EFFECTS OF GOYFREMENT LOAN.AND PURCHASE PROGRAMS UPON DOMESTIC MARKET SUPPLIES OF FARM PRODUCTS IN ESE POSTYIAR PERIOD 33’ John F. Stollsteimer A THESIS Submitted to the College of‘Agriculture, Michigan State University of Agriculture and Applied Sciences in partial fulfillment of the reouirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Department of Agricultural Economics 1957 I—-7'5'% Ci; [5"? ACKI‘IOWLEDGLENTS The author wishes to express his gratitude to the many people who assisted in the deveIOpment and completion of this thesis. Special thanks are eXpressed to Dr. Dale Hathaway for his aid in developing the framework of this study and constructive criticisms during the course of its progress. Thanks are also expressed to other members of the Agricultural Economics staff for their helpful suggestions made during the development of this thesis. Cooperation given the author by Mr. Thomas Thornburg of the Fiscal Analysis Branch, Commodity Credit Corporation. U. S. Department of Agriculture greatly facilitated the collection of much of the data used in this study. The financial assistance provided by Dr. L. L. Boger, Head of the Agricultural Economics Department made it possible for the author to complete this study. ‘Appreciation is also expressed to Mrs. Patricia Cothern for typing the final manuscript. Thanks are also expressed to the secretarial staff of the Department of Agricultural Economics for assistance given during the development of this paper. especially Miss Joyce.Arts who typed the first draft of this paper. The author assumes full responsibilities for any errors that remain in this manuscript. John I. Stollsteimer ii EFFECTS OF GOVERNMENT LOAN'AND PURCHASE PROGRAMS UPON DOMESTIC MARKET SUPPLIES OF FARM PRODUCTS IN THE POST'y‘AR PERIOD By John F. Stollsteimer AN'ABSTRACT Submitted to the College of.Agriculture. Michigan State University of Agriculture and Applied Sciences in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Department of Agricultural Economics Year 1957 Approved ABSTRACT The purposes of this study were (1) to measure the volume of major agricultural commodities removed from and added to the aggregate supply of agricultural commodities available in commercial domestic markets by 006 programs during the postwar period. and (2) to relate these removals and additions to currently published indexes of farm output. farm market- ings, and farm marketings and home consumption. Data on the physical quantities of the major agricultural commodities removed from and added to the available supply of agricultural products by C00 programs were obtained from both published and unpublished records of CCC operations. These data plus base weight values used in the published indexes of total farm output. total farm marketings, and total farm marketings and home consumption were used to construct indexes of 000 removal. CCC additions. and net change in available supply as a result of CCC programs. These indexes are comparable to published indexes. Applying the mathematical concepts underlying index numbers. the indexes of net change were used to adjust the published indexes and obtain three new indexes. These adjusted indexes are measures of (1) farm output not removed from available supply by CCC programs plus CCC domestic sales during the marketing years. (2) farm marketings and.home consumption excluding the quantity removed by CCC. plus 000 domestic sales during the calendar year5 and (3) farm marketings to buyers other than CCC. plus 000 domestic iv sales during the calendar year. The adjusted indexes were computed for each of the major commodities or commodity groups which have been in- volved in 000 programs during the postwar period. Value aggregates for each of the sub-series were then summed and indexes of removal. additions, and net change constructed which are comparable to the published indexes of total farm output. total farm marketings. and total farm marketings and home consumption. CCC programs were found to be equal to a substantial portion of total farm output. total farm marketings, and total farm marketings and home consumption. The net impact of CCC programs on the available supply of agricultural products in the 1948-1955 marketing years was found to have ranged from an addition to that supply equal to 2 per cent of current production to a decrease equal to 9 per cent of current pro- duction. In relation to total farm marketings and home consumption. 000 programs were found to have had a net impact on the available supply of agricultural products ranging from an increase equal to 1 per cent to a decrease equal to 8 per cent of current farm marketings and home consumption during the 1949 through 1956 calendar years. During the 1949 through 1956 calendar years. 000 programs have had.a net effect ranging from an increase in available supply equal to 1 per cent of current marketings to a decrease equal to 9 per cent of current marketings. The effects of these programs on the available supply of individual commodities and commodity groups have been of a much greater variability than these aggregate values. These percentage changes in supply figures and an estimate of price flexibility of demand were used to estimate the income transfer resulting from CCC programs. Given the assumptions made in determining this income transfer we have found this transfer to be equal to as much as one-third of gross farm income and/or cash receipts from marketings in certain years. vi CHAPTER II III IV TABLE OF COI‘TI‘EICTS NEODUCTICNo000.000.000.000.0000.00.00.00.000000000000000. Government Loan and Purchase Programs...................... Government Disposal Programs............................... Scope and Purpose of Study................................. mmomLOGYQOODO0.000.000.0000.O.00. 00000 ...oOOOOOOOOOOOOI. Index Of Farm Output....o.o.............o.............o.... Index of Farm Marketings and Home Consumption. . . . . . . . . . . . .. Index of Farm Output and the Index of Farm Marketings and Home Consumption Compared.,............................. General Method of Adjusting the Two Indexes to Show the Relationship Between the Magnitude of Government Loan and Purchase and the Published Series.................. Adjustment of the Index of Farm Output.. . ..... ....... . .. Adjustment of the Index of Farm Marketing and Home COHBWPtiono.n...-... noose-cocoon.coooooooooo.oooooooo Estimating Income Transfer................................. Sources Of DataOOOOOOoooooOoOoooouo9.0000900000000000...Do. MMIRY PRICE mmfimPROG1WIQOOOOOOOO0.00.00.00.00.'0... Magnitude of CCC Purchase and Disposal Programs in Relation to Total Farm Output of Dairy Products................. Magnitude of CCC Loan, Purchase, and Disposal Programs in Relation to Farm Marketings and Home Consumption Of Dairy Productsooo............o.............oo...o..o Magnitude of CCC Purchase and Disposal Programs in Relation to Ram Marketings and Home Consumption of Dairy Products When the Various Types of CCC Distributions Are Considered-"...“.................................. CCC Purchases and Distributions of Dairy Products in the Postwar Period Related to the Farm Marketings of Dairy Products as Measured in the Index of Farm MarketingooOOOOOOQOOooo00.000.sOooooooooooooooooooooooo m m GRAINS PROGRM...QQ.OOOQ000.O..00.0.00000900000000 Magnitude of CCC Loan, Purchase. and Disposal Programs in Relation to Total Farm Output of Feed Grains...... ..... Magnitude of 000 Loan. Purchase, and Disposal Programs in Relation to Farm Marketings and Home Consumption of Feed GrainaoooooooooOocoo-00....0000.00.00.000000000000 Magnitude of CCC Loan, Purchase, and Disposal Programs in Relation to Farm Marketings and Home Consmnption of Feed Grains When Various Types of CCC Sales Are consj-deredotoo.00.00.00.00000000000000000000000000.0000 vii 10 11 12 14 14 15 23 24 26 28 31 33 35 43 47 TABLE OF CONTENTS - Continued CHAPTER VI VII VIII IX Magnitude of CCC Loan, Purchase, and Disposal Programs in Relation to Total Farm Marketings of Feed Grains.. THE FOOD GRAINS PROGRAM................................... Magnitude of 000 Loan, Purchase, and Disposal Programs in Relation to Total Farm Output of Food Grains...... Magnitude of CCC Loan, Purchase, and Disposal Programs in Relation to Farthsrketings and Home Consumption of Food Grains....................................... Magnitude of CCC Loan, Purchase, and Disposal Programs in Relation to Farm Marketings and Home Consumption of Food Grains When Various Types of CCC Sales.Are Considered.........................”...nnnno”... Magnitude of CCC Loan, Purchase, and Disposal Programs in Relation to Farm Marketings of Food Grains........... CCC COT'IDN PPSGRAI‘:Soo-oooo.ooso.00.000000000000000000000.. Magnitude of CCC Loan and Purchase Programs for Cotton in Relation to Total Farm Output of Cotton.............. Magnitude of CCC Loan and Purchase Programs for Cotton in Relation to Farm Marketings and Home Consumption of cotton..........0.0.0.0....00......0.0.0.0....OODOOO. m TOBACCO PBOGMOOOOQIOOOOOOO0.00.000.000.00.000.000... Magnitude of CCC Loan, Purchase, and Disposal Programs for Tobacco in.Relation to Total Farm Output of Tobacco.. Magnitude of CCC Loan, Purchase, and Disposal Programs for Tobacco in Relation to Farm Marketing and Home Consumption of Tobacco............................... m mmm PROGMM..0.0CICOOOOOOOOOOO.........OOOOOOOOOOOO Magnitude of CCC Removal of Potatoes in Relation to Total Farm Output of Vegetables............................ Magnitude of CCC Removal of Potatoes in Relation to Total Farm Marketings and Home Consumption of Vegetables... CCC Removal of Potatoes in Relation to Farm Marketings of Vegetables........................................... OIL 5-:er PROGPAMSOOOOOOO.-......OOOOOOI.......OOOOOOOOOOCO Magnitude of CCC Loan, Purchase. and Disposal Programs for Oilseed in Relation to Total Farm Output of Oilseed.. viii Page 49 51 53 56 60 61 64 67 69 78 84 86 86 89 92 Jll ll «l‘lrll TABLE OF CONTENTS - Continued CHAPTER Page Magnitude of CCC Loan, Purchase, and Disposal Programs for Oilseeds in Relation to Farm.Marketings and.Rome Consumption of Oilseed.................................. 96 Effects of CCC Programs on the Available Supply of Oilseeds When Various Types of CCC Sales are Considered.......... 99 Magnitude of CCC Loan, Purchase, and Disposal Programs for Oilseeds in Relation to Farm Marketings of Oilseeds..... 100 x m AGGEEGA’E D'TACT OF CCC PROGM'ESQOOO......OOOOOOOOOO..... 103 Magnitude of CCC Loan, Purchase, and Disposal Programs in Relation to Total Farm Output........................... 104 Magnitude of CCC Loan, Purchase. and Disposal Programs in Relation to Total Farm Marketings and.Home Consumption............................................. 10? Magnitude of CCC Loan, Purchase, and Disposal Programs in Relation to Total Farm Marketings....................... 109 n ESTMES OF I‘ICO-L'E mu‘TmRooo...o.oo.............o....oo... 113 XII WY Aim Cr--3}TCLUSIOIISOOOOOOOOs............OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. 118 BIBLIOGmHY.CIOOIOIIO00.000.00.00...0.0.0.0..........OOOOOIOOOOOOOOQQ. 123 ”PEMICES..O..O..C..O00.0.0....00....0.................O...O.......... 125 ix TABLE 10 11 LIST OF TABLES Volume of CCC removal from and additions to the available supply of dairy products during the postwar period in relation to total farm output of dairy products....... Vblume of CCC removal from and additions to the available supply of dairy products during the postwar period in relation to farm marketings and home consumption of dairy products........................................ Effects of CCC programs on the available supply of dairy products when various types of distributions are weighted to reflect their impact on available supply.. Volume of CCC removal from and additions to the available supply of dairy products during the postwar period in relation to farm marketings of dairy products......... Volume of CCC removal from and additions to the available supply of feed grains during the postwar period in relation to total farm output of feed grains.......... Volume of CCC removal from and additions to the available supply of feed grains during the postwar'period in relation to farm marketings and home consumption of feed grains........................................... Volume of CCC removal from and additions to the available supply of feed grains in relation to farm marketings and home consumption of feed grains when various types of CCC sales are weighted to reflect their impact on available supply...................................... Volume of CCC removal from and additions to the available supply of feed grains during the postwar period in relation to farm marketings of feed grains............ Volume of CCC removal from and additions to the available supply of food grains during the postwar period in relation to total farm output of food grains.......... Vblume of CCC removal from and additions to the available supply of food grains during the postwar period in relation to farm marketings and home consumption of food grains........................................... Effects of CCC programs on the available supply of food grains when various types of CCC sales are weighted to reflect their impact on available supply........... Page 34 36 41 47 54 57 LIST OF TABLES - Continued TABLE 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 21 22 23 Volume of CCC removal from and additions to the available supply of food grains during the postwar’period in relation to farm marketings of food grains. . . . . . . . . . .. CCC removal from and additions to the available supply of cotton during the postwar period in relation to total farm output of cotton................................. CCC removal from and additions to the available supply of cotton during the postwar period in relation to farm marketings and home consumption of cotton............. Magnitude of CCC removal and resulting net change in the available supply of tobacco during the postwar period in relation to the total farm output of tobacco....... Magnitude of CCC removal from and additions to the available supply of tobacco during the postwar period in relation to farm marketings and home consumption of tobacco.... CCC removal of potatoes from 1948-1950 in relation to total farm output Of vegetableaooooooooococoons-000000.09... CCC removal of potatoes during 1949-1951 calendar years in relation to farm marketings and home consumption of vegetablesoOOOOooo0000......sno.0...0.000.000.00000000 CCC removal of potatoes during 1949-1951 calendar years in relation to total farm marketings of vegetables....... Volume of CCC removal from and additions to the available supply of oilseeds during the postwar period in relation to total farm output of oilseeds............ Volume of CCC removal from and additions to the available supply of oilseeds during the postwar period in relation to farm marketings and home consumption of Oilseed-8.0.0.0000.00.0.00...00900.0.DoocoooooOsoOoooO Effects of CCC programs on the available supply of oilseeds when various types of CCC sales are weighted to reflect their impact on available supply..................... Volume of CCC removal from and additions to the available supply of oilseeds during the postwar period in relation to farm marketings of oilseeds.............. xi Page 62 68 7O 78 85 87 87 93 97 100 101 LIST OF TABLES - Continued TABLE 24 25 26 28 Volume of CCC removal from and additions to the available supply of agricultural commodities during the post~ war period in relation to total farm output.......... Volume of CCC removal from and additions to the available supply of agricultural commodities during the post- war period in relation to total farm marketings and home consumption..................................... Volume of CCC removal from and additions to the available supply of agricultural commodities during the post— war period in relation to total farm marketings...... Estimated income transfer as a result of CCC programs based on changes in the availability of farm output........ Estimated income transfer as a result of CCC programs based on changes in the availability of farm marketings.... xii Page 105 108 llllllllll ..................................... ssssss -------- was I WWO T10] In the absence of asverunentnl action. the narhets in shieh nost eaioultunl products ore sold nsot rather veil the rsquironents of per- fect oonpstition. Elven though there are exceptions. it still ssens onto to soy that e ”or portion of the e¢riculturel production of the United States is sold in nrksts with the following characteristics: (1) here ere e large nunbsr of sellers. no one of which can influence nerkst price by his production policy; and (2) prices are deter-ined in nerkets more e largo unbsr of sellers offer the comeditiss. sud e large nunber of buyers bid for these offerings. he aggregate donned for ogricultnrsl products is related to condi- tions in other sectors of the scenery. Prinery causes of short-run ohsness in domed ere chaos in insane. snploynsnt. end export donend. his linking of demand for ecrioulturel products to flucustions in other so;- nents of the econow provides the possibility of vide fluouetions in the donned for scricultursl products. he ears‘eto supply of agricultural products is relatively stable tron your to your. Veristions in yields. totnl sores. end total productive inputs applied sill effect the total vslune of ogriculturnl production. honour. history hes shosn that these variables do not produce large youn- to-ysnr shifts in the oar-opts supply of scriculturel products. he above discussion hes centered on segregate supply end donend in -1- agriculture. lor individual oe-oditiee. year-to-yoar variations in out- put are inportant variables affecting prices received by agricultural producers. Ihothsr price changes are associated with changes in denond or supply. the effect of the shifts in prices upon the producore' total revenue will depend upon the price elasticity of densnd for either the aggregate output or the individul oo-odity under consideration. he prise elasticity for all food at the farn level is generally eonsidorod to be approxintoly 0.26. Price elasticity for individual con- noditios range fron a low of about .10 to values above unity} he inplioatione of an inelastic densnd for agricultural products are of considerable inportance dun considering the input of variations in the available supply3 of those oo-oditioe on the inccno of farners. lie in- elastic de-nd indicates that lower prices. Inch night occur with an in- crease in available supply or decreased deand. will result in lower total gross incons to producers. lith relatively stable production expenses. lower gross inoene usually results in lower not incone also. ‘ lists oireunstances me pro-pus mp1- in agriculture to ate-pt various alterations of the narket structure we have described. In the absence of say indivihal control of nrkot supply. those attonpte have been prinarily through eons fern of governsntnl progrsn for agriculture. AAA Irrice elasticity m- both individual oe-odities and all food tt the far- level have been oetinated U a large nunber of workers. Richard J. lento. 'I’rioo meticities of bound for Ion-Durable Goods“. unpublished pnpor presented at a conference sponsored w the national Bureau of loenonic Research. October. 1956. provides a fairly conploto tabulation of these ostinates and type of neasuronent used to obtain the oetinatot aduiIable supply as used here is defined at that quantity which nevoe freely in none]. eonnsrcial nerhsting channels with no restriction aetesollingprico. -3- Benedict and Stinez have classified the devices used by government to in- crease the bargaining power of farmers into six categories: (1) attempts to create an improved system of marketing based on producer-controlled cooperatives. (2) holding Operations designed to stabilize the flow of nonperishables onto the market. (3) efforts to cut and hold down farm production with a view to bringing supplies into better adjustment with demand. (4) measures designed to transfer buying power from consumers or the Treasury to farm groups. (5) marketing agreements intended to stabilize the industry and.strengthen prices. and (6) efforts to maintain prices by means of government loan and purchase programs. This study is primarily concerned with the latter programs and their effects on the available supply of major commodities in the commercial market. Government Loan and Purchase Programs Price supports by means of government loan and.purchase programs have been carried out since 1983 when loans were first made available to corn and cotton producers. The level of support provided. means of pro- viding this support. and general objectives of a program depends upon the authorizing legislation. The following is a relatively complete list of legislation pertaining to loan and purchase programs.4 In the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938. the Congress enacted the first comprehensive legislation dealing with price supports. sflurray R. Benedict and Oscar Stine. The Agricultural Commodity Programs (New York: The Twentieth Century Fund. 1956)T p. n (Eummary). 4Compilation of Statutes Relating_ to Soil Conservation. Marketing Eta sand Allotments. Soil Bank. Crop Insurance. Sug____a_r Payments and was. PricoS Smport. Commodit Credit Corporation and Related Statutes. Agricultural Handbook £13. 113 Washington. 13.0.: U. S. Department of Agriculture. January. 195137}. 150. .4- Additional legislation thereafter included! he act of April 6. 1941 (providing for loans on peanuts). be not of Kay 36. 1941. as aasndsd( viding for loans on basic co-oditios through the 1946 crop . Section 4 of the act of July 1. 1941. as anendod (the so- called 'Steagall Anendaent' which provided that if the steamy of Agriculture issued an announceaent requesting the expansion of production of a non-basic agricultural. co-odity. he should provide price support on such oo-odity for two years after sens lar 11). Section 0 of the Stabilisation Act of 1943. as amended (providing for loans on basic condition for two years after Iorld Sar ll). he not of July 39. 