Production, Utilization and Demand
The Texas citrus industry is located in a comparatively small area (Hidalgo, Cameron, and
Willacy counties) in the Texas Lower Rio Grande Valley. Since the growing acreage of
Texas citrus is prevalent in this region only, the industry is subjected to heavy impacts
from weather extremes and other extraneous factors. This industry was greatly impacted by
freezes that hit the Rio Grande Valley in 1983 and 1989. While one could postulate that
a decade without extraneous weather factors would propel the industry back to pre-freeze
levels of production, the reality is that the urbanization of the Rio Grande Valley has limited
acreage re-growth. Fortunately, by implementing new hybrids, production levels have
improved to 60% of pre-freeze levels without requiring the same acreage.
The bearing acreage of citrus in the Rio Grande Valley is presently at 29,000 acres. The
1983 freeze destroyed 47,000 acres of the 69,000 acres of citrus. By 1989, acreage
had grown to 35,700; however, the December 1989 freeze destroyed 24,000 acres. By
combining the devastation of the groves due to the freezes with the booming urbanization
of this area, it can be assessed that the acreage levels of citrus will not return to prefreeze levels.
Production and utilization data show eleven years after the last freeze, the industry has not
been able to return to pre-freeze levels. For comparison purposes, an average of the five
years preceding the 1983 freeze was taken. The current level (2000-01 growing season)
of production is at 83% of the 5-year period for grapefruit and 42% of the 5-year period
for oranges. After the 1989 freeze, production levels fell to zero for the 1990-91 season.
Since the 1989 freeze, there has been a 296% increase in the production level of Texas
citrus.
Production utilized for the 1999-2000 season was 237,200 tons or 68% of the 1983 prefreeze average for grapefruit and 70,550 tons or 31% for oranges. The most recent
season completed (2000-01) estimates yields of 288,000 tons or 83% of the 1983 prefreeze average for grapefruit and 94,988 or 42% for oranges.
Roughly 25 countries produce citrus worldwide. Of these countries, the United States
ranks first in grapefruit production and second to Brazil in orange production.
The three major production areas of the United States (California/Arizona, Florida, and
Texas) have all fell victim to acreage reduction due to weather, urban expansion, and
general economic conditions. However, simply considering acreage reductions alone does
not provide an accurate picture of the status of the industry. Other factors, such as
orchard age, density, rootstocks, variety, management, climate, etc, determine orchard
productivity. Production and utilization data provides a clearer picture of the supply and
market share, than actual acreage data.
GRAPEFRUIT
Production, utilization, and value of all grapefruit production in the United States are
presented in Table 1 by production area for the 1978-79 season through the 2000-01
season. Texas ranks third in terms of production and in market utilization (both fresh and
processed), representing an average of 6.86% of total U.S. grapefruit production since
1978-79. Florida supplies nearly 72% of the U.S. fresh grapefruit market, however, over
half of their total production is sent to processing. Texas and California/Arizona, on the
other hand, utilizes an average of over 60% of their grapefruit in the fresh market.
