xt7fqz22db52 https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dipstest/xt7fqz22db52/data/mets.xml   Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station. 1959 journals 081 English Lexington : Agricultural Experiment Station, University of Kentucky Contact the Special Collections Research Center for information regarding rights and use of this collection. Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station Progress report (Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station) n.81 text Progress report (Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station) n.81 1959 1959 2014 true xt7fqz22db52 section xt7fqz22db52 Progress Report 81
Filing Code: 7-1
COMMERCIAL VEGETABLE MARKETING IN KENTUCKY - 1958
(Nine Selected Local Assembly Markets)
9 By Willard H. Minton _
Department of Agricultural Economics
The following nine local vegetable assembly markets serving Kentucky were the
basis for this report: (A)1Cinci‘nnati Produce Growers Association, Cincinnati, Ohio;
(B) Dix River Produce Growers Association, Stanford, Ky.; (C) Cumberland Straw-
berry Growers Association, Somerset, Ky.; (C‘) Growers Exchange, Inc. , Somerset,
Ky.; (D) Trimble County Growers Association, Bedford, Ky.; (E) Grayson County
Sweet Corn Producers Cooperative Marketing Association, Leitchfield, Ky.; (F)
Edmonston Growers Cooperative Association, Brownsville, Ky.; (G) Franklin Fruit
Market, Franklin, Ky.; and (H) Central Produce Company, Princeton, Ky. These
assembly markets were made up of six cooperatives and three independents. Fig.1
shows, in general, the production areas serviced by these local assembly markets.
The information and data presented in this report were obtained by visiting the
managers or sales personnel of each of the nine local assembly markets.
Varying degrees of relations between an assembly market and its producers of
commercial vegetables were noted among the nine local assembly markets. One
extreme was providing a selling market for produce delivered to it, with little pro-
motion or supervision within the area. The other extreme included high promotion,
I contracts with gr_owers, supervision, some financing during the production period,
and providing some of the services required during production. The latter appears
to be the present trend in the commercial vegetable industry in Kentucky. This system
_ has merit in that it should lead a more efficient and more orderly marketing system.
The year 1958 showed an added interest in commercial vegetables in Kentucky. ·—·
g This was evidenced by a new area, the Grayson area, producing and marketing sweet
corn for the first time in 1958. Further, ·a subdivision within the Cumberland area,
composed of Pulaski and Wayne counties, produced and marketed green beans on a
much accelerated scale in 1958. Too, some of the older areas increased their pro-
‘ duction and marketing of commercial vegetables in 1958.
Produce sold by the nine local markets in 1958, in their order of gross value,
were sweet corn, green beans, tomatoes, cabbage, green peppers, and cucumbers.
Compared with 1957, in relation to gross zvalue, sweet corn moved from second place
to first place, green beans from third place to second place, tomatoes dropped from
first place to third place, and the latter three remained in their same order. Sales
of vegetables through these nine local assembly markets in 1958 were primarily to
the fresh market; hence, 75 percent of the dollar volume went into fresh market
channels. The remaining 25 percent went to processing. The gross value of the I
above—mentioned vegetables was about $376,000 in 1958, a $82.,000 increase over 1957.
1This lettering corresponds to the lettering on the map in Fig. 1.
UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY
AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION

 -3., ‘
The ills associated with a new endeavor have, by no means, bypassed the
cornmercial vegetable industry in Kentucky. Comxriercial vegetables are by nature
highly perishable products that must be moved within a very limited time period to
retain their quality. The local markets in Kentucky have been plagued with the
difficulty of assembling enough produce in a given day to justify transportation to a
distant consurning market. At times, produce has been held over with quality sacri-
ficed for quantity.
The quality and quantity problems of the local assembly markets are probably
the crux of their major difficulties. Because of the very nature of the industry,both
must be present over a given marketing time period if the operations are to be suc-
cessful. Chainstore buyers have recently indicated that they are willing to buy local
produce in season, providing their quality standards and quantity requirexnents can be j
inet. Of course, their buying practices are on a division or area basis and not by in~
dividual stores. The producers stand to realize more net incorne per unit if the local
assembly markets are in a position to deal directly with these buyers. I
These nine local markets serving Kentucky farmers in 1958 showed different
average per unit returns and different average per unit local market costs for the c
same product. A part of these differences can be explained by the volurnes of the
produce handled. As an example, transportation costs are usually a fixed amount
per mile in relation to size of vehicle. lf the cost of a truck for a given trip is $50,
then the per unit costs for a 50-unit quantity and a 100=·unit quantity would be $1 and
$. 50 respectively. The transportation cost is twice as rnuch in one case as in the
other and has a direct bearing on the returns to the farrner. As another example,
certain costs, such as real estate costs, must be met each year, regardless of the
quantity handled. H a local assembly market“s fixed real estate cost is $5,000 per
year, then the per unit cost for a 50, 000 packagerquantity and a 100, 000 package
quantity would be 10 cents and 5 cents, respectively. Again,the per unit cost would
be twice as much in one case as in the other, and it has a direct bearing on the re--
turns to the farcmer.
The remainder of the report will be devoted to looking at each of the maj·;~:;·
vegetables marketed. The discussion of each includes the voluine of sales, total
take -·hom.e rnoney to the farmers, average take-home prices, and cost of marlaeting.
Table 1 makes sorne comparisons on a gross basis between the years l95Z’ and 1958-.