1946. (providing for loans on tobacco). lluch of this legislation oqirod with termination of the nrtiae energency and was succeeded w the Agricultural Act of 1948. he Agricultural Act of 1949 superseded or repealed prior legislation. effective for the 1960 and subsequent crop years. he Agricultural Act of 1964 and the Agricultural Act of 1956 undo significant changes in the 1949 act. bonus and purchases by Oo-odity Corporation (hereafter called 906) have been the priaary asses of providing price support to producers under each of these authorising acts. here are three nethode used to provide price support-h—lonne. purchases. and. purchase agroenents. beans provide price support in two ways: (1) providing the than with a cash return for the oeuodity at support levels during the tine period for which loans are available. and (2) strengthening aarhet prices of tho cenaodity by reducing the supply available in the nrkst. however. rqeynent of these loans at a future point in tins will constitute an in- crease in the ass-hot mu. hose loans are 'aon-seceureo'u-that is. doliveq of the oonodity at the specified tiae will be considered pnynent in full regardless of fiat has hppensd to the eo-odity price during the intervening period. by necessity. these loans are ands only on storabie condition such as grains. cotton. and tobacco. rurehaso ngroenonte are a second fora of price supports provided in the authorizing legislation. A purchase agrosnent is. as the torn would indicate. an agrosnent on the part of DOC to purchase froa the producer. at the support price. any quantity. up to the manna gunntity stipulated in the ngroaent. that the producer desires to deliver to CCC. A purchase agrosnent reduces available supply only when the co-odity is actually delivered to 060. Direct purchases are a third nethod used to support prices. Generally speaking this type of support ieusod onlywhsnlosnsandpurchaseagres- nents are not feasible. butter. cheese. and nonfat dry ailk are the noet important products covered w purchase prograas. although cottonseed. flar- eeod. and other cc-oditioe have been handled in this fashion. his type of. operation has the effect of reducing current aarhet supply at the ties of the purchase. be above description of the general nature of governaent loan and purchase prograas indicates in a general nanner how the prograas light effect the eonnsrcially aarhstabls supply of agriculture products which are covered by the legislation. however. if we are to be acre cegnisnnt of the effects of these prograas on the available supply of the connoditios under consideration it is necessary to exnaino the individual concdity prograas. A acre detailed onaination of the individual coanodity pro- groan is presented in the chapters dealing with the available supply of individual co-oditiss in the postwar period. dovernnent Dippgsnl m be use of governaent loan and purchase prograas to attain the price support objectives. as set forth in the authorising legislation. has re- sulted in substantial quantities of agricultural products becoaing the property of the CCC. which is the agency responsible for carrying out these prograas. Disposal of those stocks in dcnostic narbts is authorised and/or restricted h a variety of legislation. Section ”7 of the Agricultural Act of 1949 as mended sets forth the general conditions under which sales of coo stocks in the doaestic nrtot can take place.5 no Ce-sdiv Credit Corporation ..y sell any fara oe-odity owned or controlled by it at any price not prohibited by this section. In detornining sales poli- cies for basic agricultural cc-cditiee or sterable non- bnsic ce—oditios the Corporation should give consideration to the establishing of such policies with respect to prices. terns. and conditions as it detorninos will not discourage or deter aanufacturere. processors. and dealers fren ac- quiring and carrying nornl inventories of the co-odity of the current crop. he Corporation shall not sell any basic agricultural connodity or stcrable nonbasic oc-odity at less that 6 per cent. above the current support price for such oo-odity. plus reasonable carrying charges. The fcroping restrictions shall not apply to (A) Cales for new or byproduct uses: (3) Sales of peanuts and oilseeds for the extraction of oil; (C) Sales of seed or food if such sales -will not substantially impair any price support program; (3) Sales of co-oditioe inch have substantially deterio- rated in quality or as to which there is a danger of loss or waste through deterioration or spoilage; (S) Sales for the purpose of establishing claims arising out of contract or against persons who have conittod fraud. nisroprosentaticn. or other wrongful acts with roppoct to the cc-odity: (1') Sales for export: (C) Sales of wool: and (I) Sales for other than priury uses. Iotwithstanding the foregoing. the Corporation. on such terns and conditions as the Secretary any dosn in the public interest. shall nuke available any fara cc-odity or product thereof owned or controlled by it for use in relieving distress (1) in new area in the United States declared by the President to be an acute distress area because of unoaploynent or other occnonic crisis if the freeident finds that such use will not displace or interfere with nornal nartetings of agricultural ccaaodlties and (a) in connection with any ”or disaster dotorainod by the President to warrant assis- tance by the federal Covornnont under Public be 876. lighty- firet Congress as anended. A— 0 5mid. . pp. 160-161. d7. lor shall the foregoing restrictions apply to sales of ce-oditios the disposition of which is desirable in the interest of the effective and efficient conduct of the Corporation's operations because of the quantities involved. or homes of age. location. or questionable continued storability. but such sales shall be offset by such purchases of cc-cdities as the Corporation deter- nines are necessary to prevent arch sales from subsu- tinlly inpairing on price support prograa. but in no event shall the purchase price exceed the current support price for such couodities. ....the secretary is authorised in connection with nJcr disaster doternined by the rrosidsnt to warrant assistance by the federal Covornaont under Public Law 876. lighty-firet Congress (42 6.6.0. 1866) as anended to furnish to established farners. rangers. or stochaen. food for livestock or needs for planting for such period or periods of tins and under such terns and conditions as the Secretary my doternino to be re- quired 17 the nature and effect of the disaster. are foregoing section provides for various types of sales and certain other types of distribution of co-oditios acquired h CCC through price support operations. Donations are also authorised for certain doaostic can under section 416 of the Agricultural Act of 1949.5 In order to prevent waste of ccaaoditiss acquired through price support operations by the Conacdity Credit Corporation before they can be disposed of in moral doaostic channels without inpairaent of the price support prograa or sold abroad at coapetitive prices the Concdiiy Credit Corporation....is authorized in the case of food conodities to donate such concditios to the lure-u of ladies Affairs and to such State. federal. or private agency or agencies as any be designated by the proper 6tate or federal authority and approved by the Secretary for use in the United States in nonprofit school-lunch prograas. in the assistance of needy persons. and in charitable institutions. including hospitals. to the extent that needy persons are served. “his. . p. 166. Section 32 of Public Law 330. Seventy-fourth Congress authorises the use of funds obtained through tariff collection on dutiable iapcrts to finance the donation of surplus comoditios to groups siailar to those described above! Section ass of the Agricultural Act of 1949. as needed. states that CCC shall abs available to the Administrator of Veterans. Affairs and the Secretary of the Am such dairy promote as these two individuals certify can be utilised in nation. .2 my. levy. and Airx‘l‘crco personnel. and hospital patients Indar their Jurisdiction.8 m... individuals aunt certify that those donations are in excess of the usual quantities of dairy products being purchased in aernl trade channels. he foregoing discussion covers the ”or types of distribution of CCC stocks in doaostic narkets or to doaostic users. are magnitudes of these distributions have varied from year to year in the postwar period. he relationships between these ngnitudos. the ugnitudo of governnent loan and purchase prograas. fan output. and farn aarketings are ornnined in greater detail in later sections of this thesis. nos: .91.. m.”- 25. and; A general objective of this study is to contribute to the knowledge concerning the aggregate iapact of governaent loan and purchase prograas on Aaerican agriculture in the postwar period. A acre specific purpose is to aeaeuro the change in available supply of anor conaodities in the doaostic nnrket as a result of these prograas during the tine period being considered. his asasuro includes reductions in supply as a result of loan 7a. neutron. “Liculural Polig (low ram McCraw-Eill soot: com. 186.. 19“). p. 337. 8Aficulture Handbook lg. 113. pp. 354.. p. 155. -9- and purchase prograas. and additions to the available supply of these sane eo-odities through sales and other ferns of governaent distribution of stock accuulatod through price support operations. flaking use of statistics developed in the attainaent of the previous objective it is proposed to relate the aagnitudo of government loan. purchase. and disposal prograas to currently published series of far- output. fora aarkotings. end fare aazketings and horse consuaption. Perhaps the nest iqortant objective of this study is to provide statistics fiich are useful in evaluating the input of governaont prograas on the level of agricultural prices and the inccao of faraers during the 1943-1956 period. his stuly is concerned with the iapact of covenant loan and purchase prograas on the available supply of the following eo-odiv groups; (1) dairy products. (2) feed grains. (3) feed grains. (4) oil crops (exclude ing tang nuts). (5) cotton. (6) tobacco. and (7) vegetables. Bub-indexes for each of the above commodity groups are published for the index of total fare output. fare aarketings. and far- aarketings and has ccnsuaptien. oil-runny published sub-indexes for each of these are adjusted in an att-pt to better indicate the available supply of each of these coauodity flours. loch of the total indexes are then adjusted to reflect changes lads in the individual coucdity groups. After these adjust-ants are aade,, which facilitate calculation of the percentage change in supply of agricultural products available in the concrcial aaztots during a given year. ‘a first approxiaation of tho incoao transfer resulting free these prograas is presented. Details of the aethedclog are explained in the following chapter. mm 11 ”monomer In order to fulfill the stated purpose of this study an aggregativo aoanronont of quantities is necessary. he tool esployed to accomplish this noasurenent is the cononly used index nunber. he construction and use of indexnunbere involves several problens of which both the builder and W should be “8.1 lens of these problens are: l. 3. ,l Definition of purpose for which the index is being conpilod. Selection of comeditios or connodity groups to be included in the index. Selection of sources of data. Collection of data. Belection of bee period. Drobleas arising due to aggregation. loloction of weighting systea. lo unique nothod of solving these probleas is presented. but rather the probleao are pointed out in order to help evaluate the nothods used. In order to booeno nore faniliar with the particular tools used in l the general problees of index numbers are discussed in the following literature: a) b) o) 1) I. nah». a 551;; _._r_ 1.4.: lubers (Ca-bridge. Kassachussotts: Ionghton Iifflia 00s. 1927;. Dagnsr lristh. “he Probloa of Index lunbers'. Icononotrica. Vol. IV (1930). pp. 1-38. I. Doontief. 'Oonposite Oe-oditios end the Proble- of Index labors“. leononetrioa. Vol. IV (1936). pp. 8-59. I. I. Orexton and D. J. Oowdon. lied General Statistics (low 1038 m“1m1p mg. 1956 Q ”a ~39m. -11- this neasuring process. ennination of the two series used in this study oo-s appropriate. no. .1242 2.1. an. m as index of fern output is a neasure of yoaibto-syoar shifts in the vol-e of fan production available for eventual hunan use.a fires najor sub-groups are conbinod to nuke up the total index of fan output. fie three series used are the production of crops. the production of livestock and livestock products. and feed used to fan horses and ulna-1:...3 to index of crop production includes the total constant dollar value of all crops produced regardless of how they are finally utilised. lo dehctions are ado for seed or quantities fed to livestock. In calculating the index of far- output the value of production of hw seeds. pasture seeds. oover crop seeds. and feed used by fare heroes and males are on- eluded. he index of production of livestock and livestock products includes the total constant dollar value of production of all livestock and live- stock products except horses and aloe. In the index of total fan out- put. the value of food consunod. other than pasture. is subtracted froa livestock production to avoid double counting. In essence. a value- added concept is used to neasuro not livestock preduetdea. 20. s. Darton. e_t_ _a_.l__. lanuscript of Statistical Inndbook being prepared w the Agricultural Iarketing and Research Iervices. U. I.- Departnent of Agriculture. chapter 23. p. 12. 3 Ms in Darn Induction ga_d_ Iffici ..(Iashiuton. D.O. : D. I. Depart-euro? Agriculture. June. 19 . p. d. -12- he index of feed used by farn horses and anion includes the esti- nted constant-dollar value of feed. other than pasture. oonsued by these aninals. his value is subtracted free the sun of crop production in the computation of the index of far- output. An algebraic su-ation of constant-dollar values for the following terns yields the constant-dollar value of total fare output. (fetal Crop Dreduction t} fetal Livestock l’roduction - Livestock Deed Other nan Pasture) - (nurse Q hale Deed i lay. Pasture and cover are, Seeds) 3 fetal rare Output. Evolve co-odiv groups Ike up this index. he livestock and livestock products index includes neat animle. dairy products. and. poultry and eggs. he crop index is ndo up of feed grains. feed grains. hay and forage. vegetables. fruits and nuts. sugar crops. cotton. tobacco. and oil crops. An indivimlal index is published for each of the ccnnodity groups listed. an index is conputed by the value aggregate nothod. with the base period for both prices and quantities being 1947-1949. agaamgm- ...-23.0» non he index of volune of fora aartetings and hone consunption is a unsure of changes in the quantities of fare production entering the aarheting veten in the fern of sales by farnors or direct consunption in fare households.‘ heasureaent of the phoical volume of agricultural eonnodities associated with gross farn incene is the priaary purpose of this index. Products sold or consuned during the calendar year are m1. fig.’ .01. sues P. 21e inclded in the current year's index regardless of when they were produced.l5 tales to the governnent through price support prograas are considered the ones as a ce-ercial sale in the construction of this index. 'ith respect to never-ant price support loans this index is influenced in the following nanner.‘ no narketing ccaponent of the index includes not quantities plwed under Conodity Credit Corporation leans. just as net receipts free loans are included in cash receipts fron fare narketings. Quantities placed under loan are included in the narketings index for the nonth in which the loan is node. If later the loan is repaid and the eo-odity redeened the quantity so redeened is a deduction in the narketings index for the nonth of repay-ant. As stated previously. the currently published index is a neasure of quantities entering the narketing qsten or consunod on hone fares which are associated with gross fan inceue. However. it would so- that if we are concerned with the volue of fare products entering the nameting vote- that we nust take into account governnent renoval. through lean and purchase prograas. and governnent additions through dimeal prograas. he currently published index is. therefore. used to construct an ad- justed index of fern narbetings and hone censunption which is hoped to be a closer estinte of the actual quantities which are available in the mind doaostic narket. his is not to inply that the currently published index is not neasuring what it is designed to noasure. but rather that with gevernnont lean. purchase. and disposal prograas in operation it nay no longer be the relevant neasure if one is concerned with the velune of fern products entering the doaostic narhet. 5:. v. Groveandil. r. Cannon.§_e_w_Indexlun___b_e_r_s ofl'arnilarketig‘s and lone tion (Inchington. D.C.8 us. Depart-ant of Agriculture. 75:?" 1956“ . p. 5. “ma. , p. 7. -14- an»: f1a___r_n_0u Outta andth__e_Indexe_:_f_l'arn larketi is! sand Ho__n_e_ Conmtion “spared—- he index of total fan output nonsures the volue of farn production when it is produced. he index of farn narketings and bone consunption neasures quantities entering the narketing systen or consmed on hone farns without reference to the tine of production. he nain difference between the two noasures is in year-to-year tining. Changes in farn inventories are reflected differently in the two indexes. Ihen farners sell nere than they produce the index of fare narketings and hone ccnsunp- tion will likely be higher than the index of output. but when farners are building inventories the index of output will probably exceed that for narketings and hone consunption. m.gmgm_ the Ewe Indexes the Relationship Detween the—- it Governent Lo__a_n and ”Echo“ the Published _8_e_____ries lit In: Ehe general fornula for an index nunber constructed by the value aggregate nethed isZ’o S]. x 100 .11 2% Qo - lhere: I1 _g-Index nunber of quantity q]. P 3 tries in the base period c o‘ . mantity n the base period Q1 . mantity at tine E1 I1 night be thought of as the published index of either total fan output or farn narketings and hone conouptien. As indicated earlier both of these indexes are conputod by the value aggregate nethed. Eo change :11 by a quantity equal to Q2 the following fernla is appropriate: .0. 42 . Saul-02> . I Z; a t F. 9. 3 -15- lhen: Z’.§ . 11 and 213% .12 2’. Q. 21’. Q. hen: xl " 12 = 13 . I; g Index of qmntity by which 11 is changed 13 3 Index of new quantity (Q1 .. qe) I can be thought of asan index of not change (this index is explained in detail in the next section) and I as an index of availability 3 (also explained in the next section). In the following discussion we will refer to qmntitios such as Ia and 13 as indexes. It should be pointed out that these are always based on either the index of farn output or the index of fan nnrketings and hone consunption. By this we nean the sane base weights are used for these values as for the published series. Derhaps it would be nore accurate to refer to these series as adjustnent factors rather than indexes. however. the torn index is used as it soens to describe nere accurately those values as they are used here. 51......th 9.1. no. lain. 9.1.. an. m his index neasuros output during a given calendar year. lornally output produced during a given year beconos part of the available supply in co-ercial narkets over the narketing year following the tine of production. A narketing year has boon defined as any period during which substantially all of a crop is nor-ally nrketed by producers thereof.7 752;..th Handbook 10.. 113. pp. gi_t_.. p. 164. 