Table 1: Annual production, utilization and value of US grapefruit by area for
1978-2001
Season
Production
Fresh
Processed
Percent
Value
(tons)
Utilization
Utilization
(tons)
(tons)
Fresh
($1000)
California/Arizona
1978-79
154,350
118,115
56.65%
36,967
155,540
185,410
45.62%
29,997
198,150
155,070
56.10%
48,338
157,415
121,781
56.38%
25,325
136,992
60.38%
32,822
111,798
64.87%
40,414
122,980
69.00%
81,869
400,688
37.96%
72,822
149,410
62.99%
70,175
125,625
66.06%
65,388
104,353
68.69%
58,085
131,823
66.08%
97,460
117,518
66.27%
67,133
146,060
65.94%
77,447
141,906
62.68%
52,041
272,465
1979-80
340,950
1980-81
353,220
1981-82
279,196
1982-83
345,770
1983-84
208,778
318,196
206,398
1984-85
396,720
1985-86
645,818
273,740
245,130
1986-87
403,675
1987-88
254,265
370,175
244,550
1988-89
333,325
228,973
1989-90
388,600
256,778
1990-91
348,400
230,882
1991-92
428,800
1992-93
282,740
238,319
380,225
1993-94
370,175
241,602
128,573
65.27%
55,625
241,971
116,480
67.50%
60,207
213,462
98,088
68.52%
57,715
218,889
85,961
71.80%
55,064
92,594
68.59%
71,068
29,648
89.01%
83,010
213,797
42,478
83.42%
59,784
226,125
174,368
51,758
77.11%
52,166
Average
347,715
220,971
126,744
65.08%
Percent of US
13.38%
18.64%
8.97%
1994-95
358,450
1995-96
311,550
1996-97
304,850
1997-98
294,800
202,206
1998-99
269,675
1999-00
240,028
256,275
2000-01
a
59,725
18.15%
Total
Florida
1978-79
2,125,000
1979-80
2,329,000
841,075
1,283,925
39.58%
177,009
1,500,207
35.59%
246,458
1,408,152
34.13%
248,294
1,333,693
34.76%
165,540
896,198
46.48%
129,851
1,030,158
40.74%
170,511
1,233,010
34.06%
228,661
1,153,025
41.97%
267,067
828,793
1980-81
2,137,750
729,598
1981-82
2,044,251
1982-83
1,674,501
710,558
778,303
1983-84
1,738,461
708,303
1984-85
1,870,000
636,990
1985-86
1,986,875
833,850
1986-87
2,116,500
1,226,635
42.04%
329,098
889,865
1987-88
2,288,625
982,175
1,306,450
42.92%
387,446
1988-89
2,326,875
1,015,835
1,311,040
43.66%
332,849
1989-90
1,517,250
567,120
950,130
37.38%
260,275
1990-91
1,916,750
1,016,728
900,023
53.04%
328,770
1991-92
1,802,000
831,258
53.87%
349,688
1,359,830
41.98%
236,717
1,213,290
44.08%
271,114
1,422,093
39.93%
231,779
1,254,048
43.64%
211,180
1,383,928
41.64%
207,607
1,206,575
42.70%
174,956
1,151,920
42.39%
216,309
1,495,278
34.11%
314,206
1,212,738
37.97%
198,322
41.25%
247,118
970,743
1992-93
2,343,875
984,045
1993-94
2,169,625
956,335
1994-95
2,367,250
1995-96
2,224,875
945,158
970,828
1996-97
2,371,500
987,573
1997-98
2,105,875
899,300
1998-99
1,999,625
847,705
1999-00
2,269,500
774,223
2000-01
a
1,955,000
742,263
Average
Percent of US
2,073,085
852,929
1,220,157
79.76%
71.93%
86.33%
76.37%
Total
Texas
1978-79
160,000
360,000
200,000
44.44%
17,680
1979-80
316,000
1980-81
168,000
148,000
53.16%
26,237
186,000
82,000
69.40%
27,260
266,800
52.01%
38,173
99,450
58.80%
24,148
47,600
55.38%
9,385
-
0.00%
-
93.55%
2,076
14,800
80.78%
15,122
268,000
1981-82
556,000
289,200
1982-83
241,400
1983-84
106,675
141,950
59,075
1984-85
-
1985-86
13,175
-
12,325
1986-87
77,000
850
62,200
1987-88
152,000
111,400
40,600
73.29%
25,754
1988-89
192,000
155,600
36,400
81.04%
25,107
1989-90
80,000
15,800
80.25%
14,162
-
0.00%
-
-
100.00%
983
19,120
74.51%
12,856
33,800
71.83%
15,238
64,200
1990-91
-
-
1991-92
2,600
1992-93
2,600
75,000
55,880
1993-94
120,000
86,200
1994-95
186,000
128,040
57,960
68.84%
15,539
1995-96
182,000
120,880
61,120
66.42%
21,257
1996-97
212,000
148,720
63,280
70.15%
2,078
1997-98
192,000
139,760
52,240
72.79%
22,574
163,480
80,520
67.00%
35,307
1998-99
244,000
1999-00
154,880
82,320
65.30%
37,342
162,200
125,800
56.32%
19,324
178,307
111,852
66,455
63%
17,722
6.86%
9.43%
4.70%
237,200
2000-01
a
288,000
Average
Percent of US
5.48%
Total
a. Preliminary data for the 2000-01 growing season
SOURCE: September 2001 Fruit and Tree Nut Situation and Outlook Yearbook, ERS, USDA
Since 1978, on the average, Texas as shipped 63% of its total grapefruit to the fresh
market. However, Texas grapefruit remains a distant third, as its almost 7% share of U.S.
production only generated over 5% of the U.S. total value. The California/Arizona
average value of production was the highest at $171.76 per ton, Florida=s came in second
at $119.20 per ton, and Texas= value of production is $99.39 per ton (calculated by
dividing the average value of production by the average production for the 22 year period).
