records which provided the data for this report. Special mention is made of the
financial assistance contributed by the Hood River Traffic Association. Without the active
participation of both these groups, the study would have been impossible.
Leroy Childs, Superintendent of the Hood River 'Branch Experiment Station, Paul C. Newkom,
Apple Growers Association, Robert Nunamaker, fruit grower, and A. L. Marble, formerly County
Agricultural Agent of Hood River County, were instrumental in helping to plan and initiate this
project.