615- however. the operation of governent lean and purchase prograas nakes it possible that portions of this production will not nove into the connercially available supply and. therefore. will not exert their nornal occnonic influence. he fact that production during a given calendar year nornally beconos part of the available supply during the succeeding narketing year has pronpted us to use the individual connodity narketing years as the relevant tine periods over which to neasure the change in available smply with respect to the index of total farn output. Dairy prohct purchases to support nilk prices are an exception to this case. hilk. as produced on fans. is very close to being a non-storable itea. nerefore. nilk beconos part of the available simply alnost in- aediately upon production. lo have. therefore. used the calendar year as the tine period over which to neasure the change in availability of dairy products in relation to the index .1 total fern output. as adjustnent of the index of total farn output was perforned in three steps: (1) calculation of renoval fron available supply by CCC loans and purchases. (3) calculation of additions to available supply as a result of CCC sales in the donestic narket. and (3) calculation of not change in available supply resulting fron gover-ent loan. purchase. and disposal prograas. four factors were used to neasure renoval fron available supply resulting fren governent lean and purchase prograas. hose factors are: (1) quantity of current crop acquired by CCC at the close of the narketing year through direct purchase and/er purchase agrosnents. (calendar year applies to dairy products). (2) quantity of current crop delitered to CCC in payeent of loans at the close of the narketing year. _ 17 a (3) quantity of current crop covered by CCC loans that are outstanding at the close of the marketing year, and (4) quantity of commodity represented by the repayment of loans on other than the current crop. .A locn on the current crop that is repaid during the marketing year is not considered as affecting available supply during the yeer, although it may shift the time of availability. Net CCC removal from the commercially available supply during the marketing year was computed using the following formula: 1* LDt «it no.1 - RP: Net CCC removal during the tth meréeting1 year. Ptl a Quantity of commodity produced during the tthyear acquired through purchases and purchase agreements at the close of the t marketing year. LDt a Quantity of commodity produced during the tth year delivered to 000 in payment of loans at the close of the t marketing year, th 1 Lotlu Qpnntity of commodity produced during the tth year covered by 000 loans outstanding at the close of the tth marketing year. RP n Quantity of commodity produced in years t minus 1 on which CCC loans are repaid during the t marketing year. th When. RP = m' +LD' ~ 10' +LD' Loégo 3 Quantity of commodity produced in years t minus 1 covered by CCC loans outstanding at the beginning of the tthmarketing year. LCD“o : Quantity of the commodity produced in years t minus 1 that has been delivered to CCC in payment of loans at the beginning of the marketing year. Loti a Quantities of the commodity produced in years t minus 1 covered by CCC loans outstanding at the close of the tth marzeting year. ' 13:1 3 Qpantities of the commodity produced in years t minus 1 that have been delivered to CCC at the close of the tth marketing year. There are three possible courses of action available to producers who own commodities on which there are CCC loans outstanding at the be“ ginning of the marketing year. The possibilities are: (l) The loan can remain outstanding throughout the marketing year, (2) the commodity can be delivered to CCC in payment of the loan, and (3) the loan can be repaid and the commodity redeemed by the individual or group taking out the loan. .3 loan which remained outstanding throughout the marketing year would cancel out in the equation as it would appear in loans outstanding at both points in time. A.loan outstanding at the beginning of the marketing year subsequently delivered to CCC would also cancel out as it would be positive as loans outstanding and negative as a quantity delivered to CCC in pay- ment of the loan. Only if a loan is repaid will there be a residual value, as such a loan would be represented positively in loans outstanding at the beginning of the marketing year and not be included in either value at the close of the marketing year. This residual is considered to be repayments of "old” crop loans. Once net 003 removal has been determined it is possible to construct an index of removal resulting from government loan and purchase programs based on the index of total farm output. For an individual commodity the procedure is as follous. A value aggregate comparable to the one repre- sented in the published index can be obtained by multiplying the quantity removed by CCC by the base period price used in the index of total farm output. To obtain an index number the value aggregate of CCC removal is divided by the base period value aggregate. To compute an index of removal -19- tor m oenedity group the voles eggreptes of 000 removal for individual oe-odities ere su-ed. end this value oggrepte is divided by the group value wte in the hose period. Additions to the eo-eroimlly evuileble supply in domestic nrkets during the msrkotin‘ your more measured through the determination of values for two rectors-«400 soles in the domestic ..rket. and other forms of domestic distribution by 600. he co-odities involved in these sales or other distribution are nde up of oo-oditiee enquired through price support operations. In order to meesure additions it see necessary to determine 000 smles end distribution in the domestic whet by months end sum the proper combination of months to obtain additions during the various ee-edity nrxetinc yous. hose quatity figures on additions and hose weight prices allow the construction of value aggregates of 000 additions. nose value who see be eonverted to no index or additions Iv dividing them by the appropriate base period velue aggregates. in index or met change in the oo-erciully evuilmble supply based on the index of total ten output eon be constructed akin; use of stmtistioe developed in the indexes of removal end sdditions. me is eooompliehed by subtracting the velue ourecete of 000 mdditions from the veins wte of 000 removal. his unipuletion yields e value segregate of not change. he index of not change is obtained h dividing the value aggregate of met chmnce by the appropriate buss period value unrepte of the published index. his index of not change is then added algebreioully to the pub- lished index of term output for individual co-odities. for oomuodity -m- poupe. or for the total index. i'he resulting index is e meesure of production shioh is mvmilnble to he sold in commercial merxets plus coo soles in the domestic nrxet. Ldjustment g _th_e_ Index g_f_ larm Marketing 23 Home finmtion Isny of the some techniques used to sdJust the index of form output mre used in “Justin; the index of farm mnrketings sud homo oonsuqtion: yet. the sdJustments are sufficiently different to see-rent e eeperete description. As mentioned earlier. this index measures physical volume of farm oo-odities entering the nrheting system or being comm-ed on home ferns daring s given calendar your regardless of shen the conditios sore pro- dosed. therefore. the oslendnr your is used no the relevant time period over which shngos in mileble supply resulting from government losn end purchase procrems ere meesurod. do sith the index of form output removal from edditions to end not change in svmileble supply were determined in order to carry out the adjustment of the index. moo factors meesured st tso different points in time were used to determine not coo removal from the commercielly evsilsble supply during the «lender yesr. lot 600 removal by cslendnr yeer sue determined w solving the fellosimg equation: (r em em)-(r em em).sotooo regulbyalenderger. t. h t. hen: 1" e mentity of individual commodity acquired by 000 through direct purchases or purcheee easements at the close of i. - 21 a the calendar year (December 31). LDt -.Qpantity of individual commodity acquired through deliveries of commodity in payment of loans at the close of the calendar year (December 31). 1 Lot in.Qpantity of the individual commodity covered by CCC loans 1 outstanding at the close of the calendar year (December 31). Pto = Quantity of the individual commodity acquired through direct purchases and purchase agreements at the beginning of the calendar year (January 1). LDto : Quantity of the individual commodity acquired through deliveries of the commodity in payment of loans at the beginning of the calendar year (January 1). Lot 3 Quantity of the individual commodity covered by CCC loans outstanding at the beginning of the calendar year (January 1). Here no distinction is made by crOp year because of the nature of the index being adjusted. Repayments of old loans are not distinguished in this calculation, but rather the net impact of loans outstanding is reflected in the removal figure. A.loan outstanding at the beginning of the calendar year can be repaid, the commodity can be delivered to CCC. or the loan can remain outstanding throughout the calendar year. If a loan remains outstanding it will have no effect on removal as it will cancel out. If the loan is delivered to CCC it will have no effect on removal as it will be positive in deliveries at time T1 but negative in loans outstanding at time To. This is the preper treatment of such deliveries as such a loan will have been counted as a positive removal in the previous calendar year. If a loan is repaid, it will have the effect of reducing removal due to a negative effect at time To and zero effect at time T1. .An index of removal related to the index of farm marketings and home consumption was constructed in the same manner as described for the index -22- of for. output but using less weights. prices. end value aggregates for the index of fern nsrhetings end hone eonsnnption. Additions to naileble supply with respect to the index of fer- nerketings end hose consumption were neesured by nonths. and these values were sued to yield calender yeer edditions. in index or use edditione use constructed in the sens nenner es for the index of totel fern output using price end velue seights fros the index of fen nrketings end hone consumption. he indexes of net chenge besed on the index offer-nerhetingsend hone consumption and the edJusted indexes of fern nsrhetings end hone con- suqtien to reflect availability were constructed in the she nenner es the index of total fen output. he nethed of edJusting the index of fern nerhetings end hone consuep- tion described in the preceding persgrephs contains s number of implicit essuptions. One of these is that ell con-odities moving out of 000 stocks end into donestic lurket chennels heve en equel inpect on the available supply of the connodity being distributed. Iith verious types of “give new" progrens in operation. plus seles et various prices. such on esmption eight sell be nieleeding. In order to eccount for these verious types of distribution e second edJustnent of this index wee perferned. In In ett-pt to reflect the reletive input of various types of distribution on the eveileble supply of the co-odity under consideretion. the following nethed wee used. In constructing the index of 000 additions price weiaits were used which geve different weights to the various types of distri- butions. Distributions which ere considered to he in direct competition with regular oo-ereiel seles ere weighted et hese weight prices. Other distributions ere weighted et less then bese weight prices. be exact price weight assigned te these distributions depends upon the author's Judge- nent es to how nearly they substitute for the co-odity es sold in the eonerciel nrket or some ether ce-odity being used by the recipient. lstiut_i_ng _I_ngg_e_e_ rrensfer In edJusting, the index of fern output end the index of fern nerhetings. stetistics are developed thich ellow celculetion of the percent-gs change in the evuileble supply of fur- products with respect to these two neasuros resulting free GOO pm Percent-gs change in eveilebility one be deter-lined by dividing eech index of not change by the eppropriete pub- lished index. Given the pox-mug. change in supply of fern products end en estinte of price flexibility ef «mad for tot-l fern eutput it is possible to nebe en estinete of the incoee trensfer resulting free these pregame. Irice flexibiliw of hand is the retio ef percentege chenge in price to the percentege ehsnge u may ecu-metal.a a. reciprocal of price elesticity of deeend is often used es the coefficient of price flexibility of densnd. leoegnising the my linitetions of such usege we heve used the reoiproeel of en estinted price elasticity of denend for total fen output es en estinste of price flexibiliw of deesnd for fur- output in neking estinetee of incone trensfer. his estinte ef price flexibility of dennd in conjunction with the percent-gs chsnge in supply yields en estinete of the percentege ohsnge 8l'er e detailed explsnetion of price flexibility of deeend see Iillien A. Ore-arty. 'lcononic Structure in Aeericen Agriculture' (Unpublished rs. D. dissertation. Dept. of Agriculture Icononics. liohigsn ltste University). pp. lm-lfidu -24- in price due to CCC pregrens. If it is essuned that producers will ner- ket the eene quantities of egriculturel products during e given yeer with er without CCC progrens this percentege change in price is else the per- cent-gs changein. income. he netheds described ebove ere used to doternino s first epproxine- tion of the incone trensfer resulting free CCC prograas. 22c“ 2; a All renovel figures shown in this thesis. with the exception of these ef hiry products. were computed free dste published in the m 3; M. Condition and Qperetion 2f Comedig C_1l'_e_d_i_._t_ gel- nretion. his report is published nonthly by the Connodity Stabilisetion Cervioe ef the C. l. Deperteent of Agriculture. Dete on CCC renovel of dairy products were obteined free the lurch. 1957. issue of the gem gtution. inch is published by the Agriculturel unmeting Service of the v. e. Department of Agriculture. Chen this study as undertehen in the fell of 1956 there were no consistent date available on CCC files in the donestic mrket during the postur period. Since thet tine dete on celender year puroheses end distribution of dniry products heve been published.9 here is still no published source of CCC donestic seles of other co-odities. hose dnte were ebteined fron eeles ledgers ninteined by the fiscal Anelysis Drench ef Ce-odity Credit Corporation in Washington. D.C. bees lodgers ere sundries of sales reports by the connodity offices located in various parts of the United Stetee. ”net lituetion Washington. n.c.: u. s. Depart-out of uranium. lurch. 1967). -25- Inferention on the bees weight used in constructing the index of fun nerkoting end hone consumption is published in _l_e_g_ £9333 Numbers g _l'_e._rn__ Motg‘s e_nd; _E_o_n_o_ Consuuption by I. I. Grove end ll. 1'. Connon of the Agriculturel mung Service. s. s. Depart-tent of Agriculture. I’rice weiflte used. in the index of total fern output were obteinod fro. Dr. Jones Cevin. heed. Statistical end Historicel lesseroh Drench. Agriculturel Ierhoting Service. s. s. Deportnont of Agriculture. seee period velue eggrogetes used in the index of totol furs output were ob- teinod fren en unpublished nenuecript of e statistical hudbook compiled w the Agricultural lerheting Service. U. 8. Depart-out of Agriculture. mm III m mm PRICE SUPPORT PROM !he purchase of deiry products to support prices received by dniry farners originated in 1933. Purchases prior to the end of Iorld Var II were relatively senll. exceeding one billion pounds of silk equivalent only in 1933.1 no support or stabilisetion of milk end butterfet prices is provided in the Agriculture). Act of 1949 end the Agriculturel Act of 1954.:3 m. eqport or stebiliution has been and is currently provided by Co-odity Credit Corporation buying or offering to buy any quantity of butter. Alericen choose. end nonfat dry milk that processors ere willing to de- liver at specified prices. hose products. rether than fluid nilk. ere purchased because of greater ones of storage. Additional roosons for purchasing these portion- ler deiry products include their widesproed production in the industry. ease of distribution in either foreign or domestic nerkots. end their nvnilebiliw in bulk cerloed lets. which are unbrended fecilitnting both storego end distribution. Illei Situation Washington. 3.0.: C. 8. Department of Agriculture. Icy. 1949 . feble 11. p. 17. 3w W 12.- in. 22. cit” pp. 155-156. ~27- By offering to purchase all offerings of butter. American cheese. and nonfat dry milk at specified prices it is expected that surplus manufacturing milk or butterfat will be channeled to these three pro- ducts. By maintaining the demand at the processor level for these pro- ducts of mill: it is hoped that the price support objective of some per- contage ofparity price will be maintained at the producer level. The bwing price established by 000 for butter, American cheese, and nonfat dry milk is calculated to return the support price to the farmer from whom the milk: was purchased by the processor. Purchases of dairy products for price support purposes in the post- war period were of small importance prior to 1949.3 Disyosition of stocks, acquired through these purchases, in the domestic market began in the same year but did not reach major preportions until 1950. In the following sections the index of total farm output of dairy products and of farm marketings and home consumption of dairy products are adJusted to show the relation of the magnitude of government pur- chases and distributions of dairy products to the currently published series. Physical quantities of the individual dairy products represented by the indexes of removal and additions are shown in Tables la through 1b of the appendix. In constructing these indexes, products purchased and distributed by CCC have been converted to their equivalent at the farm level. Butter was converted to butterfat at the rate of .826 pounds of butterfat per 3The only purchases prior to this time, after cessation of hostilities, were in 1947 when 211,311,000 pounds of nonfat dry milk were purchased. Daigz Situation, March. 1957, pp. £13.. p. 20. -28.. pound of butter} Cheese was converted to milk equivalent at the rate of 10 pounds of milk per pound of cheese.5 This milk equivalent of cheese was valued as wholesale milk. Dry solids—notfat—are not valued in the adjustment of the indexes because the milk equivalent of butter and cheese includes this portion of the milk.6 Mitude 2_f_ CCC Purchase and Digposal Programs _i_n_ Relation-£9: Total Farm Output 23 Daigz Products The index of removal shown in column 2 of Table 1 is a measure of the volume of government purchases of dairy products based on the index of farm output of dairy products. a comparison of the two indexes (removal and total output) in 1949 will serve as an illustration of this point. In 1949 the index of total farm output of dairy products stood at 101, while the index of removal was equal to 1.64. This means that the volume of total farm output of dairy products available to be sold in commercial. domestic markets could be represented by an index number of 99 rather than 101 as the remaining output we sold directly to government. Such a comparison of these two indexes for each of the postwar years, when CCC purchases of dairy products were of importance, will provide an indication of the portion of total production being sold directly to govement and the portion of production available to be sold in commercial channels. _L__ 4amo1pn I'roker and Clifford Hardin. my; Producers £33; rat and Solids-motfat _i_._n Milk (University of Wisconsin: February, 1942), Research Bulletin 143. Egg-icultural Statistics, 1955 (Washington. 13.0.: U. 8. Government Printing Office. 1955). p. I: (Introduction). 6Daig Situation. May. 1949. 92. £11. m l.-Volue of 000 removal from and additions to the available supply of dairy products during the postwar period in relation to total farm output of dairy products Published Index of Index of Index of calendar Index 000 000 lot Adjusted Year 1947-49 s 100 Removal dei tions . Change Index (1) (2) (3) (4) ‘ (6) 1949 101 1. 64 0. 22 -1 100 1950 101 2. 57 2. 32 0 101 1951 100 .01 . 40 0 100 1952 101 . 22 .01 0 101 1953 106 7. 10 1. 32 «ed 100 1954 107 6.53 2. 96 .4 103 1956 109 3. 38 2.43 -1 107 Sources: Oolumn 1M_ in rar- Production and lfficie (Iadington. 0.0 .8 U. I. Department of Agriculture. 1956,. pp 8-9. col-no 2-3-I-Oomputod from data in appendix and base weights used in the index of total farm output. Oolumn Holumn 2 minus column 3. Golan Molumn 1 minus calm 4. he index of 000 additions is a measure of the volume of 000 dispositions of dairy products in the domestic market. his index provides a means of detouining the importance of 000 distributions in the oomestis market in relation to total farm output of dairy products. In 1980 the index of total farm output was equal to 101. he index of 000 additions was equal to 2. In the absence of 000 per-- sbasos this would mean that the total quantity of dairy products avail- able in the domestic market could be represented by an index number of 103 based on the index of total output. Two quantities are represented in such an index number: (1) farm output equal to 101. and (2) 000 domestic distributions equal to 3. am. no index of additions would indicate that 060 distributions of dairy products have never been large in relation to total output of dairy products. However. a year-by-year comparison of the index of ad- ditions with the index of removal. indicates that 600 additions in some years have been of sufficient magnitude to substantially offset 006 pur- chases. In ... year(1961) distributions in the domestic market exceeded purchases. resulting in a net addition to available donestic supply. The index of not change is a measure of the net inset of government purchase and distribution programs on the quantity of dairy products available in commercial domestic markets relative to farm output of dairy products as measured in the index of total farm output. In an earlier example we have shots: that if only government distributions are considered the change in available supply during 1950 would be a plus 2.32 in terms of index numbers. However. when 000 purchases are considered (a minus 2.6 in index numbers) we find that the not change in available supply is equal to a minus .35. ' The adJusted index is a measure of farm output of dairy products not sold to 000 plus 000 distributions in the domestic nrket. l'rom 1949 through 1953 this index (the adjusted index of farm output) centered at the level of 100 and flucuated very little. In 1954 this index began to move upward and reached a level of 10? in 1955. his index would indicate that can activity stabilized the quantity of dairy products. measured in terms of promotion. available over the 1949-63 period. he rise in this index during 1954 and 1966 indicates that the quantity of dairy products available to be sold in conercial mad-hots was rising. his rise in the available supply of dairy products appears to be due to increasing farm output of dairy products «companied h steady to em a a falling 000 removal and a higher level of 000 additions. &____ tudeef L00 Loan. Purcha_______e_e_. e_nd Disposal Progress _i_n_ Relation to Fara Karhetiggs_ and Home conmtion: of Dairy Products he index of renoval shown in lable 2 is a neasure of the volune of dairy products sold to 000 based on the index of fan narratings and hone comeunption. his index measures sales to 000 as a part of the total index of farm narheting and home consumption. If this index is compared with the published index of fare marketings and hone consunption of dairy products it is possible to determine the relative importance of sales to 000 as com- pared to other sales and home oonsunption dairy products. In 1949 sales m 2.-Yolne of 000 removal from and additions to the available supply of dairy products during the postsar period in relation to farm markstings and hone coasunption of dairy products Index lumbers _o_f l’_a_r_rm_ mtg 0‘. 5. Departmt of Agriculture. 1955;. p. 15. versation with 1.9. Grove. 0. 8. Depart-cut of Agriculture. Iashington. D. 0. Published Index of Index of Index of Calendar Index 000 000 let AdJusted tear 1%7-49 . 