ORANGES
Annual production, utilization and value of U.S. oranges by production area for the growing
seasons of 1978-79 to 2000-01 are presented in Table 2. Texas ranks as third in the
production of oranges, averaging less than 1% of total U.S. production. Florida is ranked
as 1st in total U.S. production with production levels exceeding 76% of the U.S. total.
However, processing is the primary market utilizing Florida oranges. Roughly 6% of
Florida oranges are utilized in the fresh market, while California/Arizona and Texas
oranges exceed 65% fresh market utilization.
Table 2: Annual production, utilization and value of US oranges by area for
1978-2001
Season
Fresh
Processed
Production
Utilization
Utilization
Percent
Value
(tons)
(tons)
(tons)
Fresh
($1000)
California/Arizona
1978-79
1,507,500
991,500
516,000
65.77%
994,990
1979-80
2,358,750
1,563,000
795,750
66.26%
1,068,408
1980-81
2,581,875
1,513,500
1,068,375
58.62%
1,045,600
1981-82
1,685,625
1,332,000
353,625
79.02%
387,020
1982-83
1,883,625
1,717,313
1,278,938
91.17%
335,257
1983-84
2,041,875
1,562,500
421,125
76.52%
411,869
1984-85
2,097,375
1,575,188
466,688
75.10%
525,271
1985-86
2,272,500
1,696,687
400,688
74.66%
378,920
1986-87
2,207,700
1,637,250
570,450
74.16%
450,859
1987-88
2,280,750
1,602,188
678,563
70.25%
473,109
1988-89
2,272,500
1,568,063
704,438
69.00%
477,006
1989-90
2,737,875
1,809,713
928,163
66.10%
568,719
1990-91
1,025,625
660,675
364,950
64.42%
404,031
1991-92
2,616,750
1,618,350
998,400
61.85%
450,400
1992-93
2,574,375
1,897,350
677,025
73.70%
481,529
1993-94
2,456,250
1,785,488
670,763
72.69%
475,130
1994-95
2,139,375
1,691,063
448,313
79.04%
480,408
1995-96
2,236,875
1,716,300
520,575
76.73%
498,102
1996-97
2,452,500
1,980,113
472,388
80.74%
593,552
1997-98
2,625,000
2,114,325
510,675
80.55%
619,955
1998-99
1,393,125
765,300
627,825
54.93%
424,077
1999-00
2,441,250
1,668,975
772,275
68.37%
350,962
2,246,250
1,902,375
343,875
84.69%
567,215
2,179,797
1,581,270
634,342
72.36%
541,843
22.31%
76.53%
8.20%
2000-01
a
Average
Percent of US
Total
33.30%
Florida
1978-79
7,380,000
526,545
6,835,455
7.13%
994,990
1979-80
9,301,500
494,550
8,806,950
5.32%
1,068,408
1980-81
7,758,000
372,420
7,385,580
4.80%
1,045,600
1981-82
5,661,000
342,900
5,318,100
6.06%
752,547
1982-83
6,282,000
464,400
5,817,600
7.39%
955,741
1983-84
5,251,500
343,800
4,907,700
6.55%
880,377
1984-85
4,675,500
299,340
4,376,160
6.40%
930,139
1985-86
5,364,000
403,200
4,960,800
7.52%
708,356
1986-87
5,386,500
399,150
4,987,350
7.41%
864,171
1987-88
6,210,000
428,400
5,781,600
6.90%
1,288,199
1988-89
6,597,000
381,960
6,215,040
5.79%
1,357,529
1989-90
4,959,000
266,490
4,692,510
5.37%
888,097
1990-91
6,822,000
560,295
6,261,705
8.21%
1,180,715
1991-92
6,291,000
519,840
5,771,160
8.26%
1,094,369
1992-93
8,397,000
482,580
7,914,420
5.75%
1,004,253
1993-94
7,848,000
445,410
7,402,590
5.68%
1,061,122
1994-95
9,247,500
469,845
8,777,655
5.08%
1,138,825
1995-96
9,148,500
448,605
8,699,895
4.90%
1,316,167
1996-97
10,179,000
481,320
9,697,680
4.73%
