galleria 23.2 ' S rn i t/o-Doxey Classification, ' Fiber Texting aria’ ' Problem; of the Cotton Trade May I956 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION R. D. LEWIS, D 11111 OR, C LLLL GE S TTTT ON, TEXAS SUMMARY Members of the Texas Cotton Association were either interviewed personally or were, mailed a questionnaire in June 1955 and were asked the following questions: 1 1. To what extent are Texas cotton merchants buying cotton on the basis of Smith-Doxey, classification and what are their chief criticisms of this classing service? 2. T0 what extent are Texas cotton merchants buying and selling cotton on the basis a of laboratory testing of fibers? 3. What staple lengths are in greatest demand‘? 4. What specific problems associated with cotton need study and research? s, Approximately 150 questionnaires were mailed to members of the Texas Cotton Association; and 65 merchants answered the questions in sufficient detail to use their replies in tabulating results. These firms have an annual business of approximately 4,864,000 bales and represent shippers, f.o.b. merchants, spot brokers and mill buyers. i Of the 65 firms, 53 indicated they purchase some cotton on Smith-Doxey classification and about 38 percent of their total purchases were made on the basis of “green cards” in 1954.’ Thirty-two firms said the Smith-Doxey classification was satisfactory or at least partially‘ so. Twenty firms were emphatic in saying the service was not satisfactory. Practically all made some criticism concerning Smith-Doxey classification. Fifty-three firms stated they made some use of fiber testing. All 53 used the Micronaire’ tests for selling but only 27 reported they purchased cotton on such tests. Approximately ~ 50 percent of the total 4,864,000 bales handled by all 65 firms was sold on the basis of a Micronaire tests, but only 27_ percent was purchased on this basis. _ Thirty-five of the 65 firms sold cotton on fiber strength tests but only 11 firms purchased V cotton on such tests. About 11 percent of all sales was made on fiber strength tests and less 1 » than 1 percent was purchased on such tests. . Very little use is made of the fibrograph or maturity tests. ~ Nearly half of the firms had their own Micronaire but only 7 had the Pressley tester. Many firms use commercial laboratories for testing fibers. p Although fiber testing affects the pricing of cotton, it still is too new to give a definite‘ set of discounts and premiums like those given for staple and grade differences. Only a few firms have a clear-cut pricing system based on laboratory tests. ; Most of the cotton merchants give 3.5 as the minimum for Micronaire readings based on demands from mills. Most of them said demand requires a Pressley test of 80,000 or more; The majority think the greater demand is for staple lengths of 15/ 16 up to 1-3/32. Problems suggested for study covered a large range. Better varieties, government. programs, ginning and improvement in the character of cotton were most often mentioned a8 needing attention. CONTENTS Page? Summary ................................................................................................................................................................................ .. 2 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................................ .. 3 ~ Evolution of Standards for Quality ................................................................................................................................. .. 3 ,; Factors Determining Grade .................................................................................................................................... 5“ Determining Staple Lengths ...................................................................................................................................... .. 5 » Smith-Doxey Classification and the Cotton Trade ....................................................................................................... .. 5 i. Use of Smith-Doxey Classing ................................................................................................................................... .. 6,‘ Trade Appraisal of Smith-Doxey Classing ............................................................................................................ .. 6 ._ Why Grade and Staple Standards Are Inadequate ....................................................................................................... .. 6 a Use of Fiber Testing by Texas Cotton Firms ............................................................................................................... .. 7 Fiber Testing and Pricing ......................................................................................................................................... .. 7 i Cost of Laboratory Testing of Fibers .................................................................................................................... .. 8 '4 Relationship of Laboratory Testing of Fibers to Cotton Classing .................................................................. .. 8 p Fineness and Strength in Greatest Demand .................................................................................................................. .. 9 Staple Length in Greatest Demand ................................................................................................................................. .. 9 , Production Trends in Staple Lengths .................................................................................................................... .. 9 Trends in Discounts and Premiums for Staple Lengths .................................................................................... .. 10 Trends in Production and Carryover by Staple Lengths .................... ........... ..- ............................................... .. 