100 Raoul Additions Change Index (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) 190 101 1. 54 0. 21 -1 100 1950 101 2.57 2.32 0 101. 1951 99 .01 . I) 0 99 1952 100 . 22 .01 0 100 1952 105 7.09 1. 51 ad 99 1954 105 5.52 2. 95 -4 102 1955 107 3. 37 2. 42 -1 105 1955 110 8. 25 2. 7d .1 109 Sources: column 1-1949—1954 l. I. Grove and I. I. Cannon. 193 s and Bone Consumption Washington. 2.0.: 1955-1955 telephone conv- Ooluns 2-3—00mputed from data in appendix and base weights used in the publided index of farn marketings and home cone-ption. colu- d—Oolun 2 ainus ooluan 3—--Oo1unn 5-colunn 1 minus dalumn 4. -32- to CCC were equal to a values that would yield an index nunber of 1.54 when measured in terns of the index of farm marketing and hone consumption of dairy products. he published index is equal to 101. If sales to CCC were not included in this index it would be equal to 99 rather than 101. In acre precise terns. this means that farm marketings to buyers other than CCC and home consumption of dairy products could be represented by an index number sf 99. he index of additions shown in column 2 sf labls 2 is a measure sf CCC distributions in the domestic market measured in terns of the index sf farm marbtings and home consumption. Comparison of this index with the total index of farm narketings and home consumption facilitates the determination of the relative iaportance of these distributions in tens sf other sales and home consunption of dairy products for each year daring the time period under consideration. Io illustrate the leaning of this index the values of CCC distributions in 1954 will be considered. In that year CCC disposed sf a volune of dairy products in the donestic aarhet duch yields an index number of 2.95 when neasured in terns of the index of far- narhstings and hone consuption. his scene that the total quantity of dairy products entering the donestic market er being ccususd snhonsfarns oouldbs representsdbyan indexaanbsroflm. with the lathetings and hone consumption index equal to 105 and the index of additions equal to 2. CCC purchases are not considered in this exanpls. heindsxsfnstohangsisamsasureef the nstchengeinquantity of dairy products entering the donestic narxst as a result of CCC purchases and disposals. he net effect of these two programs has varied from a net addition represented by an index of .39 in 1951 to a reduction of 5.7? in 1953. he adjusted index of farm aarketings and bone consumption is a neasurs sf the quantity of dairy products sold to buyers other than CCC and used on hens farms plus CCC distributions in the donestic narxet. Prom 1949 through 1953 this index was stable at a level of 100. In 1954 the index began to rise and continued to do so in both 1955 and 1955. he action sf this index would indicate that the quantity of dairy products sold to buyers other than CCC and used on home fares plus CCC donestic distributions was relatively constant from 1949 through 1953. 'he rise in this index in 1954. 1955. and 1955 indicates that these same quantities have risen substantially during the past three years. he forces causing this index to rise seem to be (1) a rising level of total farn marketing and hone consunption. (2) a lowering of the level of 000 purchases. and (3) a relatively high level of CCC distributions. m 9_f____ CCC Purchase and Di osal Program si__n_ Relation _t_o_ Darn rnTarhetiggs sand Home Conmtion__ of Dairy Products When the Various m_ of _C__CC _Dtistributions £3 Considered In hbls 3 indexes are presented which measure the sale quantities of dairy products considered in the previous sections. he published index and the index of removal in hble 3 are pre- cisely the sons as those shown in i'able 2. In the index of additions in hble 3 various types of CCC dis- tributiome are weighted differently in an attsnpt to account for varying recipient dennd for the products being distributed. Co-ercial. domestic sales are weighted at base weight prices. traders to the tray and Veterans Administration Hospitals are also weighted at base weight _ 34 - prices,7 Donations of dairy products under either Section 32 or 416 programs were weighted in the following manner. Butter is valued at the 1947-49 average price of oleo. This value is used because it is felt that much of the donated butter is used as a substitute for oleo. Cheese that is donated is valued at 55 per cent of its base weight, which deflates the value of donated cheese at a rate comparable to the one used for butter. It is heped that such a weighting system will yield an index of additions which will provide a better indication of the effects of these additions on the available supply of dairy products. EABLE 3.-Effects of CCC programs on the available supply of dairy products when various types of distributions are weighted to reflect their impact on available supply . Published Index of Index of Index of Calendar Index 000 CCC Net Adjusted Year 1947-49 a 100 Removal Additions Change Index (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) 1949 101 1.64 0.15 -l 100 1950 101 2.57 2.05 -1 100 1951 99 .01 .40 0 99 1952 100 .22 .01 0 100 1953 105 7.09_ .93 —6 99 1954 106 6.52 2.18 -4 102 1955 107 3.37 1.79 -2 105 1956 110 3.75 1.85 -2 108 In years when there were no domestic donations of dairy products the index of additions shown in Table 3 is the same as the one shown in 7Discussions with seVeral Army Quartermaster Corp officers who have worked or are currently working in military food procurement and distribution provide the basis for this weighting. There is general agreement that these transfers become part of the general supply and act as nearly perfect substitutes for dairy products obtained in commercial markets. -35- sun. 2. In other years when occ donations were a .11 part of am donestic distributions this index changes slightly. In years when these donations were large in volume the index of additions in Table 3 differs lasted]: fro- the one shown in hble 2. In 1950. 1955. and 1956 donestic donations were of sufficient naitude to change the adjusted index from the one presented in fable 2 in which all 000 distributions are weighted equally. be adjusted index presented in hble 3 represents fare narketings sad hone consumption of dairy products excluding sales to the government. plus 000 donestic distributions weighted to reflect user demand. As mentioned earlier such weighting changes the adjusted use: in three of the eight years being considered. from this it would appear that it is helpful to know the type of distribution taking place when evaluating the effect of these distributions on the available supply of dairy pro- ducts. however. it should be pointed out that such a weighting changed the index of availability by only one index number in each of the in- stenees when a change did take place. 000 Purchases _eng Distributions ofDei gy______ Products in _t_he________ Postnr P_e____riod Related to the rare Mark arketig‘s _e__!“- Ihig Products as Measured.— in the Ind—_e_x_ . of Ia__i_1_ Harketig hes the volume of government purchases end/er distribution is , compared to total fern ssrketings of dairy products it is an even greater shareofthetotaltheaitwesshowntobeinthepreviousthreecoe- perisons. In this 4 s set of indexes are presented which relate the sub- index en marketing to the veluee of government purchases and distributions. -36- um d.-Volune of 000 removal from and additions to the available supply of dairy products during the postwar period in relation to farm marketings of dairy products Pebli shed Index of Index of Index of . calendar Index 000 000 let musted Year 1947-49 3 100 Removal , Additions Change Index (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) 1949 103 1.92 O. 25 -3 100 1960 102 3.02 2.72 0 103 1961 100 . 01 . 47 0 100 153 102 .26 .01 0 102 1963 108 8. 32 1. 6d -7 101 1964 111 7.65 3.47 04 107 1966 113 3. 96 2. 84 -1 112 1966 117 d. 40 3. 22 -1 116 Sources: Column l-Jarm Income Situation (Washington. D. 0. s U. I. Department of Agriculture. larch. 19675. p. 9. 001.. 2-3—0omputed from date in appendix and base weights used in the published index of farm nerketings. Delu- d-0o1umn 3 minus column 3. column 6—0olumn 1 minus column 4. he index of r-oval show: here is m meenre of government purchases as a part of total farm nrketings. comparing this index with the published index shows the relation of sales to government to other farm merketings of dairy products. he index of additions in table d relates government distributions to farm .rketings and provides an indication of the importance of these distributions as a part of total fern marketings of dairy products. heindexofnet ohangeisemeesure of the netchange inthevolume of dairy products entering the domestic market as a result of 000 pur- chases end distributions. lhen evaluating the effect of government purchases -37- and distribution on the quantity or dairy products available to acct narhst deasnd a neaeure such as this seens to be the relevant one. as adjusted index of tar- narketinge is a neasure of turn narketing to buyers other than 000 plus 000 distribution. The level of this index provides an indication of the quntity of dairy products in comercial donestic channels. as index varied, but slightly. around the level of 100 tron 1949 through 1953. In 1954 the index rose sharply to a level of 107. In 1955 and 1956 the steep rise continued reaching a level of 116 in 1956. his indicates that despite a substantial purchase prograa the quantity of dairy products aoving in donestic nrket channels has increased substantially during the past three years. CHAPTER 17 m3 m9 GRAINS PROGRAM he first governnental progran for a feed grain was initiated in 1933 when 0o-odity Credit Corporation offered loans to growers on 1933 crop corn} Price supporting loans have been available on barley and grain sorghau since 1940 and on oats since 1945.3 Purchase agre-ents have been available since 1947 for corn3 and 1948 for the other feed grains.‘ Loans ads to growers on fan stored grain are secured by a chattel on the grain. Iaoans en warehouse stored grain are secured by a proniseoiy note secured by a warehouse receipt. he grower nay pay off his loan at an tine up to the aaturity date at its face value plus any accrued interest. lessal prograas which allow extensions of the loan beyond the naturity date have been in operation during several of the postwar years. be placing of a quantity of feed grains under governnent loan has the effect of reducing the available MP1,. If these loans are repaid during the current year. this reduction is short-lived and really does not reduce ... available supply but rather shifts the availability to a later date. However. if these loans are not repaid and are either outstanding at the l‘(Sorn Price-M11 Loan rations. 1933-1953 (Iashington. 13.0.: 0. I. Departnent of Agriculture. 1953 . p. l. aegicultural Mg m. pp. 93.3.. p. 337. 3Oorn Price-m Lean Qpentions. oc. m. ‘lenedict and Stine. o . 933.. p. 229. -33.. -39- close of the year or if the conmodity is delivered to 000 a reduction in the available supply results. mess loans can remain outstanding into the next mrketing year which provides the possibility of repay-eats of loans on other than the current crop. Repay-eats of such loans have the effect of adding to the available supply during the year in which they occur. Ouch repay-ents nay either partially or totally offset aw reduction in available supply resulting from loans aade on the current crop. rurchase agreeaents are also available as a scene of price support on feed grains. hose agreements have been used less than loans. but have been inportant in sons years. Purchase agreonents reduce the avail- able supply only when the commodity is actually delivered to 000. Corn is the saJor feed grain and the only one of the four desiglated as basic oomdity under price support legislation. Support for the other feed grains is provided under the authority to support other non- basic agricultural connodities. lelatively strong demand for feed grains plus a small corn crop in 1947 held. feed. grain prices above support level fron the close of Iorld Var II through the 1947 narrating year.5 In 1948. however. a record corn crop accompanied by a decline in denand for feed grains caused prices to decline and 000 to become an inportant factor in the narket. Although there are no currently available data on 000 sales of feed grains in donestic nartets prior to July 1. 1949. there is a strong indi- cation that such sales were of I‘ll inportance during the period July 1. 1946. through June 30. 1949. Data on total feed grain files during this 5m nrketing year for cats and barley is free July 1 through June 30; for corn and grain sorghuns the narketing year is from October 1 through Septenber so. -m- tins period indicate that the sales were of relatively small volune.6 Data on CCC stocks of feed grains over this same period indicate a large share of these stocks were connitted for foreia distribution.7 hose co-ittnents of 0C0 stocks would indicate that during this period a substantial portion of total CCC sales were in foreign narkets. the physical volunes of feed grains represented by the indexes of renoval and additions are shown in hbles 2a through 5d in the appendix. minds 3_ _o_ Dean.1’urchess. _e_ng Dispgsal Pagans in Relation totalfo Darn Outfit 35 lead Grains In 1948 a record corn crop was harvested in the United States. he index of total output of feed grains was at a record level of 116. Iith these conditions prevailing CCC becane an inportant outlet for feed grain producers. In 1948 the index of CCC novel was equal to 10.80. Inch represented a quantity of feed grains soul to slightly nore than 9 percent of the total farn output of feed grains. With few CCC sales in the donestic nrhet an index nunber of 106. based on the index of total fern output. would be a relatively accurate neasurs of the quantity of feed grains produced and available to be sold in oo-ercial donestic narhets with the ruaining output being reneved free supp]: W 000 loans and purchases. 1 oonparieon‘of the index of ruoval shown in fable 5 ‘rot-i feed grain can free July 1. 1946. through June so. 1949. were as follows: barley. 31.107.483 bushels; eats. 10.04.” bushels: grain sorghuns. 10.455.794 cwt.. and corn. 9.047. 664 bushels. 3123.! 3; financial condition and erations. Continuity“ Credit Co ration g g_f_ J_3_n_‘s 30.1_9__47. l__9__48. 93 1949 bashington. D. 0.: U. i: Governent Punting Office. 1947. 1948, and 19495. 73—9221_ of rinan_____c___ial Conditi__on and Qpe reaction. dig Credit 0o ration as o_f_—_—— June 30. l_9__47. .‘l’une_ 30. 1948. and Decenber 31. 1948 Washington ..""‘5 c.: ms. run-ant r‘i—‘fntm _Of-f-i—ce. 1947. 197a. and 1949). -41- with the published index of fern output of feed grains provides an indication of the naitude of CCC renoval of feed grains in relation to total fern output of feed. grains. m 5.-Vo1une of C00 renoval from and additions to the available supply of feed grains during the postwar period in relation to total fare output of feed grains Published Index of Index of Index of Iarketing Index CCC CCC let Adjusted Year 1947-49 : 100 Removal Addi tions Change Index (1) (2) (a) (4) (a) 1948 116 10. so --‘ -11 105 1949 103 7. 39 . 79 - 7 96 1950 104 -l. 51 1. 68 3 107 1951 97 . 21 3.08 3 100 . 1952 102 7. 18 1. 53 - 6 97 1954 105 9. 95 1.77 o 8 97 1955 111 12. 71 2. 24 -10 101 ‘rstiutod to be equal to zero. domes: Calm 1M 1.5 hrs Production _en_<_1 lffici (Washington. D.C.: U. 8. Depart-ant of Agriculture. 1956,. pp. 8-9. Calms 2-3—00nputed fron data in appendix and base weights used in the index of total fern output. Colunn 4--Colun 3 sinus colm 3 rounded to the nearest whole nunber. Calm 5-0o1unn 1 ainus calm 4. An explanation is in order for the figures presented for 1950. m renoval index is a neasurs of the quantity of feed grains produced during year t and delivered to CCC at the close of tth nrketing year plus the quantity of feed grains produced during year t on which CCC loans are outstanding at the close of the tth narhetm year ninus . the quantity of feed grains produced in years t minus" 1 on which loans are repaid during the ,tth narketing year. i'his index indicates -42- a not addition to available supply during the 1950 marketing year. it the beginning of the feed grains marketing years in July and October of 1950 substantial quantities of 1949 crop feed grains were in the hands of producers. but under CCC loans. With feed grain prices rising during the narketing year a large portion of these loans were repaid. his rise in the price of feed grains also caused the quantity of 1950 crop feed grains delivered to CCC or resaining under loan at the close of the narketing year to be relatively nun. m net effect was that the quantity of feed grains represented by repay-ant of 'old' loans exceeded the quantity re- aoved free supply by 000 loans and purchases. resultitg in a negative index of renoval. CCC donestic sales during the 1950 narrating year were equal to an index number of 1.68. In total. CCC operations of pre- vious and the current year resulted in a net addition to the available simply of feed grains equal to an index number of 3.21 in terns of the index of total fern output of feed grains. he index of additions. which is a neasurs of CCC sales of feed grains in the donestic market as a part of total fern output. was equal to 3.08 in 1951. be quantity of feed grains represented by this index aunber was equal to nere than 3 per cent of the total fern output of feed grains in 1951. he nJority of these sales were conercial sales of corn. During the 1953 narrating year CCC removal and additions were both equal to rather large portions of total fern output of feed grains: removal was equal to 10.5 per cent. and additions were equal to 5 per cent. CCC sales during the 1953 marketing your consisted nainly of out-of—conditian corn sales with over 146 nillion bushels of such corn being sold in -43ee donestic narkets fron October 1. 1953. through September 30. 1954. CCC renoval of feed grains continued high during 1954 and reached a peak in 1955 with total CCC removal of feed grains equal to 11.5 per cent of the total fern output of feed grains. Innination of the index of not change presented in hble 5 in- dicates that the net effect of CCC activities on the available supply of feed grains in relation to the total farm output of feed grains has ranged from a reduction equal to 10 per cent .to an increase equal to 3 percent. Such a variation in the impact of government programs on the available supply of feed grains indicates that any evaluation of the progran's effect should consider CCC removal. CCC additions. and the part that each has played in yielding the results obtained. his index also indicates that CCC programs have tended to offset variation in farn output of feed grains. his was especially true during the 1951-1955 period. Mitude _o_; 99_ Loan. Purchase, _a_n_<_1_ Disposal Programs Ln Relation to l'arn Marketigs and Home Condition g_f_ 1329 m is indicated in the opening section. CCC was not an important outlet for feed grain producers prior to the 1948 narkoting year. In terns of values delivered to CCC corn was by far the nest important feed grain involved in price support prograas at that tins. herefore. adjust-eat of the index of farm narketings and hose consumption of feed grains on a calendar year basis fron 1948 through 1956 will include the nsJority of 000 activities in feed grains. from the close of Vorld War 11 through calendar year 1956. -“- In hble 6 indexes are presented which provide an indication of the relative iaportance of CCC removal in relation to total farm marketings and bone consumption of feed grains and the importance of CCC sales in the domestic market in relation to these two factors. he fact that relatively small quantities of feed grains are marketed or consumed on hone farms renders quantities removed from or added to the available supply of feed grains by CCC programs a relatively large part of the total farm nerhetings and home consumption of feed grains. m 6.~Vo1une of CCC removal from and additions to the available supply of feed grains during the postwar period in relation to farm marketings and hone consumption of feed grains I’ublished Index of Index of Index of Calendar Index CCC CCC let deus ted Year 1947~49= 100 Renoval Additions Change Index (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) 1949 121 36.84 0.4c" .ss 35 1950 112 20.15 3.79 .17 95 1951 88 3.13 6.07 3 91 1953 91 ~2. so 14. 22 17 108 1953 107 29. 27 7.18 ~22 85 1954 125 32. 83 13.18 -20 105 1955 ,136 35.90 5.04 ~31 105 1956 135 34. 68 6. 15 ~29 106 ‘hepresents domestic sales during the last 6 months of 1949 only. Sources: Celunn 1-1949-1954—1. I. Grove and II. 1'. Cannon. _l___ew lunbers of _l'ag ll erlcseti_gg sand Home Conmtion (lashington. D.C.: U. 8. Departnent of __dgriculture. 19565. p. 16. Calms 3-5—Computed from data in appendix and base weights used in the published index of farm nrketings and home consumption. Column 4-Co1unn 2 nine column 3 (rounded to the nearest whole aunber). Colu- 5—0olunn 1 minus oolunn 4. -45.. In 1949 large quantities of corn from the record. crop of 1948 were nrhsted. Ehese aarketings. plus other factors. caused a general lowering of feed grain prices in co-ercial narkets. Under these conditions CCC loans and purchase agree-outs became an attractive arrangement for feed grain producers. he degree of attractiveness is indicated by the high level of the index of CCC removal based on the index or turn narketings and hose eonsuxption. In 1949 CCC removal was equal to 30 per cent of total {an aarketing and hone consumption of feed grains. he index for renoval for 1960 is equal to 20.15. but in arriving at this index aunber counterbalancing factors have been considered. nose two rectors are deliveries to ace. and repayments of loans. for single. 3m.8 nillion bushels of corn were delivered to CCC in peynent or leans during 1950 p111. 53.9 aillion bailels that were an"... to coo in fulfillasnt of purchase agreements. Offsetting these large renoval figures are large quntities of corn on which loans were repaid. he net change in loans outstanding on corn during 1950 vas a ainus 168.5 aillion bushels. his sons type of activity was carried on in other feed grains with repay-eat of loans on oats exceeding renovel by loans and purchases. 