1,235,547
1997-98
10,980,000
495,450
10,484,550
4.51%
1,339,529
1998-99
8,370,000
488,700
7,881,300
5.84%
1,252,704
1999-00
10,485,000
422,685
10,062,315
4.03%
1,304,965
10,048,500
433,035
9,615,465
4.31%
1,063,496
7,506,196
433,518
7,071,895
6.00%
1,075,037
76.82%
20.98%
91.37%
2000-01
a
Average
Percent of US
Total
66.06%
Texas
1978-79
272,000
89250
182750
32.81%
26,970
1979-80
171,275
88400
82875
51.61%
19,791
1980-81
184,025
121125
62900
65.82%
20,363
1981-82
252,450
141100
111350
55.89%
28,228
1982-83
241,400
141950
99450
58.80%
26,402
1983-84
106,675
59075
47600
55.38%
11,492
0
0
0.00%
-
1984-85
1985-86
13,175
12325
850
93.55%
3,168
1986-87
37,188
33,363
3,825
89.71%
7,469
1987-88
60,775
89.23%
54,230
6,545
12,373
1988-89
78,625
66,130
12,495
84.11%
13,932
1989-90
51,213
28,178
23,035
55.02%
8,256
-
-
0.00%
-
1990-91
1991-92
1,275
1,275
-
100.00%
431
1992-93
21,675
19,040
2,635
87.84%
4,156
1993-94
23,375
21,420
1,955
91.64%
5,044
1994-95
44,838
30,515
14,323
68.06%
4,828
1995-96
39,950
33,490
6,460
83.83%
7,310
1996-97
60,350
40,630
19,720
67.32%
7,563
1997-98
64,813
47,983
16,830
74.03%
5,874
1998-99
60,775
47,515
13,260
78.18%
11,147
1999-00
70,550
54,358
16,193
77.05%
10,173
94,988
54,018
40,970
56.87%
5,539
84,843
51,538
33,305
66%
10,457
0.87%
2.49%
0.43%
2000-01
a
Average
Percent of US
Total
a. Preliminary data
0.64%
SOURCE: September 2001 Fruit and Tree Nut Situation and Outlook Yearbook, ERS, USDA
The value of Texas oranges exceeded that of Texas grapefruit, however, the less than 1%
level of total U.S. production represented just over half of 1% of total U.S. value. The
average value of production of California/Arizona orange value was the highest at
$248.57 per ton, Florida=s was second at $143.22 per ton, while Texas= came in third at
$123.25 per ton (calculated by dividing average value by average production for the 22
year period).
Texas grapefruit acreage over the past decade (since the 1989 freeze) is over 2.25 times
that of the acreage for oranges. Grapefruit production per acre in the last ten growing
seasons averaged 1.5 times that of oranges. Additionally, the overall average value of the
grapefruit was 2.9 times higher than that of oranges ($18.3 million and $6.2 million,
respectively).
DEMAND
A shift has occurred in the demand for citrus. In the past 22 years, the Amarket basket@
of consumers has changed to reflect the growing demand for convenience foods. In the
U.S., the average from 1978/79 to 2000/01 processed market utilization of oranges was
79%, while the processed market during this same period utilized 54% of grapefruit.
Past utilization trends provide the basis for examining changes in consumption patterns,
which reflect the interaction of factors such as production, price, income, population,
demand, consumer preference, and taste. Table 3 summarizes the trends in per capita
consumption by product form. The consumption of fresh citrus declined steadily from 1950
to 1960, remained fairly consistent to 1976, and then continued to decline through 1990.