11 i. Specific Problems Needing Study .................................................................................................................................... .. 12', Governmental Policies and Cotton Marketing ............................................................................................................... .. 13 ‘VTON MERCHANTS ARE IN A UNIQUE POSITION gobserve the cotton economy as a whole. By ir experience over the years, they have learned I mill requirements as to quality and quantity, i through them the mills have obtained the bulk heir raw cotton. They also are close enough to - cotton farmers to understand their problems i to have an intimate knowledge of the kind of 1 n produced in the various areas of the Cotton t. They stand between the farmers and the ' s, and knowledge of mill requirements is Ved back to the local markets through them. a» must be alert and sensitive to the changing --» of the mills and equally well informed on qnges in production on the farms. ._, Cotton merchandising is a highly specialized ‘iness. To build an organization which can rate economically under normal conditions ‘uires both technical knowledge of the many Ilities of cotton produced and years of experi- e in matters of finance, storage, transportation E» other services. The merchandising system, th buying and selling organizations in this ntry and throughout the main cotton consum- f; centers of the world, developed over many rs. It provides a highly competitive market the farmer at the crossroads as well as at the ler market centers. Prior to the entrance of '3 U. S. Government into the cotton business, l, on merchants carried the surplus cotton until was needed by the mills here and abroad. It p their function to provide a continuous market farmers at country points and to provide ton to the mills for prompt shipment or for as erred deliveries, often extending for a year -more. ,5, Recently the mills called on cotton shippers sadd a new service, that of selling cotton on the jis of certain physical qualities, especially fine- f; breaking strength, uniformity and maturity éfiber. This compels shippers to supplement if customary classing service with laboratory ipment. Although some buying is done on the °is of laboratory fiber tests, buying continues be mostly an art. Until the cotton merchant buy on the same basis as he must sell, he umes significant risks. f. To survey the practice of buying and selling the basis of physical characteristics, a ques- nnaire was presented to 150 Texas cotton irchants for information on the following: 1. To what extent are Texas cotton mer- chants buying cotton on the basis of mith-Doxey C larszfication, Fiber T erti n g and l, Problems of the Cotton Trade ROBERT L. HUNT, Professor Department of Agricultural Economics and Sociology Smith-Doxey classification and what are their chief criticisms of this classing service? 2. To what extent are Texas cotton mer- chants buying and selling cotton on the basis of laboratory testing of fibers? a. Do they have their own laboratory equipment or do they use commercial laboratory facilities? b. What is the additional cost of this service? c. What do they find to be the minimum requirements for fineness and break- ing strength and what range seems to be in greatest demand by mills? 3. What staple lengths are in greatest de- mand? 4. What specific problems associated with cotton does the cotton trade think the Texas Agricultural Experiment Station should help solve? Sixty-five firms answered the questionnaire in sufficient detail to be used. The replies which answered only a part of the questions were dis- regarded. The 65 firms whose answers were used have offices in Texas and handle an average of about 4,864,000 bales annually. Some of the firms do a considerable part of their business in other states, while others limit their purchases to Texas cotton. No attempt was made to determine what per- centage of the total volume was exclusively Texas cotton. 0f these 65 firms, 41 were cotton ship- pers, 16 were f.o.b. merchants, 5 were mill buy- ers and 3 were spot brokers. The volume handled annually by each firm ranged from 6,000 bales upward, with an average for all firms of 76,000 bales. These firms do business in all cotton producing areas of Texas and represent all major types of cotton merchants handling cotton in the State. EVOLUTION OF STANDARDS FOR QUALITY Ever since cotton has been grown and traded on a commercial scale, some kind of standard for quality has been used as a basis for trading. In the infancy of the cotton trade, cotton was bought and sold by actual inspection. A system of buying and selling by sample developed about 1800 in 3 Liverpool. Cotton was classified largely accord- ing to the names 0f the regions where the cotton was produced. The color names, white, yellow and gray, were not used as they are today. By 1803, Sea Island cotton was classified as fine, good, middling, ordinary and stained but upland cotton continued to be identified as to the country of origin until 1825. After 1825, upland cotton began to be classified as good and fine, good fair, fair, middling and ordinary. From this time on, Liverpool evolved definite standards for indicat- ing the quality of cotton. During the early development of cotton mar- keting in the United States, cotton was classified largely according to origin. Sea Island cotton, for example was grouped into such terms as “Georgian,” Floridas” and “Island Crop Lots,” while the uplands were known as “Benders,” “River,” “Peelers,” “North Georgian,” “Cane- brakes” and “Texas Blacklands.” For a long time American cotton was sold largely on the basis of two grades, “good” and “sorry.” Regional trade names have played an im- portant part in the marketing of American cotton. Areas producing hard-bodied, strong cotton, areas with extra long staples, areas with favorable cli- mate and good soils and areas producing inferior qualities, were recognized and the trade expressed