'ith feed grain prices rising during 1952 feed grain producers. and especially corn and grain sorghun producers repaid loans on large quantities or their 1961 crop during the 1952 calendar year. resulting in a negative index er renoval for the year. CCC sales were also very high in 1952 with donestic sales of corn equal to 198.6 nillion bushels. nese corn sales plus other feed grain sales yield an index of additions equal to 14.22 which represents a quantity of. feed grains equal to 16 per cent of total tars metings and hose consumption of feed grains. an“- During 1954 CCC loans and purchases removed more than 360 million bushels er corn from the‘available lupply. During that same year CCC donestic corn sales were equal to 147.5 million bushels. 0! total dones- tic corn ales out-of-condition sales were equal to 151 million bushels. CCC corn sales were equal to slightly more than 40 percent of corn renoval during 1954. base large CCC com operations are the primary reasons for the high level or the indexes of removal and additions during that year. In 1955 the index of 000 removal rose to 35.90-only slightly under the high point for the time period considered in this study. CCC removal waseqnal to more than 27 per cent of the total tars aarketings and heme consumption in 1955. In 1956 CCC removal continued to be an important part or total flarm marketings and hone consumption with the removal index equal to 34.68. Iotal CCC operations in 1956 resulted in an adjusted index of 106—slightly higher than in 1’55b Ina-ination of themadJueted index.indicates that despite heavy removal by CCC the index has been stable for the past three years at a level nch higher than in any of the otheryeass exasined except 1952. however. the reaeon for this higher level in the past three years appears to be for two reasons. In 1954 the adJusted index was forced.upward by a.higher level of CCC sales in domestic markets. In 1955 and 1956 CCC sales were back at a more nornal level but total tars marketings and home consumption had risen sufficiently to hold the addusted index at approximately the same level. Ibis higher level of the adJusted index indicates that greater quantities or feed grains have been available in -47- domestic. co-ercial markets during the past three years. tude Lf _C__CC Loan. Purchaee. and Digosal Progfls _i__n Relation to Farm Marketiggs__ and _H____ome ConEtion— of reed Grains When Various HEP—9.... eof _C__CC Sal___e_9 dr__e_ Considered In the previous section reference has been made to two types of 666 sales of feed grains in the domestic market. these being comercial sales. and out-of-condition sales. feed grains have also been mplied to domestic users under the emergency feed pm i'o reflect the relative impact of each type of sale on available supply. different price weights have be- assigned to each in constructing the index of additions shown in hble 7. m 7.~Vo1ume of 660 removal from and additions to the available supply of feed grains in relation to farm marketings and home consumption of feed grains when various types of 000 sales are weighted to reflect their impact on available supply Published Index of Index of Index of Calendar Index CCC COO let Wasted Iear 1947—49 s 100 Removal Additions Change . Index (1) (2) (a) (4) (5) 1949 121 36.84 0.42‘ -36 so 1950 112 20.15 2.70 -17 95 1951 99 a. 13 5. 95 9 91 1952 91 4.90 14.31 17 106 1953 107 29.27 6. 71 .23 e4. 1954 125 32.83 11. 93 -21 104 1955 136 35.90 4.65 .31 105 1956 135 34.66 6.69 q .29 106 ‘lepresants .1“ during the last 6 months of 1949 only. Ce-ercial sales are weighted at base weight prices. Cut-ef—condition sales. which are sales of CCC stocks which have been declared out of con- 41916; and/or unfit for mom storage. are weighted at 90 per cent of -48- their base weight price. Assignment of such a price weight to out-of- condition sales is somewhu arbitrary. but there are indications that such a price weight is fairly accurate in estimating the relative impact of co-odities sold as out-of-condition on available supply.8 Distri- butions under the eaergenoy feed program were weighted on the basis of the degree ef substitution of the comedity being distributed for grain sor- gimme. Corn distributed under this prograa is weighted at 90 per cent of the base price of grain sorghum and cats at 46 per cent of the base price of grain sorghuns.9 Use of these weights yields an index of additions which is slightly lower than the one presented in Table 6 for each of the years under con- siderhion. hose changes were sufficiently large in only two years (1953 and 1954) to change the adjusted index from the one presented in l‘able 6. and then only by a single index number. his lack of change in the indexes should not be used to imply that sales other than commercial sales have been unimportant. Imergency feed sales have never been of sufficient sise to influence the indexes. Out-of-ccndition sales have been a large part of total CCC sales of feed grains in some years. but. given the weighting systea used. very large out-of-eondition sales fail to shift the indexes by any great amount. 31 review of receipts of grain by sex-16.4 169. at the Chicago terminal market published daily in the wall Street Journal which dis~ tinquishes between CCC grain and other ”grain indicates very few cars of CCC grain contain more than 10 per cent damage. 1 maJor portion contain considerably less. 9mess price weights assign a value to each of these feed grains which is approximately equal to the relative feeding value of the two grains and grain sorghum. but at less than the value of grain sorghum due to a lack of effective denand. -49- O mitude af- CC Loan. Purchase. .a_n_d Disposal Programs 3.; lation _tg i'otal rarm Markethgs _o_; reed Grains 5' Home consumption of feed grains as measured in the index of farm marketings and home consmnption is a very small part of the total quantity represented in the index. herefore. a comparison of the volume of CCC removal from and additions to the available supply in relation to the 'index of farm marketings yields a very similar set of relationships as shown in hble 6. Indexes in fable 8 indicate that CCC removal and additions have been a large proportion of total farm marketings in the postwar period. he adjusted index of farm marketings represents the quantity of feed grains entering domestic markets from produce sales to buyers other than CCC plus CCC sales in domestic markets. plus the not change in the quantities under loan. he spread between this index and the published index pro- vides an indication of the relative importance of 060 activity in relation to total farm marketings and the removal and addition indexes provide an insight into the reasons for this spread. lxamination of the magnitude of CCC loan. purchase. and domestic sales of feed grains in relation to total farm output. farm marketings. and home consumption of feed grains indicates that governmental prograas have influenced abstential portions of these total quantities. however. these indexes indicate that the flow of feed grains to and from government has varied in both direction and volume. he timing of the changes in the direction of this flow has very likely had a dampening effect on price flucutions in the feed grains. It would be expected that this dampening effect would work in either direction—that is. an increase in the available supply should tend to push prices dots: in the same way that a decrease ame- in available supply should tend to hold prices up. we 8.~Volume ef CCC removal from and additions to the available supply of feed grains during the postwar period in relation to farm marketings of feed grains Published Index of Index of Index of Calendar Index CCC CCC let Adjust ed Year 1947-49 a 100 Removal dei tions Change Index (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) 1949 121 37.25 0.43" ~37 e4 1950 113 20. 27 2. 82 ~18 95 1951 88 3.16 6.13 3 91 1952 91 '3. 83 14. 38 17 108 1963 107 29. 60 17. 26 .22 84 1954 125 . 33. 2O 13. 33 -26 105 1956 136 37.33 5.10 ~32 104 1956 135 35. O7 6. 22 -29 106 .Iepresents sales in the last 6 months of 1949 only. lourcest Column 1"” Income Situation Washington. D.C.: U. 8. Department of Agriculture.“ “arch. 19575. p. 9. Cole. 2-3—Conputed from data in appendix and base weights used in the index of farm marketings. Column 4—Column 2 minus column 3 (rounded to nearest whole number). Celun 5—Column 1 minus column 4. owm Y m NOD WINS PEGRAM hree food grains have been involved in price support programs during the postnr period. hose food grains are rye. rice. and wheat. In terms of value or volume wheat has been by far the most prominent in government price support operations. Provision for price support loans on wheat were first made in 1938.1 Iheat prices have been supported during the postwar period by means of loans and purchase agreements. Strong export demd for wheat from 1945 through 1947 held wheat prices above the support level through the 1947 marketing yeti-.2 A record wheat crop in 1947 restored depleted supplies. and. a large wheat crop in 1948 pushed wheat prices below the support level. During the 1948 nrketing year CCC loans and purchase agreements becane an important outlet for dieat producers. lye is an important crap in some states but is not a large part of the overall crop program. CCC loans have been available on rye since 1939. luppert has been provided in the postwar period by means of loans and purchase agreuents. he rye program has not been large in total or as a part of the total production. Bye prices remained high through the 1n.» Stabilisation Activities (Washington. 9.0.: u. 9. Department of Agriculture. June. 1955). p. 1. 3hemarketingyearforuheatandryeisJ‘ulylthreuthune 30. and for rice August 1 through July 31. Ivl.’ -52- 1947 marketing year. but declined sharply in 1948.3 with prices declining during the 1948 nrketing year rye producers began to make use of CCC leans and prchase agreements which were available to tho-o . lice is defined as a basic commodity by price support legislation. Loans have been available to rice producers since 1933. but prior to 1948 veiy little rice as pledged for CCC loans. During the period under con- sideration price supports have been available to rice producers in the form ef loans and purchase agreements. Vith the removal of price ceilings on rice at the close ef World Var II rice prices rose sharply.4 lith prices rising during 1946 and 1947 000 loans and purchases were of small importance. however. falling prices in 1948 and 1949 resulted in sub- stantial quntities of rice being placed under ooc loan and/or delivered to CCC through purchase agreements. he foregoing would indicate that the impact of 000 removal on the available supply of food grains from the close of Vorld Var II through the 1947 nrketing year was of all importance. he impact of CCC additions en the available supply of food grains during this same period cannot be precisely determined because of a lack of data on 000 domestic sales prior to July 1. 1949. however. there are strong indications that CCC donestic sales of food grains were small prior to July 1. 194.9.6 alessonal average price per bushel received by farmers for rye from 1946-1948 we as follows: 1946. 91.92;.1947. $2.26; 1948. 91.46. cultural Statistics. 1955. 32. 311.. p. 14. 4 Seasonal average price per bag received by farmers for rice from 1945—1949 was as follows: 1945. 93.98; 1946. 95.00: 1947. 95.97: 1948. $4.88; 1949. “.10. ibid.. p. 19. 6Sales of feed grains not specifically marked for export from July-1. 1946. through June 30. 1949. are as follows: wheat. 38,672,552 bushels; rye. 10.566 bushels. 222.12 9_f_ financial Condition and Qperations. 9_C_C_ g 2; June £0. 1947. 1948. £14; 1949. pp. _c_i_t_. -53- Various relationships between the volume of food grains involved in 000 less. purchase. and disposal programs and farm output and farm mar- ketings and home consumption of food grains are described in the following sections. 'i'he physical vulume of the individual food grains represented by the indexes of removal and additions are shown in Tables 6a through 86. of the appendix. In constructing these indexes milled rice has been con- verted to rough equivalent at the rate of 1.52 pounds of rough rice per pound ef milled rice.6 itude of G C Loan. Purchase. and Digpgsal Programs in Relation to Total Farm Oumt 91 Food Grains In Eable 9 a group of indexes is presented which show the naitude of 000 naoval from and additions to the supply of food grains available in domestic markets related to total farm output of food grains as measured is the index ef total farm output. a. no: of removal shown in Iable 9 1. a measure of the quantity of feed grains removed from the available supply by 000 loan and purchase operations based on the index of total farm output of food grains. he index numbers presented in column 2 of fable 9 represents 000 removal of feed grains as a part of the index of total farm output of food grains. In 1953 the index of total farm output of food grains was equal to 96. and the index of 060 removal of food grains based on the index of total farm output was 36.17. If 000 sales of food grains in the domestic market are disregarded this removal index would indicate that an index number of 60. based on the index of total farm output. would be representative of the quantity of food grains produced in 1953 and available to be sold in ‘55th Statistics. 1955. 22. 533.. p. I (Introduction). -54- co-ercial domestic markets. In percentage terms 660 removal was equal to 38 per cent of the total farm output of food grains in 1955. mu 9.-Ye1ums of 000 removal from and additions to the available supply of feed grains during the postwar period in relation to total farm output of food grains Published Index of Index of Index of Hal-hating Index 000 000 Net AdJusted Year 1947-49 s 100 Removal Addition s Change Index (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) 1948 103 23.04 ...-3 .23 so 1949 89 19. 24 1. 52 -18 71 1950 83 2. 30 1.54 - 1 82 1951 81 6. 46 . 60 - 6 75 1952 105 28. 81 . 89 ~28 77 1953 96 36. 17 1.09 --35 61 1954 85 35. 55 5. 45 ~30 55 1955 80 26. 23 l. 84 .24 56 ‘lstimated to be zero. Sources: column 1M_ in 1am Production and lfficien (Washington. D. 0.: U. 9. Department of Agriculture. 1956}. pp. 8-9. column 2-3-Oomputed from data in appendix using base weights used in published index of farm output. column 4—Oolumn 2 mime column 3 (rounded to nearest whole number). column Holumn 1 minus column 4. he index of removal of food grains represents a much greater quantity of wheat than either of the other two food grains. he quantities represented by the index number for 1948 will be used as an example. In that year the index of 600 removal was equal to 28.04 with the amount of wheat represented equal to 265.9 million bushels. he remaining quantity of food grains represented by this index number is less than a million -55... bushels of rye and slightly over 10.000 hundred-weight of rice. his overriding influence of wheat on the removal index is the primary reason for this index being positive during the 1950 marketing year. he quantity of rye and rice on which 'old' loans were repaid during the 1950 marketing year exceeded the quantity removed by loans and purchases. but removal of wheat was sufficient to keep the index positive. A year-by-ysar comparison of the index of removal and the published index of farm output indicatee the part of total output that has been re- moved from available supply by 000 loan and purchase programs. Such a comparison shows that 000 removal has been an important part of total farm output of food grains during each of the marketing years considered with the exception of 1951. he index of 000 additions in Table 9 is a measure of 000 sales of feed grains in the domestic market. by marketing year. in relation to total farm output of food grains as measured in the index of total farm output. A comparison of the index of additions shown in hble 9 with the published index of total farm output of food grains reveals the relative importance of these additions to total farm output. Such a comparison indicates that 000 domestic sales of food grains have been a rather small percen- tage of total fan output of feed grains during each of the marketing years considered with the exception of 1954. In 1954 domestic sales of food grains by 000 were equal to 6 per cent of total farm output of food grains. a substantial increase in the domestic sale of rice during the 1954 marketing year was the primary reason for the sudden rise in the index of 000 additions for 1954. ...-56.- he index of net change is a measure of the net change in the avail- able supply of feed grains as a result of 000 loan. purchase. and disposal pregrams in relation to total farm output of food grains. his index indicates that 000 activity has lowered the available supply of food grains available in domestic markets by an amount equal to a rather large percentage of total farm output of food grains in six of the eight years considered. he adJusted index is a measure of the quantity of food grains produced and not removed from available supply by 006 loan and purchase programs plus 000 sales in the domestic market. he index indicates the quantity of food grains being produced and available to be sold in com- mercial domestic markets. he general trend in this index appears to be domrd indicating that miler quantities of feed grains have been available in domestic markets during the latter part of the period con- sidered. he lower level of this index appears to be due to a lower level of total farm output of food grains coupled with a continued high level of 000 removal. Meghan-Wu ..mn._-22__m manage in Relation _t_g Tar-m Marketi _ngs and. Ho Donation of load Grains As indicated in the opening section of this chapter. 000 loans and purchases of feed grains were of small importance prior to the 1948 trusting year. he indexes presented in hbls 10 have been constructed w calendar year from 1949 through 1956. 000 activity during the 1948 marketing year prior te January 1. 1949. is not measured in these in- dense. -57- mm 10.~'slume of 000 removal from and additions to the available supply sf feed grains during the postwar period in relation to farm marketings and home consumption of feed grains Published Index of Index of Index of Calendar Index 000 000 let AdJueted Year 1947-49 3 100 Removal Additions Change Index (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) use as 33.46 0.91‘ .33 55 1950 91 11.36 1.73 ~10 71 1951 77 3. 99 . 77 ~ 3 75 1959 98 31. 93 1.28 ~21 77 1953 95 39. 25 . 59 49 57 1954 92 37. 88 5. 37 ~55 57 1955 51 31. 35 5. 3) ~26 55 1956 96 26.99 2.17 ~27 58 ‘lepresents domestic sales during the last 6 months of 1949 only. Isurces: Golan l-1949~1954. l. I. Grove and II. I'. Gannon. _l___ew Index_____ lumbers of Ia__r_m_ flarketi_95e___ and Home Oonmtion Washington. D. 0.: U. 8. Department of Agriculture. 1956;. p. 16. 1955-1956 telephone conversation with I. I. drove. Agricultural Iarketing Service. lashington. D00. Column Mmputed from data in appendix and base weights used in published index sf farm nrketings and home consumption. Colu- 4-Oolumm 2 minus column 3 (rounded to nearest whole number). Oelun Helm 1 minus column 4. he index of removal shown in hbls 10 is a measure of 000 removal as part of total farm marketings and home consumption of food grains. A eomparison of this index with the published index of farm marketisgs and home consentiem provides an indication of the importance of 000 removal in relation ts total farm marketings and home consumption of food grains. During 1953 the index of removal was equal to 39.25 which represents a quantity sf feed grains equal to 41 per cent of total farm marketings -58- and home consumption. An index number of 57. based on the index of farm marbtings and home consumption. would be representative of farm marketing to buyers other than 000 and home consumption of food grains in 1953. A like comparison for each of the postwar years considered indicates that 000 removal has been an important part of total farm marketings and home consumption of food grains. he index of removal for 1951 indicates that 000'rsmova1 was equal to a quantity of food grains that can be represented by an index number of 2.99. based on the index of farm marketings and home consumtiom. however. deliveries to 000 during 1951 were to a large degree effect by loan repayments during that year. he removal was negative during 1951 with loan repayments exceeding removal 10 loans and purchases. he index of 000 additions of food grains shown in hble 10 is a measure of the qmntity of food grains sold in domestic markets by 000 as a part of the total index of farm marketing and home consumption. Using the matity sold during calendar year 1954 as an example. we find 000 sales sf feed grains in domestic markets equal to an index number of 3.27 based on the index of farm marketinge and home consumption. An index number sf 95 would be an accurate representation of the quantity sf feed grains available in domestic markets or consumed on home farms. his index number is a measure of farm nrketings (including those to 000) and home consumptien of feed grains. plus 000 sales sf food grains in domestic marhsts. 