This decline has been offset by a steady increase in per capita consumption of frozen
concentrated orange juice, which increased from 21.9 pounds in 1970 to 29.2 pounds by
1990. Chilled juice consumption increased from 4.6 pounds per capita in 1970 to 6.3
pounds in 1990 (Taylor, Hall, Gustavo; Texas Citrus-Production, Utilization, and Demand,
1994).
Table 3: U.S. per capita consumption by product form, 1970-1990
Year
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
Fresh
(lbs)
28.9
29.0
27.3
27.2
27.0
29.1
28.5
26.0
26.1
23.0
26.1
23.5
23.5
27.9
22.7
21.5
24.2
23.9
25.5
23.6
21.4
Canned
Juice (lbs)
5.2
5.3
5.1
5.5
5.3
5.2
5.1
4.9
5.5
5.5
5.0
4.8
3.9
2.9
2.8
2.3
2.0
2.0
1.7
1.6
1.8
Frozen Juice Chilled Juice Total Citrus
(lbs)
(lbs)
(lbs)
21.9
4.6
60.6
25.6
4.7
64.6
29.4
5.1
66.9
28.5
5.2
66.4
31.1
5.1
68.5
35.0
5.6
74.9
35.1
6.0
74.7
36.6
5.6
73.1
30.3
6.0
67.9
32.9
5.4
66.8
33.8
5.8
70.7
33.2
4.1
65.6
36.9
3.5
67.8
41.7
4.1
76.6
35.6
3.7
64.8
40.5
3.2
67.5
43.3
3.8
73.3
40.2
4.5
70.6
40.1
5.1
72.4
34.3
6.5
66.0
27.2
6.3
56.7
Sources: 1993 Fruit and Tree Nuts Situation and Outlook Yearbook, ERS, USDA
1991 Fruit and Tree Nuts Situation and Outlook Yearbook, ERS, USDA
From 1970 until 1990, the data collection methods broke down the juice consumption by
product form. However, in 1992, the USDA instituted new reporting procedures. Rather
than reporting juice statistics by product form, consumption is now reported as gallons of
single strength equivalent. This new method takes into consideration juices that were not
previously estimated, as well as juice blends.
In order to adjust for these changes, Table 4 and Table 5 provide information for the U.S.
per capita consumption for processed and fresh market citrus fruit, respectively.
Despite
fluctuations in the consumption patterns of both fresh and processed fruit, there has been
an overall trend of decreased per capita consumption of oranges, temples, and grapefruit.
On the other hand, the overall consumption of fresh and processed tangerines and
tangelos, lemons and limes have increased.
Grapefruit has had the largest decreased
consumption of 35% in the combined processed and fresh fruit markets from 24.36
pounds combined processed and fresh market per capita consumption in 1977/78 to
15.77 pounds combined processed and fresh market per capita consumption in 2000/01.
Oranges have also seen a decreased per capita consumption level of 3.5% from
91.78 pounds in 1978/79 compared to 88.57 pounds in 2000/01 of combined processed
and fresh market citrus. While U.S. per capita consumption has been decreasing, the
export market growth has become extremely important.
Table 4: U.S. per capita consumption of processed b citrus fruit, freshweight equivalent, 1977/78 to date
Year a
1977/78
1978/79
1979/80
1980/81
1981/82
1982/83
1983/84
1984/85
1985/86
1986/87
1987/88
1988/89
1989/90
1990/91
1991/92
1992/93
1993/94
1994/95
1995/96
Oranges & Tangerines Grapefruit Lemons
Temples & tangelos
in pounds
78.34
2.00
16.01
4.71
74.58
1.91
14.09
2.56
80.98
2.85
10.20
3.33
82.82
2.02
13.03
6.53
74.98
2.48
12.19
4.63
91.04
1.69
11.53
4.36
80.26
1.60
6.23
3.02
78.36
1.40
11.12
3.82
82.44
1.14
8.49
2.80
78.00
1.58
11.54
5.38
72.42
1.56
6.07
2.67
73.88
1.59
9.70
2.73
71.97
1.08
9.86
3.63
73.71
0.95
7.40
3.49
63.46
1.01
6.30
3.23
74.59
1.13
9.55
4.39
72.53
1.44
8.80
4.78
78.90
1.27
10.45
3.24
77.62
1.26
11.62
4.07
Limes
Total
0.05
0.10
0.19
0.19
0.26
0.27
0.23
0.29
0.39
0.38
0.19
0.25
0.57
0.47
0.39
0.20
0.24
0.51
0.29
101.11
93.23
97.56
104.59
94.53
108.90
91.35
94.99
95.26
96.88
82.92
88.15
87.12
86.02
74.39
89.86
87.79
94.37
93.99
1996/97
1997/98
1998/99
1999/00
2000/01 c
71.65
82.59
78.34
79.47
75.59
2.04
1.51
1.23
1.61
1.57
10.17
9.11
9.69
10.13
10.94
4.26
3.40
3.09
4.00
5.40
0.50
0.23
0.22
0.49
0.54
88.62
96.84
92.57
95.71
94.03
a. Marketing years begin in November of the first year shown for fresh oranges, temples, tangerines, and
tangelos; grapefruit in September; lemons in August; and limes in April
b. Juice marketing years begin in December of the first year shown for oranges, Temples, tangerines, tangelos,
and grapefruit; lemons in August, and limes in April.