its ideas of the qualities coming from each area by such terms as “Mississippi Deltas,” “North Georgias” and “Red River Staples.” Although cotton coming from a given area differed greatly in staple quality and character, the regional trade names conveyed to the experienced cotton mer- chant some general ideas as to the characteristics of the cotton. New York was probably the first market in the United States to adopt cotton standards. The term “middling” appeared in New York price quotations as early as 1822. After 1855, New York used middling as a basis grade. New Orleans cotton men used the term “mid- dling” as early as 1828. Both New York and New Orleans eventually made their “middling” grade approximate the one used by Liverpool. One of the expressed purposes for organizing the New York Cotton Exchange (1870) and the New Orleans Cotton Exchange (1871) was to establish standards and classification for cotton. Prior to 1874 each market had its own stan- dards, which caused confusion and disputes be- tween buyers and sellers. Misunderstandings were common so long as price quotations were made on the basis of different standards, and efforts were made from time to time to establish a common set of standards for the entire trade. A National Cotton Exchange was organized and a committee was appointed in 1874 to recommend uniform standards that were to be adopted by all the cotton exchanges. This committee made types for the following grades: good middling, middling, low middling, good ordinary and ordinary. Speci- mens of these types were sent to the various cotton 4 exchanges. Additions were made by some“? changes but middling was accepted as a bas‘ This was a forward step, but the Ame i standard classifications differed somewhat f Liverpool standards. The Liverpool Cotton ker’s Association sent a complete set of Live ‘ standards to the American National Cotton A“ change in order to harmonize the two standa These standards were received favorably and adopted by most of the exchanges in the Un States. The National Cotton Exchange was i, solved in 1878, however, and with it went» uniformity of standards that had been establis In spite of the confusion existing in stand prior to 1909, the spot markets of the Uni States came to recognize in a general way‘- following grades: l Fair Strict low middl - Middling fair Low middling , Strict middling fair Strict good ordi f Strict good middling Good ordinary ‘ Good middling Strict ordinary Strict middling Ordinary Middling The grades designated as “strict” were kno as half-grades and the others as full gray, These grades were for white cotton only. terms “tinged” and “stained” were used these grades to designate discolored cotton. dling” was an accepted basis grade by all mar C as it is now. : u Unfortunately, the acceptance of gen grade names did not cause them to mean the things. “Middling” might be a higher or l0; quality in one market than in another. The = largest markets, New Orleans and New r; made up their standards independently of ot, exchanges. Innumerable disputes between buy and sellers naturally resulted from such a m = plicity of standards and methods of doing b’ ness. . Recognizing the confusion resulting fromv multiplicity of standards, Congress passed a in 1908 that authorized the Secretary of Agri ture to set up standard classifications for co The Secretary called together a committe} prominent men in various phases of the co l trade, and this committee selected a set of that they thought were representative of if grades. These were approved by the Seer“ of Agriculture. The cotton trade in general f in favor of official standards, but strong if sition soon developed because of the fear ' official standards would conflict with pri types. _ The adoption of the standards was i‘ entirely permissive, that is, the trade could a "7 or reject them. The Secretary of Agriculture ,8 not authorized to enforce their use. By ‘p most of the cotton exchanges had accepted; new standards. The Cotton Futures Act of I made the use of the government standards Us _ futures trading. With the futures mpelled to use the official standards, spot exchanges accepted them volun- overnment provided standards for 918. Investigations over several years hat farmers were not paid for their he basis of staple, and this created a i farmers would not try to improve ‘a number of years of negotiating with d other European exchanges, univer- s for grades were established in 1924. 11- ause of different standards of meas- r-v by countries of the world, universal ere not established for staple lengths. time to time the Secretary of Agricul- ake changes in grades and standards nges need to be made. At the present ‘fficial grades are: ~ ITE iddling ._middling SPOTTED Good middling Strict middling Middling Strict low middling Low middling . 9 V,‘ low middling iddling ,; good ordinary ordinary _ GED YELLOW ‘middling STAIN ED ‘middling Good middling p’ I Strict middling low middling Middling iddling GRAY p, Good middling Strict middling Middling Strict low middling '1 approximately 125 years to establish 1 standards for grades of American liermining Grade is a term which embraces three factors Qreign material and preparation. .3 is one of the most important factors y: the grade of cotton. The major of color in the present standards are M ed, tinged, yellow stained and gray. Iitions occur within each of these gen- L}: and includes a range of light color. l, white grades may be slightly creamy, ~ loomy” but free of discoloration. The grades have less brightness and have ‘loration. , are differences in the standard colors. g grades are rather bright and of lighter the lower grades have a deeper and r. The 12 samples included in each i; prepared by the U. S. Government s. White, for example, is relative in ' illustrate the permissible range of color in the grade the box represents. There also are 2 to 4 samples or biscuits from each of the