000 sales have not been equal to a large part of total farm marketings and home consumption of food grains during the majority sf the year considered. however. in 1955 000 domestic sales were equal to 6 per cent of total farm marketings and home consumption of food -59.. grains. In relation to 000 removal of food grains. additions have not been large. his results in a rather large negative index of not change during most of the year considered. he index of net change shown in liable 10 is a measure of the not impact of 000 loan. purchase. and disposal programs on the supply of food grains available in domestic markets based on the published index of farm markstings and home consumption. his index is a measure of the flow of feed grains to and from government indicating both direction and quantity. A comparison of this index with the published index of farm narketings and home consumption shows the net effect of ccc loans. purchases. and disposals on the available supply of food grains in relation to total farm marketings and home consumption. Such a comparison indicates that 000 has had a net effect equal to a substantial portion of farm marketings and home consumption during all but one of the years considered. his index also indicates that the change has always been a reduction in the available simply which has been as high as 41 per cent of total farm marketings and home consumption. he adjusted index in Table 10 represents farm maztetings and home consumption of feed grains excluding the quantity removed by 000 plus 000 domestic sales of food grains in the domestic market. he level of this index appears to have been stabili sod at a level of approximately 57 during the 1953 through 1956 period. l'otal farm marketings and home consumption of food grains. as measured in the published index. have fallen steadily over this same period. Varying levels of the index of not change. due to varying levels of 000 removal and additions. have been the reasons for the constant level of this index. he stable index level indicates -50.. that 000 prograas have stabilized the supply of food grains available in ce-ercial. domestic nrhets during this time period. tude o__f LOO _L_9___an. Purchase. an__d_ Disposal nggrens in Relation_ to rare Martetipgs__ and H_g__me Consumption g_f Feed 92333“ When Various—- H232... of LOO §_a___les A3 Considered he index of removal. the published index. and the adjusted index shots: in hble ll are precisely the same as those shown in i‘able 10. he index of additions shown in hble ll has been constructed using varying price weights for each type of 000 sale. Commercial donestic sales of food grains are weighted in the index at base weight prices. Out-of. condition files are weighted at 90 per cent of their base weight value. Distributions of wheat under the emergency feed program are valued at the base weight price of corn on the basis of the likely substition of this product for corn. m lL-Iffects of 000 programs on the available supply of food grains when various types of 066 sales are weighted to reflect their impact on available supply Published Index of Index of Index of calendar Index GOO GOO let deusted Year 1947-49 m 100 Removal Addi tion s Change Index (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) 1949 so as.“ 0.91“ .33 as 1960 Bl ll. 36 l. 70 ~10 “’1 1951 7? 2.99 .76 - 2 76 1962 98 21. 93 l. 27 -21 77 1953 96 39. 26 . 58 - ~39 57 19M 92 37. 88 3. 12 .35 5'? 1965 Bl 31. 36 6. 13 -26 55 1956 85 28.99 2.10 .27 58 'lspresents domestic sales during the last six aonths of 1949 only. e061- fetal 060 sales of feed grains in domestic markets have been relatively s-ll during the postwar years considered in this study. he very stall difference between the indexes of additions shown in hble 11 and hble 10 indicates that sales other than conercial donestic sales have been relatively sill during the postwar period. Iron this it would seen that a lumping of all 000 distributions of food grains into one category would not lead to serious errors. However. if out-cf-condition sales of meat continue to grow as they have during 1966 and 1956 it will become in-- creasingly important to consider these distributions as a separate part of the total. mg? 2.2. .c__._I-m. mam. an _2__.91 amazes-2.2 in lation .t_o_ l'arm Narketipgs 35 Food Grains he indexes presented in hble 12 indicate the volume of feed grains involved in 660 loan. purchase. and disposal programs in relation to farm “stings of food grains. he physical quantity of feed grains re- presented W the home consumption component of the index of farm nrketings and home consumption index of food grains is rather lull. herefore. OOO'reaoval and additions are approximately the same proportion of farm marketings as they are of fern aarketings and home consumption. he indexss shewn in em. 12 are slightly higher but are generally the same as those shown in hble 10. hose indexes indicate that 000 removal has been a large portion of total farm sarketings of feed grains during seven out of the eight years considered. comparison of the adjusted index with the published. index indicates that the net inpact of 060 activity has been to lessen the quatity of food grains available in donestic sarhets during the time considered. um lac-Volume of 000 removal from and additions to the available supply ef feed grains during the postwar period in relation to farm sarketings - of food grains Published Index of Index of Index of Calendar Index 006 CCC let Adjusted Iear 1947-99 . 100 Removal Additions Change Index (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) 1949 99 33.50 0. 91" .33 55 1950 91 11.40 1.74 ~10 71 1951 77 3.01 .79 . 2 75 1952 99 21.99 1.29 .21 77 1953 99 39.37 .50 .39 57 1954 91 37.99 3.29 .35 53 1955 90 31.49 5.21 .25 54 .1959 94 29.09 2.91 .27 57 .lepresents domestic sales during the last six months of 1949 only. lamest Golan l—l‘an Incone Situation Washington. 19.6.: U. 9. Depart-est of Agriculture. larch. 19565. p. 9. 001m 3-3—Oomputed from data in appendix using base weights used in published index of farm narketings. column Molunn 2 minus column 3 (rounded to nearest whole umber). Column Holmes 1 minus column 4. he foregoing sections indicate that 600 programs have influenced quantities of feed grains equal to a substantial portion of the total quantity of feed grains represented 19 the published indexes of farm out- put and farm “sting and hose concurrption. here is also an indication that 000 removal be far outweighed 000 additions in almost every year. he fact that there have been substantial additions of rye and rice in -63- certain years is not shown by these indexes due to an aggregation pro- blem. he adjusted indexes. which are measures of the available supply of feed grains with respect to farm output or farm nuketings and hone consumption of feed grains. indicate that the available supply of food grains as relatively low in 1949. rose somewhat during the Korean con- flict. and since that time have been stable at a level below earlier postwar levels. Stability of the available supply of food grains during the past four years has been accomplished by varying the amount of 000 removal to compensate for changes in farm output and farm marketing and home consumption of feed grains. CHAPTER VI CCC COTIUN PROGRAMS CCC price supporting loans have been available to cotton producers continuously from 1933 to date with the exception of the 1936 marketing 1 hese loans may be obtained by cotton producers in three different year. No.3 Probably the most common method of obtaining a loan is by delivering ginned cotton to a warehouse approved by CCC and obtaining a warehouse receipt for the quantity delivered. After the cotton has been classed the producer can obtain a loan through CCC with the warehouse receipt and classification slip serving as collateral for the loan. Members of cooperative marketing associations can obtain loans through their associations. he producer obtains a loan directly from the associ- ation. he association. in turn. uses the documents covering the cotton I as collateral to obtain a loan from CCC. It is also possible for the producer to obtain a loan on farm stored cotton. he farm storage must be approved by the local ASC committee. and the loan is secured by a chattel mortgage. Loan cotton is that cotton upon which the producer has obtained a loan _ 1m M 93 Commodity Credit Corporation Pro rams (Washington. 13.0.: U. S. Department of Agriculture. December. 1953-.5— 2191-199 Programs. Agriculture Infomation 991199119 153. _1__s_§ (Washington. 13.0.: U. 8. Department of Agriculture. 1955). pp. 4-5. -64- -65- froa agencies other than coaperative marketing associations. when the producer delivers his cotton to the marketing association warehouse he loses control of its disposition. In disposing of loan cotton the producer has three altematives cpen to him. He may (I) sell his ”equity“ in the cotton under loan. he equity represents the difference between the amount due on the loan and the amount the producer can receive in the local market. be selling of equity simply involves the signing of the equity transfer on the producer loan statement in the presence of a witness authorised by the county ASC committee. The Inner of the equity not then repay the loan within a specified time poriod. (2) the producer say repay his loan and sell the cotton in the open market. (3) He may choose not to row his loan and allow CCC to take possession of the cotton in pay- Ient of the loan. he fact that producers can sell their equity in loan cotton makes it easier for this cotton to re-enter the available supply than possible when leans lust be repaid by the producers before selling the counodity. Other than this. loans on cotton have the same effect on available supply as on other commodities. Purchase agreements have been available to producers of upland cotton in the postwar period. but rather small quantities have been delivered to 600 as a result of these agreements. Another unique characteristic of the cotton program is the operation of producer pools by CDC. Producer pools are made up of cotton on which loans have not been repaid at the final maturity date. 000 has. at times. placed this cotton in a pool and sold it for the producer's account. each ‘1 .. I'd!‘ -66.- prochicer sharing in the receipts at a rate based on the quantity of cotton contributed to the pool. The effects of these sales on available supply are the same as any other 000 sale or the repayment of an 'old' loan by a producer. Participation by cotton producers in postwar loan and purchase pro- grams was saall prior to the 1948 marketing year.3 he primry reason for this is that cotton prices remained strong during the 1945 through 1947 marketing years. Cotton prices exceeded the support level during most of these three years. In 1948 cotton production rose substantially and cotton prices tended to fall to appronmately the loan level. Under these cir- cumstances cotton producers placed substantial quantities of cotton under 000 loans. with large quantities remaining under loan at the close of the nrketing year. he following sections are concerned with the relation between CCC renoval froa and additions to the available supply of cotton and total fara output and total farm narketings of cotton. Only 000 removal and additions of upland cotton have been measured in this study. Governmental prograas for both American lgptian and extra long staple cotton have bean in operation during the postwar period. However. it is felt that the net effect of these prograas on the available supply of cotton has been relatively small. The plwsical quantity of upland cotton represented by the indexes of removal and additions are shown in Tables 9a through 9d in the appendix. A conversion rate of 500 pounds per bale has been used in aProducers pledged very little cotton for loans during the 1945- 1947 marketing years with a majority of these loans being repaid prior to the c1ose of the marketing year. Quantities pledged are as follows: 1945. 216.000 bales; 19‘6. 146.000 bales. and 1947. 280.000 bales. Cotton. Review 25 Commodity Credit Desperation Programs. gp. ‘c_i_t_.. pp. 18-19. -67- this study.‘ 22 __fiafin‘ffitil Liza my. 9.: 9.9.3.103. he index of 000 removal shown in Table 13 is a measure of 000 re- moval of cotton as a part of the index of total farm output of cotton. The importance of 000 removal has varied considerably during the postwar period. ranging fun 0 to ‘0 percent of the total cotton production. In 1953 the index of total farm output of cotton was equal to 115 and the index of 000 removal equal to 35.07. this would indicate that in index number of so could be used to represent the quantity of cotton produced in 1953 and available for sale in commercial markets. Practically all 000 removal of cotton represented in this index is a result of the loan prom he index of 000 additions shown in Table 13 is a measure of CCC sales of cotton in the domestic market in relation to total farm out- put of cotton. he index was equal to a number greater than 1 in only two of the years considered. i'his indicates that CCC sales of cotton in domestic markets have been vary small during most of the years considered. Only in 1950 were these sales a substantial part of total production. During the 1950 marketing year 000 sold 3.1 million bales of upland cotton in the domestic market. The quantity of cotton sold 1y 000 in the domestic market in 1950 as equal to 31.5 per cent of total farm output of cotton during that year. During both the 1949 and 1950 marketing years 000 sales of cotton were of sufficient magnitude to offset GOO removal and result in a net addition to the available supply. ‘A‘ricultural Statistics. 1955. gp. 933.. p. I: (Sumary). -68.. run 13.400 removal from and additions to the available amply of cotton during the postwar period in relation to total farm output of cotton Published Index of Index of Index of )(arheting Index CCC CCC let Adjusted Year 1947-49 3 100 Removal Addi ti one Change Index (1) (2) (8) (4) (5) 1948 104 26.43 ‘ _ee 78 1949 113 2. 65 4. 47 2 115 1950 70 .02 22.00 22 92 1952 106 12. 88 .01 ~13 93 1953 115 35.07 . 75 -34 81 1954 96 8. 46 . 55 - 8 88 1955 103 42.00 .90 ~41 62 ‘lstinated to be equal to zero. Cources: Column—Mg in rare Production 5d lfficien Washington. 13.0.: o. 3. Department of Agriculture. June. 19555.55”. s-s. Columns Z-Homputed from data in the appendix and base weights used in the published index of farm output. Colun 4—Column 2 minus column 3 (rounded to nearest whole number). Celm Helm 1 minus column 4. hat the change in available supply of cotton as a result of CCC programs has varied in both direction and magnitude is evidenced by the index of net change she‘s: in this 13. During the 1950 marketing year the net effect of 000 programs was to raise the available supply of cotton by an amount equal to 31.3 per cent of cotton production during that year. he reverse of this situation existed in 1953 men CCC reduced the avail- able supply by an amount equl to 30 per cent ef that year's crop. he adJusted index. which represents cotton produced and not removed from available supply by CCC plus CCC sales of cotton in the domestic market. -69- has fluctuated rather widely over the time period considered. From a relatively low level in 1948 this index rose sharply in 1949 and remained relatively high through the 1951 marketing year. During the 1952 through 1955 “ting years the level of this index has tended. downward. indi- cating a lowering of the available supply of cotton in relation to pro- duction. Ehe lower level of this index during the latter portion of the time period considered appears to be due to heavy removal by CCC with practically no sales in the domestic market. 0 £3 E C Loan and Purchase Programs 33 Cotton let-t—i'on Farm Iarketiggs and Home Conmtion 9_i_' Cotton In the published index of farm marketings and home consumption. t" l3 home conmtion of cotton is coneideredito be 0. Therefore, the indexes presented in fable 14. are actually indexes of farm marketings of cotton. he index of 000 removal shown in column 2 of Table 14 is a measure of CCC removal of cotton as a part of total farm marketings of cotton. l’er example. in 1953 the index of fans mrketings of cotton was equal to mm the index of CCC removal to 38.50. from this it would seem that in index number of 85 would be representative of farm mrlnetings of cotton if CCC removal is excluded from the marketincs index. CCC removal was equal to 31 per cent of total farm marketian in 1953. the index of removal for 1950 is equal to a minus 12.38 indicating a net addition to the available supply of cotton. Heavy rcpayments of loans during calendar year 1950 were due to rising cotton prices prior to the takeover date fer the 1949 cotton crop. be outstanding characteristic of the index of CCC additions of cotton. based on the index of farm narketings of cotton, is its extremely -70- low level in all except one of the years considered. This index indicates that domestic CCC sales of cotton have been a very small part of total farm marketinge of cotton during the postwar period. Calendar year 1950 is the one exception to this statement. During that year 000 sold 3.? million bales of upland cotton in the domestic market. These sales were equal to 28 per cent of total farm marketinge during that year. um Ida-CCC removal from and additions to the available supply of cotton during the pest'r period in relation to farm marketings and home consumtion of cotton Published Index of Index of Index of Calendar Index CCC CCC ' Net ‘ Adjusted Year 1947-49 a 100 Removal Additions Change Index (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) 1949 116 8.35 0.42‘ .. s 106 1960 79 -12.28 22.35 35 114 1961 93 3.22 . .66 - 2 90 1962 102 8.44 .02 - s 98 1968 124 38.50 0.00 -29 86 1964 101 6.48 .66 - 9 95 1966 101 29.41 .60 «29 72 1966 99 26.60 .74 ~25 74 ‘Includes sales during the last six months of 1949 only. leurces: Column 1—1949-1954. I. V. Grove and It. I. Cannon. Lew Index lumbe_____r_s of Farm Marketings sand _E____0me Consumption (Washington, 10.0.: 0. 8. Department of Agriculture. Jun. 1956). pp. 16-17. 1955-56 telephone conversation with I. N. Grove. 0. 8. Department of Agriculture. Column z-HOIpntOd from data in the appendix and base weights used in published index of farm marketings and heme consumption. Column Holman 2 minus column 3 (rounded to nearest whole number). Celun Helm 1 minus column 4. he index of net change she-1 in ll'able 14 is a measure of the net impact ef CCC programs on the available supply of cotton in relation to total farm marketings of cotton. The index indicates that this impact has fluctuated widely. but has been negative in all but one year. In 1950 the met impact of CCC programs was to increase the available supply of cotton by an amount equal to 44 per cent of farm marketings of cotton during that year. Ibis abrupt shift in the direction of the flow of cotton between 000 and the "sinus supply came at a time when cotton prices were rising. .i_ ELLE}. reasoning would indicate that such an increase in supply would tend to deen the price rise. lhe adJueted index. which is a measure of farm marketings of cotton. excluding CCC loans and.purchases. plus CCC sales of cotton in the domestic nrhet has tended downward during the time period considered. It is interesting to note that in 1960 the published index of farm.marketings of cotton was at its low'point for the time period considered, but the adjusted index. iiich includes 000 domestic sales. was at a peak. !he downward trend in this index.indicates that CCC activity has tended to limit the available supply of cotton during the latter*part of the time period under consideration. Ihere have been no domestic sales of cotton other than commercial. domestic sales which must be made at 105 per cent of the current loan rate plus reasonable carrying changes. the lack of any other type of domestic distribution is one of the reasons for the generally'low level of domestic sales. In general. it appears that 000 programs have tended to adjust the available supply of cotton to meet changes in demand. l'otal distribution -72- (mill consumption plus smarts) of cotton fell rather steadily from 1950 through 1955.5 Over this same period the adjusted indexes have also marched downnrd rather steadily. this lowering of the adjusted indexes has been accomplished by large scale removal of cotton by CCC to compen- sate for continued high levels of production and marketing. 532 Cotton Situation, (Washington. D. 0.: U. 8. Department of Agriculture. 1' pril. 1957). ram. 16. p. 26. CHLP‘ER VII m TOBACCO PM“ men referring to tobacco it is necessary to recognise that there is a great deal of variety within this comedity classification. Seven nJer kinds of tobacco are defined in price support legislation as being types of the basic co-odity known as tobacco.:l i'hese are: hue-cured. lurley. lire-cured. Dark Air Cured. Virginia Sun-cured. laryland. and cigar tobacco. CCC price support loans have been made to tobacco producers through their cooperative associations since 1936. Although there exists a great variety in'the types of tobacco listed above. the operation of these loan programs have much the same effect on the available supply regardless of the type of tobacco under consideration. Recognizing a certain amount of variation among producing regions the following is a generalized description of how producers obtain a price support loan on tobacce.2"3 Producers who belong to one of the seventeen producer cooperative associations in the United States and Puerte Rice may obtain advances on tobacco at the price support level. he associations. under contract 1 _!_g_____bacce I’ri____c_e m_ and Related Operations Washington. D.C.t U. 8. Department of Agriculture. 1949). 2131‘s. Pe 2e a§_1_'_iculture Information Bulletin _lp_. 135, o . 235.. pp. 5-6. -73.. -74.. with CCC. handle all operations connected with making advances to pro- dmcers. he Operations of these associations are financed by loans from CCC. If the offered price on tobacco sold at auction is below the pub— lished loan rate. the lot is automatically consigned to 'loan". 'me prohcer is then paid for his tobacco at the current loan rate for the grade of tobacco he is selling. The warehouse man who advances the grower the proceeds of the loan is reimbursed by the marketing association with funds borrowed from the CCC. use tobacco that is placed under loan by the association is dried. packed. and held in storage for the account of the association. 