C. Preliminary
SOURCE: September 2001 Fruit and Tree Nut Situation and Outlook Yearbook, USDA
Table 5: U.S. per capita consumption of fresh market citrus fruit, freshweight equivalent, 1977/78 to date
Year a
1977/78
1978/79
1979/80
1980/81
1981/82
1982/83
1983/84
1984/85
1985/86
1986/87
1987/88
1988/89
1989/90
1990/91
1991/92
1992/93
1993/94
1994/95
1995/96
1996/97
1997/98
1998/99
1999/00
2000/01 c
Oranges & Tangerines Grapefruit Lemons
Temples & tangelos
in pounds
13.44
2.09
8.35
2.13
11.50
2.02
7.29
1.91
14.28
2.21
7.30
1.92
12.36
2.03
6.65
2.01
11.69
2.07
7.20
2.07
15.04
2.25
7.84
2.32
11.87
2.08
5.98
2.16
11.60
1.51
5.51
2.30
13.43
1.59
6.13
2.47
12.81
1.78
6.35
2.48
13.90
1.77
6.69
2.47
12.17
1.71
6.60
2.39
12.37
1.31
4.43
2.60
8.46
1.38
5.87
2.60
12.91
1.94
5.95
2.54
14.25
1.87
6.24
2.65
13.07
2.11
6.13
2.68
11.98
2.01
6.07
2.87
12.77
2.19
5.93
2.90
14.16
2.57
6.28
2.80
14.91
2.21
6.05
2.51
8.57
2.26
5.87
2.67
12.04
2.91
5.24
2.50
12.98
2.73
4.83
3.05
Limes
Total
0.22
0.27
0.36
0.42
0.38
0.52
0.45
0.56
0.58
0.51
0.56
0.69
0.66
0.75
1.03
0.96
0.98
1.20
1.16
1.17
1.43
1.36
1.32
1.54
26.23
22.99
26.07
23.48
23.42
27.96
22.53
21.47
24.21
23.93
25.39
23.56
21.37
19.06
24.36
25.97
24.97
24.13
24.95
26.98
27.10
20.73
24.01
25.13
a. Marketing years begin in November of the first year shown for fresh oranges, temples, tangerines, and
tangelos; grapefruit in September; lemons in August; and limes in April
b. Juice marketing years begin in December of the first year shown for oranges, Temples, tangerines, tangelos,
and grapefruit; lemons in August, and limes in April.
c. Preliminary
SOURCE: September 2001 Fruit and Tree Nut Situation and Outlook Yearbook, USDA
The changes in consumption patterns can be traced to various socio-economic factors.
These factors include rising incomes, changes in lifestyles, eating habits, and consumer
tastes and preferences. As incomes rise and people feel they have less time for food
preparation, the demand for convenience foods will continue to rise and the willingness to
pay the value-added price will increase accordingly.
Even though it can be assumed there will continue to be a slow decline in citrus
consumption, the data found in tables 1 and 2 suggest there is a substantial amount of
Texas citrus utilized in the fresh market. It is important for the sustainability of the Texas
industry to continue to create brand recognition for Texas grapefruit and oranges through
its TexasSweet promotions.