four major geographical sections of the Cotton Belt. Foreign matter is a term for bits of the cotton plant such as broken leaves, burs and seed, and other material such as sand and dust, that nor- mally get into cotton before or during harvesting and are not removed by the ginning process. Preparation means the degree to which the normal length of the fibers is maintained, or the regularity with which the individual fibers are laid together in ginning, and the amount of nep- piness of the cotton. Poor preparation is evi- denced by an appearance of roughness, stringiness or ropiness, and gin-cut fibers. Determining Staple Lengths Staple length is the measured length of a selected portion of the fibers. By custom, this measured length is assigned to a sample or bale as a whole. Cotton is stapled by gradations of 1 / 32 of an inch. Since there always is variability in the staple length of any sample, the modal length determines the length recorded. “ SIVIITH-DOXEY CLASSIFICATION AND THE COTTON TRADE One of the chief arguments for the establish- ment of official grade and staple standards for cotton was that the farmers would benefit from them. Theoretically, this was the case, but in practice the farmers did not derive the benefits anticipated. Unfortunately only a small percent- age of the farmers ever acquired the skill neces- sary to grade and staple their own cotton. Con- sequently, when the farmer met the buyer in the local market to bargain for a price on the basis of quality, mostof the knowledge of the grade and staple of the cotton in question was on the side of the buyer. The farmer had to rely on compe- tition among the buyers to get fair bids for his cotton on the basis of quality. All of the infor- mation provided the farmer through newspapers, radios and government publications availed the farmer little if he could not distinguish between the qualities of cotton for which price quotations were given. To overcome this lack of knowledge of quality by farmers, the Smith-Doxey Act was passed in 1937. Its purpose was to encourage improvement in quality and in local marketing conditions. This Act provides free classification service for farm- ers who join cotton improvement groups and make application for the classification service. The Smith-Doxey Act provides for the taking of a sample from each bale of cotton at the gin by a bonded sampler or a warehouse that issues negotiable receipts. These samples are sent to a designated central office where grade and staple are determinedgunder the supervision of the Fed- eral Government. The farmer is sent a “green 5 Figure 1. Texas districts for cotton quality reports. card” giving him the grade and staple of his cotton along with the price information. This service has been available to the cotton farmer since 1938, and a large percentage of the crop is now graded and stapled by the government (See Table 1 and Figure 1). This service gives most farmers the opportunity for the first time to enter the market and bargain on near equal terms with the buyer in matters of grades and staples and price differentials. This doesn’t mean that the buyer must accept the government classification, as often there is reason for honest differences of opinion. The government, however, accepts the classification for loan purposes. Use oi Smith-Doxey Classing , The survey of cotton buyers supplied in- formation on the extent to which they are purchasing cotton on the basis of “green cards,” that is, on the government classification, and TABLE 1. SMITH-DOXEY PARTICIPATION IN TEXAS BY DISTRICTS, 1955 FISCAL YEAR (IULY 1. 1954 TO IUNE 30. 1955)1 Acreage Percent Dis- No. mpg’; Total oggsig“ Samples gin- trictsz groups hers acreage adapted v classed circirggsd varieties 1 24 21.819 2.477.596 1.108.222 1.573.955 99.6 2 54 21.230 1.672.249 1.052.771 350.763 89.8 3 22 2.619 104.460 60.100 10.888 68.8 4 150 37.998 1.676.182 1.016.934 205.589 46.8 5 32 6.520 327.748 244.730 66.665 45.6 6 7 2.099 144.292 114.345 267.433 105.73 7 9 1.603 148.750 103.915 8.384 41.7 8 69 9.612 574.017 375.333’ 268.317 76.7 9 24 4.240 218.281 183.981 62.693 34.5 l0 116 7.301 592.957 438.391 202.974 43.4 Total 507 115.063 7.936.592 4.698.722 3.017.661 1USDA. AMS. Cotton Division. 2See Figure 1. 31954 crop in Reeves county approximately 1.500 bales more than the census figure. 6 on the worth of such classification to the co buyer. Fifty-three of the 65 firms answering ' questionnaire indicated that they purchased cotton on the Smith-Doxey classification. Ta the figures each firm gave as an estimate of purchases, the total was 1,833,900 bales, or -. 38 percent of the total volume of 4,864,000 =; This percentage indicates a considerable de of acceptance of Smith-Doxey classification buyers. Trade Appraisal oi Smith-Doxey Classing Thirty-two firms indicated Smith-D, classification was satisfactory, or at least part‘ so. A large percentage had some complaint ~. the accuracy of the classing. Twenty firms emphatic in stating the classifications made, Smith-Doxey classers were unsatisfactory. ' An attempt was made to determine the ‘f criticisms of Smith-Doxey classification from viewpoint of cotton buyers. Fifty-two of the firms questioned had some criticism. Since -: firm wrote its criticisms in its own words, i difficult to condense all the answers into a ‘ lines. However, the criticisms tended to fall i the following categories: 1. Erratic, irregular and inaccurate. 