   F  a
if- E  ig _
(lt: E  i E ·, F"\··
  gg Q -     \
H a
,7. U1,.] I H ‘  
* 5 $0 z . Q I`-.
Br vu I , —·‘
S zi I ig  i Q.
(D 1-. V tg./,,\
Z? ig gg J é;   x
z I5 ~ {
O" 2 Q : •
(P; Ul   U   . •,`·-
_ {D n .·
g   :; 9     »=
5 $3 I E"   ` * sg
N a n ’·
5. E P)?   ._  F x
5 92 E      
Y   gi ‘ E _ =I
.· ~_4- °$°° ` Q2       K.
ég __ gt  
¤=*~¤ U \ * ¥·
ww A 1 , . · °‘
M   I 7 ‘
(P *0 | =   L ·
:pJ i "\.._§ Q *
. in \_ x .. =_,.. 
' ¤ 55 ,/
?’ —°’ , \  
0**1 `\ =
·. I ·. ; I
ml \_· .· i
__L____________]

 :.4.. -
SWEET CORN
Sweet corn was the most important vegetable in terms of total take—~hon1e
money in 1958. Marketings of sweet corn more than doubled in 1958 as compared
V to 1957. Sweet corn was sold by three of the nine local rnarkets in 1958. These _
markets sold 134,037 crates of sweet corn for a total return to the farmers of _
$104, 222. 92 after all costs of rnarketing were met, including costs of containers.
'This was an average take—home price of 78 cents per crate to the farmers for their
on~t·he-·farn1 costs of production and returns to labor. Takemhome prices `ranged
from 61 to 80 cents per crate, according to local markets.
Sweet corn was marketed in wooden crates containing 5 dozen ears per crate.
The average cost of marketing sweet corn at these local assembly markets was 45
cents per crate. Cost of inarketing ranged from 38 to 60 cents per crate according to .
local marlcets.
GREEN BEANS
Gr een beans were sold by five of the nine local markets in 1958. Marketings of
green beans in 1958 more than doubled 1957 figures. These markets sold 55, 393 _
bushels of green beans for a total return to the farmers of $80, 576. 98 after all costs
of marketing were met, including cost of containers. Approximately onemfourth of
the green beans were sold on the fresh market, and three·~fourths of the green beans
were sold to processors. Beans sold on the fresh market returned an average take-
horne price of $1. 38 per bushel to the farxners for their on=-the·=»farn1 costs and returns
to labor. Take·--horne prices for green beans ranged from $. 71 to $2. 08 per bushel
according to local markets. Beans sold to the processors returned an average takes
home price of $1. 48 per bushel to the farmers.
Green beans were niarketed in bushel containers. The average cost of rnarketing
at these local assembly markets for fresh green beans was ll cents per bushel. Cost
of marketing fresh green beans ranged from 5 to 20 cents per bushel according to
local markets. The average cost of marketing for processing beans was 5 cents per
bushel, less than half the cost for fresh beans.
TONIATOES
'Tomatoes were sold by five of the nine local markets in 1958. Marketings of
toinatoes in 1958 were about half the volume marketed in 1957.. These markets sold
702, 452 pounds of tornatoes for a total return to the farrners of $37, 101. 05 after all
costs of marketing were met, including costs of containers. This was an average
take—~—honie price of 5. 3 cents per pound to the farzners for their on—the¤-farni cost of
production and returns to labor. Take-hcnae prices ranged from 2. 8 to 6. 8 cents
per pound, by local markets.
Tomatoes were marketed in 8, 10, 20, and 30-pound containers. The average
cost of rnarketing tornatoes at these local assenibly rnarkets was 0. 7 cents per
pound. Cost of rnarketing ranged front 0.. 2 to 1. 3 cents per pound according to
local markets.