'mis temce is mksted over time by the association at prices established Jointly by these associations and 000. he procedure for obtaining a loan on cigar leaf tobacco is much the fine except that cigar leaf is not sold at auction. Producers of cigar leaf deliver their product to warehouses maintained by the marketing associations and receive their advance or loan on the basis of the grade delivered and the published support price of the grade. Purchase agreements have also been made available to tobacco pro- ducers. but little if any tobacco has been supported in this manner. ‘ be importance of CCC price support loans on the available supply of tobacco is pointed out by Johnson in his review of the Burley tobacco Imam-III.4 ....lach year since non-recourse price supporting loans were set up in 1940. a portion of the crop has been subject ‘Glenn 1.. Johnson. "Barley Tobacco Control Programs“. Bulletin 9Q. Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station. University of Kentucky. Lexington. Kentucky. February. 1952. pp. 56-57. -75- to possible diversions from commercial purchases to grower association stocks. the associations having administered the lending operations under federal price support pro- greas. Thus. two quantities are Jointly determined in the auction period. These two quantities are: 1. n» U. 8. season average price received by farmers for burley tobacco 2. The amount of burley tobacco which has to 'go' to associations (i.e. be removed from the market by direct price supporting loans) if the support price is to be attained Another important variable affecting the total available supply of tobacco is the repayments of old loans by these associations and the selling of accumulated stocks obtained in earlier years. The impact of government programs on the available supply of tobacco has been brought about by the two factors described above. That is. by diversion of current production to producer marketing associations. and the subsequent sales of stocks obtained in this fashion. Quantities of tobacco actually becoming the preperty of 000 have been rather insignificant but substantial amounts have been influenced w the loan operations carried on through the grower marketing associ~ ations. Before emining the impact of 000 programs on the available supply of tobacco. some eqlanation of methodology is necessary. The available supply of tobacco is that quantity of tobacco which moves freely in comercial markets with no restrictions as to selling price. It has been argued that tobacco held by coaperative marketing associations is part of the available supply.5 However. this tobacco fails to meet 5Letter from Arthur G. Gonover. Head. Tobacco and Specialty Craps section. Statistical and Historical Research Branch. Agricultural Marketing Service. U. 8. Department of Agriculture. June 27. 1957. This letter is included as pages/7/ and /75 of the appendix. -76- the criterion of available supply as defined in this paper. It is not argued that this tobacco is not available 'at a price“. However. the prices at which various lots of tobacco held by these associations are available are determined at the beginning of the marketing year and there- after resin stable throughout the marketing year. This inflexibility of price places a definite limitation on the availability of this tobacco. In the preceding paragraph the term marketing year was mentioned with respect to tobacco. For all kinds of tobacco except flue-cured the marketing year is from October 1 through September 30. For flue-cured the marketing year is from July 1 through June 30. In this study we have chosen to use the July-June period as the marketing year for all types of tobacco.6 Such a decision is necessary due to the non-availability of data on repayments of loans by type of tobacco. This means that all types of tobacco are treated as a single comedity. The problems of such an aggregation are recognized. However. for this particular study these problems are not so large as they might be in others. In both the index of farm output and the index of farm mar- ketings and home consuption all types of tobacco are treated as a single commodity and weighted at a single price. therefore. in the construction of indexes to relate 000 programs to total farm output or marketings this type of aggregation can not be avoided. This study starts with the 1948 marketing year. It is recognized that 000 programs for tobacco during the postwar period were of importance prior to that time. especially during the 1946 and 1947 marketing years. However. a lack of precise data for these earlier years prevents including “this. .7?- them in this study. Indexes which facilitate a comparison of the magnitude of_CCC loan, purchase. and disposal programs for tobacco with total farm output and farm marketings and home consumption of tobacco are presented in the following sections. The physical quantities of tobacco which are represented by the indexes of removal and additions are shown in Tables 10a through 10c in the appendix. Mggitude 25 _C_(_3_C_ Loan. Purchase, and Disposal Programs for Tobacco in Relation to Total Farm Output 2; Tobacco The index of removal shown in column 2 of Table 15 relates CCC removal to total farm output of tobacco. .A comparison of this index with the published index of farm output of tobacco indicates the importance of 000 removal in relation to total tobacco production. CCC removal has ranged from an index number of minus 3.19 to a plus 10.45. The fact that this index has been negative indicates that repayment of "old" loans has been relatively high in at least one year. In reality the repayment of “old" loans has been relatively important in almost every year considered. In 1948, for example. 204.4 million pounds of tobacco were removed from the avail- able supply by CCC loans. However. during that same year 'old' loans were repaid on 195.2 million pounds of tobacco. This means that net removal of tobacco during the 1948 marketing year was only 9.1 million pounds. Table 10c in the appendix shows the relative importance of loan repayments in other'years. The index of CCC removal is primarily a.measure of the net impact of CCC loan Operations on the available supply of tobacco. Only very small quantities of this tobacco have been delivered to 000. but substantial quantities have remained under loan for several years. - 73 - TLBEE 15.-Magnitude of CCC removal and resulting not change in the avail- able supply of tobacco during the postwar period in relation to the total farm output of tobacco Published Index of Index of Marketing Index CCC Net .AdJusted Year 1947-49 a 100 Removal Change Index (1) (3) (3) (4) 1948 98 0.45 O 98 1949 97 -1.79 2 99 1950 101 -3.19 3 104 1951 115 6.68 - 7 108 1952 112 5.73 — 6 106 1953 102 4.46 - 4 98 1954 111 10.45 ~10 101 1955 112 3.50 - 4 108 Sources: Column l-—C§Egge s in Farm Production and.Efficiencz (Washington. D. 0.: 'U. S. Department of.Agricu1ture. June. 1956). pp. 8—9. Column 2—~Computed from data in the appendix and base weights used in the index of total farm output. Column 3—-Column 2 rounded to the nearest whole number. Column 4-Column 1 minus column 3. The fact that CCC has never become the owner of large quantities of tobacco necessarily limits the quantity of tobacco that can be added to the available supply by CCC sales in the domestic market. There is no available data on domestic sales of tobacco by marketing year. However. data on CCC domestic sales by calendar year from 1949 through 1956 indicate that total sales in the domestic market have been very small in quantity.7 By necessity no index of CCC additions of tobacco by marketing years is shown in Table 15. Hewever. because of the small volume of CCC sales. it 7See Table 10b in the appendix. -79- is felt that this omission is not of great importance. he index of net change shown in Table 15 is simply the index of renoval rounded to the nearest whole number. The index is a measure of the net impact of CCC programs on the available supply of tobacco. This not impact ranged from an increase in available supply equal to 3 per cent of current production to a decrease in available supply equal to 9 per cent of current production. he quantity of current production remaining under CCC loans at the close of the marketing year rose substantially from 1949 through 1955. he index of removal and in this case the index of net change did not rise in the same proportion because of heavy loan repayments during the later years considered. he adJusted index. which is a measure of tobacco produced and not removed from available supply by CCC. has tended to rise during the time period considered. This indicates that CCC activity has not completely offset the rise in tobacco production that has taken place. The average year-to-year percentage change is less in the adJusted index than in the published index of total farm output of tobacco.8 he coefficient of variation is also less in the adjusted index.9 These two tests indicate that CCC programs have tended to dampen changes in the quantity of tobacco available in domestic markets which are associated with changes in tobacco production. , 171, 8Average percentage change - ( ) . Average percentage change for the index of farm output I - is equal to 5. 57 and the adjusted index is equal to 4.14. 9Coefficient of variation (__f_ . 100) is equal to 3.9 for the adjusted index and 6.8 for the published index of farm output of tobacco. - so - Mgggitude of CCC Loan. Purchase. and Disposal Programs for Tobacco in Relation to Farm Marcetigg and Home Consumption“ of Tobacco In the published index of farm marketings and home consumption. home consumption of tobacco is considered to be equal to zero. Therefore. the indexes presented in Table 16 are actually based on an index of farm marketings of tobacco and relate CCC operations to total farm marketings of tobacco. ‘ TABLE 16.-Magnitude of C00 removal from and additions to the available supply of tobacco during the postwar period in relation to farm marketings and home consumption of tobacco Published Index of Index of Index of Calendar Index CCC CCC Net Adjusted Year 1947-49 s 100 Removal Additions Change Index (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) 1949 92 o. 96‘ o - 1 91 1950 98 -3.81 .02 4 102 1951 111 4.17 0 ~ 4 107 1952 104 7.93 0 - 8 96 1953 100 2.49 .01 ~ 2 98 1954 106 6.20 .05 - 6 100 1955 110 16.34 .07 -16 94 1956 103 1.63 0 - 2 101 aIncludes sales during the last six months of 1949 only. Sources: Column 1—-l949-1955. E. W. Grove and.M. F. Cannon. Lew Index.Numbers of Farm.Marketing§ and.Home Consumption (Washington.~ D. C.: U. S. Department of Agriculture. July. 1956). p. 16.1955—56 telephone conversation with Mr. E. V. Grove. U. S. Department of.agricu1ture. Columns 2-3—~Computed from data in the appendix and base weights used in the index of farm marketings and home consumption. Column 4——Column 2 minus column 3(rounded to nearest whole number). Column 5-Column 1 minus column 4. ~81- an. index of removal shown in column 2 of Table 16 is a measure of the net quantity of tobacco removed from available supply by 000. based on the index of farm marketings and home consumption of tobacco. This index is primarily a measure of the net effect of CCC loans on the available apply. It includes both removal by loans and additions as loans are repaid. be index shows that CCC removal has risen substantially from 1949 throw 1955. The sharp drop in CCC removal during 1956 was caused by heavy loan repayments during that year. A comparison of removal with total tare marketings indicates that removal has been equal to from 1 to 15 per cent of the total farm marketings of tobacco during years that re- novel was a postive value. During 1950 the index of removal was negative and equal to 4 per cent of total farm marketings of tobacco. he index of 000 additions shown in Table 16 is a measure of CCC sales of tobacco in the domestic market in relation to total farm mart- ketings of tobacco. he extremely low level of this index indicates that CCC sales of tobacco in the domestic market have been very small during the period considered. Total domestic sales of tobacco by CCC from January 1. 1949 through December 31. 1956. are equal to 8.2 million pounds of tobacco. Largest single year sales were during 1965 when 1.6 million pounds of tobacco were sold by CCC in domestic markets. Even in that year these sales were equal to an index number of only .07 based on the index of tar- marketings and home consumption of tobacco. In relation to either CCC removal or total farm marketings these sales have been an in- significant factor. he index of not change shown in column 4 of Table 16 is a measure -82- of the net effect of CCC operations on the available supply of tobacco in relation to farm marketings of tobacco. Due to the very low level of CCC additions this index is very much like the index of removal and reflects the same movements as that index. be adjusted index shown in Table 16 is a measure of farm marketings of tobacco. excluding that quantity removed by CCC plus CCC sales of tobacco in the domestic market. This index shows somewhat less fluctuation than the published index of farm marketings and home connmption of tobacco. indicating that CCC activities have tended to even the flow of tobacco into domestic nrtets. The level of this index rose sharply from 1949 through 1951 reaching a level of 107 in 1951. Iron this level the index fell to 96 in 1952. here appears to be a slight upward trend in the values of this index from 1953 through 1956. indicating that the supply of tobacco avail- able in domestic mkets tended upward during this period. However. shifts in CCC round largely offset shifts in mitotinge. CCC price support programs for tobacco have tended to stabilise the available supply of tobacco by daupening year-to-year shifts in the avail- ability of production and farm marketings. However. the absolute level of the adjusted indexes. which reflects availability of production and ur- ketings have tended to rise during the period considered. his indicates that 000 action has tended to limit the rise in available supply but has not been able to offset completely the rise in production and marketings. 0mm VIII m POM’I'O PROGRM‘ Price support operations for potatoes have probably drawn lore public criticise than any other price support program. General dissatisfaction with the progree resulted in abandonment of price supports for potatoes after the 1950 marketing year.1 Prior to this tine. potato prices were supported primarily by Issue of purchases and loans.2 Purchase prograas were the principal leans of support used in the 1948-1950 period. Purchases were made at prices calculated to return a given per cent of parity to potato producers. Although these purchases were node at the for: level. at the local market level. and at the terminal aarket level. their effect on the available supply of. potatoes was much the flue. Loane were available to growers and dealers through the 1948 growing season. hereafter this method of support was replaced by direct purchases.3 Both 000 purchases and loans have the effect of reducing the avail- . able supply of potatoes. Substantial quantities of potatoes were purchased 1n this paper the narrating year for potatoes is considered to be July 1 through June 30. 2:. v. or». v. 1.. Sorenson. and v. v. Cochrane. £13 1%“ 2; Govern-ant Pig‘s-ans an _th_g Potato Industg (University of Minnesota. June. 19m. Do a. 31314.. p. 41. -84- by 60G during the 1948-1950 period. The quantity of potatoes placed under loan in this time period was rather small compared with amounts purchased. be large potato price support operations which were carried out during both 1946 and 1947 are not considered in this study. In the following sections indexes are presented which relate the magnitude of (:00 loan and purchase programs for potatoes to total farm output and total farm marketings and home consumption of vegetables. lhe aggregation problems-that are present in these relationships are recognised. However. if 000 removal is to be related to these two pub- lished indexes. these are the only comparisons that are possible. Irish potatoes mine up approximately 24 per cent of the index of farm output of vegetables and 23 per cent of the index of farm marketings and hone consumption of vegetables. Vith these relatively low percentages being represented by potatoes it is very possible that shifts in the other comedities could easily offset shifts caused by potato removal. be physical quantities of potatoes represented by the indexes of removal are shown in fables 14a through 14b in the appendix. Ho indexes of additions are shown because very few of the potatoes removed by CCC re-entered domestic market channels. W; 25 992 Removal _o_f Potatoes in Relation _tg To Earn Oumut 95 Vegetables i'he index of removal shown in Table l? is a measure of 000 removal of potatoes in relation to total farm output of vegetables. Iron the level of this index one might estimate that 000 removal was equal to a substantial portion of total potato production. This was found to be true. when CCC removal by marketing year was compared with total potato production it was found that this removal was equal to 42 per cent in 1948. 82 per cent in 1949, and 35 per cent in 1950.4 2AM 17.-CCC removal of potatoes from 1948-1950 in relation to total farm output of vegetables Published Index of Index of Adjusted Hat-toting Index CCC Net Index Year 1947-49 a 100 Removal Change (1) (2) (3) (4) 1948 10:5 7. 62 -8 95 1949 99 . 4. 60 -5 94 1950 101 6. 68 -6 95 Sources: Column l-Changes _ig Farm Production 225.1. Efficienc (Washington. D. 0.: U. S. Department of Agriculture. June. 1956,. pp. 9-10. Oolunn Mounted from data in the appendix and base weights used in the index of total farm output. Column Holman 2 rounded to the nearest whole number. Oolun d—Column 1 minus column 8. The adjusted index. which is a measure of farm output of vegetables excluding the quantity removed by 000. appears to fluctuate less than the index of farm output of vegetables. Bus could be caused by 600 removal offsetting changes in potato production. which are reflected in the index of total farm output of vegetables. 4Potato production in the United States during 1948-1950 is as follows: 1948, 449,895,000 bushels; 1949, 366.528.000 bushels: 1950, 402.363.” bushels. Ericultural Statistics. 1955. 92. git. n86... Mgeitude 91 CCC Removal of Potatoes in Relation to Total 232 Marketings and .3213. Consumption 2}: Vegetables me index of 000 removal shown in Table 18 is a measure of 000 removal of potatoes in relation to total farm marketing and home consMption of vegetables. A comparison of this index with the published index indicates the importance of this removal as a part of total farm marketings and home consumption of vegetables. me volume of 000 removal of potatoes ranged from 4 to slightly more than 5 per cent of total farm marketings and home consumption of vegetables during the 1949-1951 period. i'he index of net change shown in 'l‘able 18 is equal to the index of removal rounded to the nearest whole number. he adjusted index is a measure of farm marketings and home consumption of vegetables. excluding potatoes removed by 000. The fact that this index in lower than the published index indicates that 000 removal of potatoes was of sufficient magnitude to lower the aggregate supply of vegetables. including potatoes available during the three years considered. __gg Removal 9!; Potatoes _i_n_ Relation _t_g Farm marketings _o_; Vegetables lxamination of the indexes in Table 19 indicates that CCC removal of potatoes during 1949 through 1951 was equal to from 6 to 7 per cent of total fare marketings of vegetables. rho exact relationship between the level of these indexes and 000 removal is relatively difficult to ascertain because of the small percentage of the total index represented by potatoes. However. it does appear that 000 removals during the 1948-1950 marketing years and 1949-1951 calendar years were of sufficient volume to shift the published indicators of total -87.. vegetable output. marketings. and home consumption to somewhat lower levels. i‘ABIl lO.-CCC removal of potatoes during 1949-1951 calendar years in re- lation to far- marketings and home consultiption of vegetables L - Publi shed Index of Index of Calendar Index CCC Net AdJusted Year 1947-49 a 100 Removal Change Index (1) (2) (3) (4) 1949 98 4. 9O -5 93 1950 99 5. 08 .5 94 1951 100 4. 41 4 96 Sources: Column l--D. V. Grove and M. 1. Canon. Lew I_p____dex Numbe_____r_s _o_f ran Harketings and H__o__me Consumption (Washington. D. C.i U. S." Department of Agriculture. _July. 1956)— pp. 17-18. Column Z—Coniputed from data in the appendix and base weights used in the index of farm marketings and home consumption. Column 3—Column 2 rounded to the nearest whole number. Column «lo-«Column 1 minus column 3. mm 19.-CCC removal of potatoes during 1949-1951 calendar years in relation to total farm marketings of vegetables Published Index of Index of Calendar Index CCC Net Adjusted Year 1947-49 : 100 Removal Change Index (1) (2) (3) (4) 1949 99 6.32 -6 93 1950 100 6. 65 -7 93 1951 103 5. 69 -6 97 Sources: Column l--J'arm Ecome Situation (Washington. D. C. i U. S. Department of Agriculture. March. 