2. Failure to be consistent throughout I season, that is, grade too hard in the ¢ part but too easy in the latter part. 3. Other criticisms were poor sampling the gins, samples not representing n1 quality of bale because of two-sided b failure to indicate character or vari temporary classers, classing too rap and public pressures coming from f ers on one side and from the merch on the other. i WHY GRADE AND STAPLE STANDA I ARE INADEQUATE I Official standards for grades and sta have helped cotton trading and are a great g provement over the old unofficial standa Nevertheless, they do not account properly the character of cotton. The character of c0 1_ is most important in finished goods. Many» the aspects of quality are not identified in ' factors called grade and staple. I Some of the more important elements character in which a spinner is interested :Y uniformity of staple, length and diameter, te strength, fineness, cohesiveness, pliability : elasticity, porosity and capillarity, luster = durability. These elements are not included grade and staple standards even though the i. value of any fiber depends on its performanc spinning. Many of the elements of quality character of cotton have been difficult for classer to define exactly. Because of this ' ‘_ologists have been working for a long f lop methods of measuring these quali- r eater exactness. S0 far, the technol- e developed practical apparatus for "four properties of cotton fibers in l laboratories—fineness, s t r e n g t h, ,_-~ maturity. A, to What extent cotton firms in Texas “fiber testing equipment in addition to fing, they were asked what percentage '_‘n handled was purchased and sold on 10f laboratory testing. The percentage firms with their own equipment for the extent to which they used com- “boratories also were considered. or FIBER TESTING BY TEXAS COTTON FIRMS is the fiber property most commonly the cotton firms interviewed. Although fseveral instruments for determining Texas merchants use the Micronaire irely. Of the 65 merchants answering onnaire, 31 had their own Micronaire. firms, or 81 percent, stated that they cotton on the basis of Micronaire tests. for 41 percent, reported that they pur- n on the basis of such tests. Approxi- 'ce as many sold cotton on Micronaire ught on that basis. These firms stated ,= about 2,437,950 bales on Micronaire Ipurchased only 1,827,225 bales on such '1 gth is one of the most popular of all 'urements but is more time-consuming sive than the Micronaire test for fine- e Pressley strength tester is commonly 5 he cotton trade. Spinners often relate f» and fabric strengths to fiber strength, need to know the strength of fibers purchase the raw cotton. 1 35 cotton merchants reported that they A of their cotton on the basis of Pressley i“ 7 had their own equipment to make which means most of the firms have to 1- hers for their tests. Eleven merchants ‘luey purchased cotton on the basis of _'_ tests. rms of bales, the 65 merchants reported approximately 536,500 bales annually, or p’... of their total volume, on the basis of _ | gth test. uch smaller amount was purchased on I of fiber strength tests, 34,800 bales, or V 1 percent. “eat deal of spot checking is done, how- the use of fiber strength testing is more ,t than the foregoing figures indicate. j ing gives a fairly good indication of the @ngth coming from a given area for a l. especially in one-variety communities. Length of fiber also is of great importance to spinners, and cotton merchants often are called upon to make sales on the basis of length meas- urements. Laboratory length factors may be expressed in several ways, but the most common ones are: (1) mean or average length, (2) upper half mean length and (3) length uniformity or the uniformity ratio. These length factors usually are computed from measurements made with the Hertel Fibrograph. Only a small percentage of the cotton is sold on the basis of the fibrograph test. Approximately 26,000 bales were sold in 1954-55 on this basis, or less than 1 percent. Only 5 firms interviewed indicated they had a fibrograph. Maturity tests show the percentage of im- mature fibers in a sample although the word “maturity” is used to indicate the degree of immaturity. Maturity is measured by using a microscope to examine the fibers that have been swollen or mercerized in caustic soda. This makes it possible to see how big the lumen is and how thick the wall. Only 2 firms said they had equipment to make maturity tests. Only 1 firm reported sales on the basis of such tests, and only 1 made pur- chases on such tests. Total sales and purchases on the basis of maturity tests were far too low to be of any significance. Fiber Testing and Pricing Undoubtedly the development of laboratory testing of cotton fibers is having considerable influence on the pricing of cotton by spinners and cotton merchants, but at the present time it is difficult to measure this influence. Only a very few cotton merchants have developed for their buyers a pricing system based on fiber testing comparable with the differentials they send out for grade and staple. Mills tend more and more to give minimum requirements for fineness and strength as they ask for offers from the cotton merchants. Such qualifications nat- urally influence the price of raw cotton, but it will be some time before a quotation service giving price differentials will be possible. Only a few cotton firms that are far in advance of the others have a clear-cut pricing system based on labora- tory tests. A great many firms are not yet equipped to make such tests and have to use commercial laboratories or government testing as the necessity arises. One f.o.b. cotton merchant expressed his opinion of the effects of fiber testing on price in these words: “We are beginning to feel the effects of Micronaire demand by mills. The past two seasons have been pace setters. Because of our methods of merchandising cotton, (Smith-Doxey class) both mills and shippers require their buyers in our territory to constantly furnish them types from cotton grown in our area. As long as the cotton meets the Micronaire minimum, say 3.2, 7. there is no specific mention of Micronaire in our contracts. As the season progresses and the quality of the cotton becomes ‘softer’ the drop in Micronaire is usually reflected in the basis we are offered by the same firms.” Cost of Laboratory Testing of Fibers The added cost of the Micronaire