 . ¤5-
CABBAGE
Cabbage was sold by three of the nine local markets in 1958. Marketings of
cabbage in 1958 were about 10 percent more than the volume marketed in 1957.
‘ These markets sold 670, 050 pounds of cabbage for a total return to the farmers of
$7, 520. 35 after all costs of marketing were met, including cost of containers. Both
red and green cabbage were marketed. Green cabbage returned an average take-
~ home price of 1. 1 cents per pound to the farmers for their on·»the-·farm costs of pro-
duction and returns to labor. Red cabbage returned an average take-home price of
2 cents per poundto the farmers for their on-the-farm costs of production and returns
to labor.
Cabbage was marketed in 50-pound crates and 50 mpound bags. The average
cost of marketing at these local assembly rnarkets for cabbage was 0. 14 cent per
pound.
SWEET PEPPERS
Sweet peppers were marketed by three of the nine local markets in 1958.
Marketings of sweet pepper in 1958 were about 30 percent less than the volume
marketed in 1957. These markets sold 3, 709 bushels of green peppers for a total
return to the farmers of $5, 272. 89 after all costs of marketing were met, including
cost of containers. This was an average take-horne price of $1. 42 cents per bushel
to the farrners for their on-the-farm costs of production and returns to labor. Take-
. home prices ranged from $. 95 to $1. 45 per bushel, by local markets.
Sweet peppers were marketed in bushel basket containers. The average cost of
“ marketing at the local assembly markets was 7 cents per bushel. Cost of rnarketing
ranged from 6 to 15 cents per bushel, by local rnarkets. —~
. CUCUMBERS
Cucumbers were marketed by two of the nine local markets in 1958. Marketings
of cucumbers in 1958 were four times the volurne marketed in 1957. These markets
sold 2, 532 bushels of cucurnbers for a total return to the farmers of $2,837. 75 after
all costs of marketing were met, including cost of containers. This was an average
take-home price of $1. 12 cents per bushel to the farmers for their on·—the·-farm costs
of production and returns to labor.
Cucumbers were marketed in bushel basket containers. The average cost of
marketing cucumbers at these local assembly markets was 6 cents per bushel.

 TABLE 1 - Commercial Vegetable Marketings in Kentucky in 1957 and 1958
(Selected Local Assembly Markets) ~
 
1 Gross Value Marketing
Volume (Dollars) Gross Average Cost 1
(Average) ~
Sweet Corn
1957 60,934 crates 124,005 $2.04/crate 76¢/crate
1958 134,037 crates 215,417 $1.61/crate 45¢/crate
Green Beans
Fresh
1957 12, 462 bushels 26, 653 $2. 14/bushel 12¢ /bushel .
1958 13,049 bushels 23,010 $1. 76/bushel 11¢/bushel
Process
1957 11, 980 bushels 19, 7 10 $1. 65/bushel 36¢ /bushel ·
1958 42, 334 bushels 64, 720 $1. 53 /bushel 5¢/bus11€1
Tomatoes 1
1957 1, 312,820 pounds 100, 554 7. 7¢ /pound 1¢ /pound
1958 702, 452 pounds 51, 122 7. 3¢ /pound 0. 7¢ /pound
Cabbage
Green
1957 594, 440 pounds 13, 650 Z. 3¢ /pound . l8¢ /pound
1958 658,100 pounds 12, 305 1. 9¢ /pound . 14¢ /pound
Red
1957 None
1958 11,950 pounds 313 2.6¢/pound .12¢ /pound
Sweet Pepper
1957 5, 337 bushels 8,166 $1. 53/bushel 6¢ /bushel
1958 3, 709 bushels 6,104 $1. 65/bushel 7¢ /bushel
Cucumbers
1957 625 bushels 1, 191 $1. 91/bushel 7<,“ /bushel
1958 2, 532 bushels 3, 375 $1. 34/bushel 6*;} /bushel