test for fineness and the Pressley test for fiber strength was considered, but the equipment was new to most firms and the majority had made no serious effort to determine the cost of these tests per bale. Employees, for example, who made the Micronaire tests might be used for other duties around the office, and no timetables were kept on the labor costs. Consequently, any attempt to estimate costs was abandoned. Perhaps the charges made by commercial laboratories are as good an estimate as possible. Following is the price list furnished by the United States Testing Company, Inc., Dallas, Texas: PRICE LIST OF COTTON FIBER TESTS GROUP OR LOT SAMPLES SUBMITTED I AT SAME TIME 5-49 50-500 Over 500 samples samples samples No. per mo. per mo. per mo. (1a) Fiber strength, flat bundle, 2 breaks per sample, (Pressley) per sample (2a) Fiber length and A uniformity, 2 measurements (Fibrograph) per sample .85 .75 .70 (3a) Fiber fineness, 2 determinations (Micronaire) per sample (4a) Combination tests (1a) , (2a) and (3a) above per sample 1.75 1.50 1.40 (5a) Maturity $ .60 $ .50 .35 .30 .25 (Microscopic) per sample 4.00 (6a) Moisture content .80 .7 0 .60 (7a) Sugar content .80 .70 .60 (8a) Shirley Analyzer ‘ (non-line) per sample 2.50 under 10 bales 2.00 over 10 bales SPECIAL QUOTATIONS No. of samples FINENESS Price per sample 30,000 or more in 6-month period __________________ _- $ -15 500 per month ______________________________ _- ~20 Under 500 but in 100 bale lots ...................... __ ~25 Under 500 but in small lots ______________________________ _- -30 Under 100 .................................... -- -35 In addition to commercial laboratories; U. S. Department of Agriculture has a te laboratory at College Station, Texas. This _, ratory tests fibers for breeders and others _ fee basis. The charges are somewhat hi_ however, than the price list given for the pri agency. Cotton firms frequently use the laboratory to check the accuracy of their i. laboratory tests. ‘ Whatever the additional costs of labora tests, it appears certain that such tests are to stay and any cotton firms merchandising cotton will have to have laboratory service of kind or another. Some may find commeé; laboratory prices less than the cost of putti their own equipment, especially for certain - It seems certain that the larger firms will acq their own equipment for testing fineness, most of the smaller firms may find the cost 1 necessary skill for making the other tests expensive to install their own equipment. Relationship of Laboratory Testing of Fibers to Cotton Classing The fiber laboratory will not replace cotton classer, but will supplement his work.» now operated, the laboratory needs the cla The classer, however, should become more s in his classing if he checks with the labora on, results. i‘ The cotton merchants were asked if thought fiber testing helps their classers dev' added skills. Of the 60 answers, 33 thought testing helped their classers in detecting l. accurately certain qualities of cotton, whil thought such tests did not help their cla They also were asked if fiber testing aff their opinions about qualities of cotton c0 from various areas and if such tests affected appraisal of the numerous varieties. Of th, answering the first question, 37 said fiber t, had influenced their ideas about qualitil cotton produced in the various areas of the S while 20 said such tests had not affected n? opinions. Of 46 firms answering the a5 about qualities associated with various vari 25 said fiber testing had affected their opi; while 21 said their opinion had not changed. thought their classers were good enough to d, most of the qualities by old methods of cla Each firm was asked if it thought Micro readings also should be added to the grade staple classification given on the card se, the farmer. Forty answered “yes,” and. , answered “no.” I Apparently some shippers felt that if, Micronaire reading is added to the grade e staple classification, it might further enco ' mills to go direct to local markets to pur their supplies of cotton. This would cut rf the volume handled by the cotton merchants, ‘ through the years have assembled cotton, cl it in even running lots before selling to the - MINIMUM MICRONAIRE READING ESTIMATES _ OF 60 COTTON FIRMS No. oi firms giving ~-- m r ' . . . u eqdmg this nummum 3.0 1 3.2 2 3.5 15 3.6 4 3.8 14 4.0 24 60 lready is a tendency on the part of some i; ., purchase cotton on Smith-Doxey classi- ~ and the addition of a Micronaire reading make it more convenient to buy direct lrmers or local buyers. ‘I s AND STRENGTH m - GREATEST DEMAND ; has long been the responsibility of the merchant to study the needs of his cus- » and to concentrate cotton, equalize it in nning lots and disperse it according to tomers’ needs. Since laboratory tests “ness and for strength of fiber are used -= monly, the cotton merchants were asked "test demand and to state what they con- re the minimum requirements based on . 1r fineness this question was asked, “What "Aire reading do you find in greatest de- ’ Sixty firms answered this question by gthe minimum requirements or a range. pwers are given in Table 2. Use answers indicate little demand for fwith a Micronaire reading less than 3.5. ‘i. percent stated the reading should be 3.8 or better. _y 34 firms answered the question on the frength tests. Their estimates are shown 3. twer firms expressed opinions on fiber 4h than they did on fineness. This is to , ted since only 7 of the 65 firms reporting ipment to test strength of fiber while 31 A cronaires. ble 3 shows that the mills are interested in fibers that will test 80,000 or more. ~ FIBER STRENGTH TESTS ESTIMATES OF 34 COT- * TON FIRMS - their ideas on the range of these qualities A gs of Pressley test No. oi firms 75,000 1 i. 78.000 2 n 80.000 l5 ~ 82.000 4 83.000 2 i 84.000 1 85.000 6 " 86.000 l i 90.000 2 q 34 STAPLE LENGTH 1N GREATEST DEMAND In view of a prevailing complaint about the quality of Texas cotton, especially its staple length, cotton firms were asked to give the staple lengths they found in greatest demand. Their answers were somewhat affected by the area in which they operate and the type of cotton they specialize in handling. Only 62 firms gave their opinions on this question, as shown in Table 4. It is obvious the shorter staples of Texas cotton are not in great demand, yet the average staple length has been running about 15/ 16 for a number of years._ . Production Trends in Staple Lengths In order to dig deeper into the causes for the constant complaints about Texas producing so much short staple, the average staple lengths for all the cotton states were calculated for the 1928- 30 and 1952-53 crops so that a comparison could be made as to the progress each state has made in increasing staple lengths between the two periods. In the fourth column of Table 5, the gains and losses in staple lengths are given for each state in terms of 32nds of an inch. All the states having short staple cotton as the dominant crop, except Texas and Oklahoma, have increased staple lengths since 1928-30 by 2/32 to 4/32 of an inch. Oklahoma actually has decreased its average staple length while Texas has made very little increase. A large proportion of all cotton 7/8-inch and shorter grown in the United States has come from Texas in recent years. In 1952, for example, Texas produced 86.6 percent of all the 7 /8-inch and shorter and 79.6 percent in 1953. It is obvious that most of the other statesihave aban- doned the growing of the 7 /8-inch staple and shorter. All states except Oklahoma and Texas TABLE 4. STAPLE LENGTHS IN GREATEST DEMAND. SUM- MER OF 1955 Staple lengths No. of firms 7/8 - 15/16 1 29/32 - 31/32 1 29/32 - 15/16 1 29/32 - 1 1 15/16 - 2 15/16 - 31/32 1 15/16 - 1 2 15/16 - 1-1/32 3 15/16 - 1-1/16 ~- 2 15/16 - 1-3/32 1 31/32 1 31/32 up 1 31/32 - 1-1/32 1 31/32 - 1-1/16 l 1 up 14 1 - 1-1/32 1 1 - 1-1/16 6 1 - l-3/32 1 1 - 1-1/32 3 1-1/32 - 1-1/16 13 l-1/32 - 1-3/32 3 1-1/16 1 1-1/8 -1-5/32 1 Total 62 as a4 — 7 as 32 7 a I so 29 2e 2? 2e STAPLE LENGTHS IN 32NDS OF INCH AVG. STAPLE LENGTHS I l928—l93O I l952—l953 w??? L ol ||| ||| ||| ||| ||| ||| ||| ||| ||| ||| ||| | U.S. CAL. NM. MISS. LA. ARIZ. MO. ARK. TENNFLA.$.C. ALA. GA. N.C. VA. TEX. 0K0 Figure 2. Average staple length oi American upland cotton ginned in the United States. by states. crop 1928 and l9 are producing staples averaging 1 inch and better in recent years. (See Table 5 and Figure 2.) Trends in Discounts and Premiums For Staple Lengths As more and more of the cotton produced each year in the United States has averaged 1 inch and better, the trend for discounts for cotton below 15/16 inch and the trend of premiums for the inch and better staples are of interest. Pre- miums and discounts for 1-1/ 16 and 7/ 8-inch cotton are charted in Figure 3 from 1938 through 1954. along with the percentage of the total crop falling in these staples. The trend line for premiums for 1-1/ 16-inch cotton has been up- Ward, although varying from year to year with the quantity of this staple produced. The trend TABLE 5. A COMPARISON OF STAPLE LENGTHS GROWN IN 1928-30 AND 1952-53 BY STATES Average Average Gain or loss in stat staple staple staple length e lengths. lengths. from 1928-30 1928-30 1952-53 to 1952-53 ————— 32nds oi aninch ————— Alabama 28.40 32.6 4.2 Arkansas 31.28 33.5 2.2 Florida 28.81 32.6 3.79 Georgia 29.05 32.35 3.30 Louisiana 31.03 33.75 2.70 Mississippi 32.82 33.7 0.88 Missouri 31.03 33.5 2.47 North Carolina 29.66 32.75 3.09 Oklahoma 29.74 29.1 —0.64 South Carolina 30.44 32.45 2.01 Tennessee 29.94 33.20 3.26 Texas 29.99 30.05 0.06 Virginia 29.24 32.9 3.66 California 33.82 34.0 0.42 Arizona 32.84 33.5 0.66 New Mexico 33.50 34.5 1.00 All states 30.34 32.45 2.11 10 PERCENT OF CROP 7/9 INCH PERCENT OF CROP lI/IS INCH line of discounts for 7 /8-inch staple and sho { also has been upward. there has been some shift in demand by u from the short staples to the longer staples, ‘ the price difference between shorter staples inch and longer staples has been widening. Te farmers have not shared extensively in the be fits of the increasing premiums but have sha largely in the increasing discounts because -_ have produced a large proportion of the sho staples. Approximately 62 percent of the T .- 35 0| O N (I 2O I I\ ' \ l ft’ .- I \ I 75y I ~~ ‘I v ~50’ I , . ’ \' Z"..__'.=’§§l|§§°§=l=".1§>oLa BALE IN DOLLARS _~~— l 11- ~/. or CROP ‘us’ III onscounr PER soo L8 BALE m DOLLARS / ‘I s" A _ __, _ L, c" YEARS Figure 3. Percentage of total U. S. cotton crop l-l and 7/8 inch and premiums and discounts per 500-po bale for these staple lengths, 1938 and 1954. These trends indi " I "M! \ - 1. I’ ‘s I y o l | | | | .1 | 1 l . | | r n | _ 1930's: '40 '4| '42 '4: '44 '45 '40 '41 '4a '49 ‘so ‘an ‘s2 ‘s: ‘so ~ ‘I PERCENTAGE OF VARIOUS STAPLE LENGTHS GROWN IN TEXAS BY DISTRICTS FOR COTTON QUALITY RE- f‘. PORTS, 1952-53 AND 1953-541 Districts tor cotton quality reports - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 7° % 7. 7» 7° 7° 7» 7° 7° 7° ‘I 6. shorter 10 16 16 4 3 2 7 7 2 2 34 28 24 14 8 2 28 6 1 1 30 21 24 22 12 2 28 17 3 2 17 20 24 34 21 2 24 3'0 16 6 5 8 8 l7‘ 18 2 8 23 19 6 _, _ 2 5 3 7 17 2 4 8 27 19 j 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 4 24 37 2 2 2 2 2 1g 2 2 3 27 ‘I 2 2 2 2 21 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 24 2 2 2 2 y 2 2 2 25 2 ’ 2 2 7 2 1 2 ,5 longer2 2 2 bales d, 1952-53 _~ -54 1,402,995 345,771 19,258 837,627 214,246 227,136 23,606 347,785 220,897 326,939 : USDA, AMS, Cotton Division. ‘an 1 percent. {drop was 15/16 inch or less, and in 1953 reduction rose to 71 percent. | Table 6, a 2-year total production by ‘cts for cotton quality reports” was used f, the percentage of the various staple lengths ~in each district in Texas. By checking iidistricts against the map of Texas (Figure Tis easy to locate the areas producing both orter and the better staples. Y. addition to the large percentage of cotton fshorter staples, certain areas also produce deal of cotton with a 10W Micronaire 2 g because of climatic conditions. Adding naire readings to the Smith-Doxey classifi- 4 for the cotton from some of the areas will Appointing to a great many farmers, espe- Qduring years with short growing seasons. is a tremendous problem still ahead for of the Texas cotton farmers in improving Staple and character of cotton. Nearly all cotton firms contacted in the survey indi- one of the most important problems needing fwas staple, varieties and character of Texas .1 F" in Production cmd Carryover le Lengths Migure 3 shows that the trends for premium j e staple length of 1-1/1‘6-inch cotton over g 15/ 16-inch cotton have been upward since and the discounts for 7 /8-inch staple also .-increased over the same period, thus widen- ii difference between these two qualities of '. To determine whether more of the shorter cottons and less of the longer staple would ,_the carryover each year, the carryover of ‘nd 29/32, 15/16 and 31/32, 1 and 1-1/32, _-1/16 and 1-3/32-inch cotton was plotted the annual productions of these staples _"1928 through 1954. Figures 4, 5, 6 and 7 Jthat the percentage of carryover of these p» staple lengths closely parallels the per- Icentage of the annual production of these staple lengths. In other words, as the percentage of the annual crop that is 7 /8 and 29/32-inch has decreased over the years, the carryover of this kind of cotton also has decreased. As the per- centage of 1, 1-1/32, 1-1/ 16 and 1-3/32-inch staple has increased in production, the percentage of carryover of these staples has followed the same trends. Actually, on a percentage basis, there has been less of the shorter staples. in the carryover and more of the longer staples of 1 to 1-3/32 inch. ‘ In the light of the data on carryovers, why is there so much complaint heard about the excessive amount of short staple going into the government loan or into the carryover? Appar- ently, the main justification for the complaint is the fact that Texas produces approximately 80 percent or more of the total crop of 7 /8-inch staple cotton. The 7/8-inch staple cotton going into the government loan or into the carryover each year is largely Texas cotton. 45 8 O 0| GI U! Q N (I N O PERCENT or TOTAL cRoP-‘r/r-zs/az‘ o G l! % TOTAL CROP ——3— % TOTAL CARRYOVER Figure 4. Trends in production and carryover of 7/8 and 29/32-inch staple lengths U. S. upland cotton, 1928-54. 11 0| Ul I 0| O I m 0| I N O I i3 I PERCENT OF TOTAL CROP l5I|6'AND 3I/32' "t '5 I I O 9 O u--- v. TOTAL CARRYOVER 11i- 1. TOTAL CROP Figure 5. Trends in production and carryover of 15/16 and 31/32-inch staple lengths U. S. upland cotton. 1928-54. SPECIFIC PBCBLEMS NEEDING STUDY There is perhaps no group of men in better position than the cotton merchants t0 point out the cotton problems needing study by an insti- tution like the Texas Agricultural Experiment Station. They have an opportunity to learn all the complaints mills have about the quality of raw cotton, and it is through them that demand information about the quality of cotton reaches the producer. In other words, if a free market exists, the price differentials paid the farmer reflect the demand for the various qualities of cotton. The quality of cotton the farmer has to sell may be a result of seed selection, harvest- ing, ginning, packaging or country damage at the local cotton yards. To get opinions about present day cotton problems from Texas cotton merchants, they were asked the following question: “What specific studies or programs do you think the Texas A&M College System should undertake that would be of greatest service to the cotton business?” 45 b O I U! (I I 0| O I N (I I G I PERCENT OF TOTAL CROP 1' AND ll/32' _ N u o O I I I I ~ n _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _..2_.. QQQQV. TOTAL CARRYOVER i7, TOTAL CROP 928 - 929 — 930 - 93l "' 932 - 933 — 934 - 935 -' 936 - 937 - 938 — 939 - 940 - 94! — 942 — 943 - 944 '- 945 - 946 — 947 - 948 - 949 — 950 — 951 '- Figure 6. Trends in production and carryover of 1 and l-l/32-inch staple lengths U. S. upland cotton, 1928-54. I2 I i‘ _,_ . g . < in ‘goo - = 11 3 zs - 0 5 0 J . < 20 - I ' 5 ,1 ° 3 ,5 _ __ i I, t. s f ‘v '1 S u. I I 5 I0 "' §_~ ’I e O- ~Q’— Q‘ f 1 : 5 — ‘y’ o I I I I I I l I I I I I I I l I I I I I I _ - N V IO O h U O O §§§:§§§§§§§§§;;§;;;;:;: bl ll I —————%TOTAL CARRYOVER Figure 7. Trends in production and carryover l-l/SZ-inch staple lengths U. S. upland cotton. 192 5 Salas-we're!‘ A number of problems were cited, but. of them covered cotton varieties, gove w» program, ginning, government classing an desirable trade practices. Y~ Staple of Texas cotton Wasthe problem often mentioned. Need for longer staple w, with better character, elimination of some in ‘varieties and selection of others for the v‘ producing areas of the State constitute, major problems mentioned under variety. - chants handling cotton on the High Plai particularly anxious for varieties that will * lint with higher Micronaire reading and will greater maturity under climatic conditio that area. a Ginning problems suggested for study { inefficient ginning, ginning too fast, usin much heat, using statifiers improperly;i’_*; sampling, mixing cotton or permitting 'c from one farmer’s truck to get into anot bale, and poor bagging. ' The chief complaint about trade pra seems to be that some firms try to “pan cotton of poorer quality on the mills, esp foreign mills, than they promised to de Some cotton merchants stated that this prj is hurting our foreign market and is encour, domestic mills to do more direct buying. I Government classing was criticized by? eral merchants, both the Smith-Doxey cl_ and other classing done by the govern‘ classers. Most of these criticisms have g discussed earlier. " .__.___..._r... A_L_.._nAA|-