1957,. p. 9. Colulm 2——Conputed from.data in the appendix and base weights used in the index of fan marketings. Column 3-Coluln 2 rounded to the nearest whole number. Column Holman 1 minus column 3. CHAPTER IX OIL SEED PROGRAMS During the postwar period there have been governmental price support programs in operation for all four of the crops classified as oilseeds in the index of farm output and farm marketings and home consumption. CCC purchases and distributions of tung nuts are not considered in this study because they represent an insignificant part of the index of farm output and farm marketings and home consumption of oilseeds.1 CCC programs for the other three oilseed crOps are of a widely varied nature and warrant separate descriptions. A large variety of price support measures have been used in programs relating to peanuts. These have included rental and benefit payments. acreage allotments. conservation subsidies, marketing quotas, CCC loans, direct governmental purchases, export subsidies andtuo price plans.2 Grower cooperatives have played an important role in the peanut program. the cooperatives served as the agent for price support purchases before 1952 and have acted as a loan agency since that time. Prior to 1952 the cooperatives were authorized to buy peanuts at prices set by the U. S. 1In the base period tung nuts were equal to 0.4 per cent of the index of farm output and farm marketings and home consumption of oilseeds. zBenedict and Stine, g. git” pp. 147—165. ‘89- ~90... Department of.Agriculture. They also disposed of peanuts as directed by the Department. They were paid for services rendered and reimbursed for any losses incurred by selling peanuts below costs. Since 1952 peanut producers have been able to obtain price support through both loans and purchase agreements. Loans on.peanuts may be obtained two ways.8 The producer desiring a price support loan can deliver his peanuts to a coaperative which has entered into a loan agreement with CCC. In delivering his peanuts the producer makes the cooperative his agent to handle and market the peanuts on his behalf or to pledge the peanuts to CCC as security for a loan. The producer relinquishes all claim to the peanuts when he delivers them to the coaperative warehouse. .At this time he is paid the full price support value of the peanuts by the coaperative. Loans are also available on peanuts in approved farm storage. Under this arrangement the producer retains control of the commodity. The pro- ducer may deliver the peanuts to CCC upon maturity of the loan or redeem his loan at any time by repaying accrued interest. Purchase agreements, are also available to producers through coaperatives or directly with CCC. Disposition of stocks obtained by these cooperatives before 1952 were controlled by CCC. Stocks held under loan arrangements are controlled in a somewhat less formal manner, if at all. These cooperatives have repaid loans on rather substantial quantities of peanuts during several of the postwar years. Strong demand for both nuts and oil during the 1945 and 1946 marketing years maintained prices above the support level.4 During the 1947 marketing “gamma Information 3.2.1222. 19.. .1322- 22- an" pp. 6-7. 4The marketing year for peanuts is.August 1 through July 30. For flaxeeed it is July 1 through June 30. and for soybeans October 1 through September 30. year the demand was weakening and COO diverted some peanuts to oil. During the 1948 marketing year the situation was such that if the announced support price was to be maintained. large quantities of peanuts had to be taken over by CCC. From 1948 through 1956 CCC has been an important outlet for peanut producers at a number of times. Governmental programs for flaxseed were primarily intended to stimu- late production prior to the close of World War II. Since that time the price support aspect of these programs has become much more important. Both loans and purchases have been used as a means of support for flaxseed prices. 000 price support Operations for flaxseed were small before the 1948 marketing year. With the removal of price ceilings in 1946, flaxseed prices advanced sharply and remained high through part of the 1948 marketing year. With heavy production and falling demand, CCC loans and purchases became an important outlet for flaxseed producers in 1948. Since 1948 000 loan. purchase, and disposal programs have played a rather important part in determining the quantity of flaxseed available in domestic markets. The first price program for soybeans was started in 1941 not as a price support measure but rather to encourage production.5 Price supports were first used in 1942 in order to maintain the announced price. This was due to more of a transportation problem rather than becauseof a lack of demand. Soybean prices have been supported in the postsar period through use of non-recourse loans and purchase agreements. Total CCC activity in soybeans has not been large because of the high demand in the postwar years with prices generally above the support level.6 6Benedict and Stine. gp. cit... p. 169. 6To compare average price per bushel of soybeans received by farmers and the support price for soybeans see pages 125 and 466 of Agricultural Statis- tics. 1955, o . 93;. In the following sections indexes are presented which relate CCC removal from and additions to the available supply of oilseeds to the total farm output and farm marketings and home consumption of oil seeds. The physical quantities of the individual oilseeds represented by the indexes of removal and additions are shown in Tables 11a through 13 d of the appendix. In constructing these indexes farmers stock peanuts have been converted to shelled equivalent at the rate of .663 pounds of shelled peanuts per pound of farmers' stock peanuts.7 This study covers only the 1948 through 1955 marketing years and the 1949 through 1956 calenn dar years. It is known that CCC Operations, especially in peanuts. were rather large during the 1947 marketing year. The absence of complete data for this earlier period precludes including it in this study. Magnitude _o_f CCC Loan, Purchase. and Disposal Prggrams for Oilseed 2._n_ Relation to Total Farm Output g_f_ Oilseed The index of removal shown in Table 20 is a measure of 030 removal of oilseeds based on the index.of farm output of oilseeds. However this index represents a widely varying mixture of oilseeds during each of the years considered. The index of CCC removal of oilseeds was equal to 20.73 in 1948. The quantity of oilseeds represented by this index number is equal to 19 per cent of total farm output of oilseeds in 1948. Large quantities of all three of the oilseeds being considered were removed by CCC during the 1948 marketing year. naxseed removal was especially high, being equal 7Gonversion Factors and Wei hts and Measures for Agricultural Commodities 5332 Their Products washington, D.G.: U. S. Department of Agriculture, 1957:. - 93 _ to more than 24 million bushels. Soybean removal was also relatively high at 11.3 million bushels. Soybean removal exceeded this level only in 1954 when 15.5 million bushels were removed from the available supply by CCC loans and purchases. TLBDE 20.-Yo1ume of CCC removal from and additions to the available supply of oilseeds during the postwar period in relation to total farm output of oilseeds W Published Index of Index of Index of Marketing Index CCC CCC Net AdJusted Year 1947-49 p 100 Removal Additions Change Index (1) (2) (a) (4) <5) 1948 109 so. 73 _‘ a 8 1949 100 9. 69 10. 50 “1' it: 1950 116 5.43 9.43 4 130 1951 106 3.49 4.49 1 107 1952 104 8.68 .53 -8 101 1953 102 10.45 2.34 -8 94 1954 116 7.95 3.15 _5 111 1955 129 1.77 2.75 1 130 glxact value unknown. Sources: Column 1—-Changes 13 Farm Production and.Efficiency (washington, D.C.: U. S. Department of‘Agriculture. 1956), pp. 8—9. Columns 2-3—~Computed from data in appendix using base weights used in published index of farm output. Column 4n-Column 2 minus column 8 (rounded to nearest whole number). 0011mm 5~—Column 1 mime column 4. In 1949 the index of CCC removal fell to 9.69. Soybean and flaxseed removal fell off sharply during that year, but peanut removal was slightly higher than in 1948. The primary reason for the index of removal remaining relatively high -94... during 1950 and 1951 was the large scale removal of peanuts by CCC during those two years. During the 1950 marketing year CCC removed 547.9 million pounds of peanuts, which is the greatest quantity of peanuts removed during a single year in the time period considered. Flaxseed removal was negative in 1950 and equal to less than a quarter of a million.bushels in 1951. Soybean removal was negative in 1950 and very low during 1951. In 1953 there was an upturn in the index of removal. as removal of all three oil crops rose sharply. During the 1954 marketing year CCC continued to remove rather large quantities of soybeans and flaxseed. However. peanut removal was negative in that year. In 1955 CCC removal was at its lowest ebb for the time period under consideration. Flaxseed removal was very low (82,300 bushels) and soybean removal was negative. Peanut removal was also low but of sufficient volume to cause the index to remain positive. tA comparison of the index of removal of oilseeds with the published index of total farm output of oilseeds indicates the importance of CCC removal in relation to total oilseed production. Removal by CCC loans and.purchases has ranged from 1 to 19 per cent of the total farm output of oilseeds during the time period considered. The index of CCC additions shown in Table 19 is a meausre of CCC oilseed sales in the domestic market based on the index of total farm output of oilseeds. When this index is compared to the published index of total farm output oilseeds. the importance of these sales relative to total oilseed.production can be seen. CCC domestic oilseed sales have been equal to from 2 to 10 per cent of current production during the 1948 through 1955 marketing years. The high level of this index in 1949 through 1950 was caused by the large domestic flaxseed andleanut sales. During the - 95 - 1951 marketing year flaxseed sales xere much lower, but peanut sales remained high. Soybean sales were an important part of CCC domestic oilseed sales only in 1954. Eight million bushels of soybeans were sold in domestic markets by CCC during the 1954 marketing year. .A camparison of the index of additions with the index of removal indicates that CCC sales of oilseeds in domestic markets have been greater than CCC removal of oilseeds in four of the seven years in Which we have data on our sales. The index of net change is a measure of the net impact of CCC loans. purchase, and disposal programs on the available supply of oilseeds. It indicates that these programs have resulted in an increased available supply during four of the eight year considered. The exact value of this index in 1948 is unknown. but it is assumed to be negative. The net impact of CCC Operations on the available supply of oilseeds has ranged from a decrease in available supply equal to 8 per cent of current pro- duction to an increase equal to 3 per cent of current production. The large number of positive values in the index indicates that CCC domestic oilseed sales have been in important factor influencing the available supply of oilseeds during a number of postwar years. The adjusted index is a measure of oilseed production. excluding the quantity removed by CCC loans and purchases, plus CCC domestic oilseed sales. The year-to-year movements in the index have varied in both direc- tion and size. The year-to—year percentage change in this index is greater than the yeahto-year percentage change in the published index of farm output of oilseeds. This appears to be caused by manipulation of CCC inventories to meet wide year-to—year variations in the demand for - 95 - oilseeds. The apparent ability of commercial demand to absorb greater quantities of oilseeds than were being produced in a number of years resulted in 000 selling rather large quantities of oilseeds in domestic markets and accentuating the year~to-year shifts in available supply. The absolute level of this index appears to be rising during the time period under consideration. The level of this index in 1955 indicates that available production was 30 per cent greater in that year than in 1949. A Magnitude_ of CCC Loan. Purchase. and Disposal Programs for Oilseeds in Relation to Farm Marketings —and Home Consumption of Oilseed The index of CCC removal shown in Table 21 is a measure of CCC removal of oilseeds based on the index of farm marketings and home consumption of oilseeds. A.comparison of this index with the published index of farm marketings and home consumption of oilseeds indicates the importance of CCC removal in relation to total farm marketings and home consumption of oilseeds. CCC removal has been equal to from 3 to 16 per cent of the total farm marketings and home consumption of oilseeds from 1949 through 1956. The importance of the individual oilseeds in this index was less varied than in the index.of removal based on total farm output of oilseeds. Examination of the data on CCC removal of oilseeds by calendar year shown in the appendix will give a more complete picture of the individual commodities represented by this index. The index of CCC additions shown in Table 21 is a measure of CCC oilseed sales in domestic markets based on the index.of farm marketings and home consumption. Examination of this index in relation to the published index.of farm marketings and home consumption of oilseeds reveals the imn portance of these sales in relation to total farm marketings and home consumption of oilseeds. CCC domestic oilseed sales were equal to slightly less than 10 per cent of total farm marketings and home consMption of oil- seeds during the 1950 calendar year. Large domestic sales of flaxseed and peanuts account for the high level of the index of additions in that year. Domestic sales of soybeans were of importance only in 1955 when 10.6 million bushels were sold in domestic markets. The level of the index dropped off sharply from 1950 through 1958. The low level of CCC additions during 1953 and 1953 may be partially caused by the low level of CCC stocks of oil crops during those two years.8 The level of this index has risen since 1953 but has not reached the high level it attained in the early 1950's. TABLE 21.~Volume of CCC removal from and additions to the available supply of oilseeds during the postwar period in relation to farm marketings and home consumption of oilseeds J I Publi shed Index of Index of Index of Calendar Index CCC CCC Net Adjusted Year 19 47-49 g 100 Removal Additio ns Change Index (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) 1949 107 14.01 7.193 - 7 100 1950 114 7. 79 11. 60 4 118 19 51 102 5. 59 8. 04 2 104 1952 112 1. 27 2. 45 -— 1 113 19 53 107 17. 58 l. 52 --16 91 1954 101 3. 65 2. 62 - l 100 19 55 146 ll. 61 4. 70 - 7 139 1956 153 12. 28 1. 60 ~11 142 a Represents domestic sales during the last six month of 1949 only. 8llgortm“ of Financial Condition and Qperations _o_f Co ommodi ty Credit Corporation a__s_ of ._I____une so. 1952 and 1953 (Washington. D. 0.: Government Printing Office. 1952 and 1953), Schedule 16. U. S. - 93 - Sources (for Table 21): Column l-1949—1954. E. W. Grove and M. F. Cannon. New Index Numbers 23 Farm Marketingg and Home Consumption (Washington, D.C.: 'U. S. Department of.Agriculture. 1956). p. 16. 1955-1956 telephone conversation with E. W. Grove, Agricultural Marketing Service, Washington. D.C. Column 2—3—-Computed from data in appendix and base weights used in published index of farm marketings and home consumption. Column 4-Column 2 minus column 3 (rounded to nearest whole number). Column 5-Column 1 minus column 4. .1 comparison of this index with the index of CCC removal indicates that CCC additions have been sufficient to totally offset CCC removal in a number of years. CCC additions exceeded CCC removal in three of the eight years considered. This means that CCC programs brought about a net addition to available supply during those three years. The index of net change is a measure of the net impact of CCC pro- grams on the available supply of oilseeds based on the index of farm marketings and home consumption of oilseeds. This index indicates that both CCC removal and additions have had an important part in CCC operations in oil crops. The impact of CCC operations has ranged from a decrease in available supply of oilseeds equal to 15 per cent of current farm marketings and home consumption to an increase equal to 3 per cent of current farm marketings and home consumption of oilseeds. The adjusted index is a measure of farm marketings and home consump- tion of oilseeds, excluding the quantity removed by CCC, plus CCC domestic sales of oilseeds. The general level of this index appears to rise over the 1949-1956 period. with a'very sharp upturn in 1955. Total farm marketings and home consumption of oilseeds rose rather sharply during calendar year 1956, but a high level of CCC removal coupled with a very lou'level of CCC domestic sales restricted the rise of the adjusted index. - 99 a The average year-to-year percentage change in the adjusted index is greater than in the published index of farm marketings and home consumption of oilseeds. This appears to be caused by shifts in the direction of the flow of oilseeds between the available supply and COO. The shifts have tended to accentuate year-to-year shifts in farm marketings and home consumption of oilseeds. Effects of CCC Programs gg_the.Available Supply g-Cilseeds [hen Various Types 2: CCC Sales are Considered CCC has sold large quantities of oilseeds in domestic markets during a number of postwar years. Practically all CCC sales of flaxseed and soy- beans have been made at 105 per cent of the current support price. CCC has sold large quantities of peanuts at less than the current support price. These sales have been primarily to oil processors. In the index of additions shown in Table 22 commercial, domestic sales of oilseeds are weighted at base weight prices. .All other domestic sales of oilseeds by CCC are weighted at 90 per cent of their base weight value. The exact degree to which oilseeds sold at less than the current market price substitute for other oilseeds is unknown. However. there is little reason to believe that these commodities are not a relatively good substitute for oilseeds from other sources. A.comparison of the index of additions in Table 22 with the index of additions in Table 21 indicates that using the system of weighting described above does not change the index of additions to any large extent. Only in 1950 was the change in the index of additions great enough to shift the index of net change and then only by a single index number. This would indicate that CCC dunestic oilseed sales, other than commercial ~ 100 - sales, are of relatively small importance. In total this is true; however, sales of peanuts at less than 105 per cent of the current support price have been a large part of total peanut sales during the postwar period. The adjusted index shown in Table 22 differs from the one shown in Table 21 in only one year—~1950. In that year peanut sales at less than 105 per cent of the current support price were sufficient to cause the index to be lower by 1 point. TABLE 22.éEffects of CCC programs on the available supply of oilseeds when various types of CCC sales are weighted to reflect their impact on avail- able supply Published Index of Index of Index of Calendar Index CCC CCC Net Adfiusted Year 1947-49 a 100 Removal {Additions Change Index (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) 1949 _ 107 14. 01 7.08“ - 7 100 1950 114 7.79 11.25 3 117 1951 102 5.59 7.56 2 104 1952 112 1.27 2.24 1 113 1953 107 17.58 1.49 ~16 91 1954 101 3.65 2.48 -‘1 100 1955 146 11.71 4.64 - 7 139 1956 153 12.28 1.47 -11 1149}l‘*“ a Represents damestic sales during the last six months of 1949 only. Mgnitude 3; CCC Loan. Purchase. and Disposal Programs 33!. Oilseeds :_l_r_i_ Relation _t_g Farm Marketings 2£_Oilseeds Home consumption makes up a very small portion of the total index of farm marketings and home consumption of oilseeds. For this reason the indexes presented in Table 22 are very similar to those presented in Table 20. The level of the indexes of removal and additions are slightly higher indicating that CCC activity is a greater share of farm.marketings of ~ 101 - oilseeds. The index of net change shown in Table 23 indicates that CCC oilseed programs have had a substantial influence on the flow of oilseeds into domestic markets. The fact that this index contains both positive and negative values indicates that CCC programs have both increased and decreased the supply of oilseeds available in domestic markets during the postwar period. TABLE 23.-Folume of CCC removal from and additions to the available supply of oilseeds during the postwar period in relation to farm marketings of oilseeds Published Index of Index of Index of Calendar Index CCC CCC Net Adjusted Year 1947-49 a 100 .Removal .Additions Change Index (1) (2) (8) (4) (5) 1949 108 14. 04 7. so“ - 7 101 1950 114 7.81 11.63 4 118 1951 102 5.61 8.07 2 104 1952 112 1.28 2.46 1 113 1953 107 17.63 1.52 ~16 91 1954 101 3.66 2.62 - 1 100 1955 145 11.74 4.71 - 7 138 1956 152 12.32 1.61 ~11 141 aRepresents domestic sales in the last six months of 1949 only. Sources: Column.1-Farm Income Situation (Washington, D.C.: U. S. Department of.Lgriculture. March, 1956). p. 9. Columns 2-3-Computed from data in appendix using base weights used in.published index of farm marketings Column 4-Column 2 minus column 3 (rounded to nearest whole number). Column 5-«Column 1 minus column 4. The rising level of the adjusted index indicates that greater quantities of oilseeds have entered domestic markets during the latter _102- portion of the period considered. The overall effect of CCC programs on the available supply of oilseeds during the 1948~1956 period appears to have been to adjust available supply to current demand. In 1948 with heavy production and falling demand CCC removed large quantities of oilseeds. With rising demand during the next three years large quantities of CCC stocks of oilseeds re-entered the domestic markets. It appears that this adjustment of the available supply to meet demand continued during the remaining years being considered. CCC programs did not result in a more stable available supply of oilseeds. This is indicated by the wide variation in the adjusted indexes. However. CCC actions may have tended to dampen price fluctuations by adding to supply when demand was strong and lowering the available supply when demand '33 weak. CHAPTER I TEE.AGGREGATE IMPACT OF CCC PROGRAMS In the preceding chapters the volume of CCC removal from and additions to the available supply of the major agricultural commodities involved in price support programs in the postwar period have been examined. In this chapter total CCC removal and total CCC additions will be related to total farm output and total farm marketings and home consumption. Indexes which relate total CCC removal from and additions to the aggregate supply of agricultural products to total farm output, total farm marketings, and total farm marketings to home consumption are presented in the following sections. Lack of data on CCC domestic sales ’ prior to July 1. 1949, places some doubt on the precision of the index numbers representing CCC additions during the 1948 marketing year and the 1949 calendar year. However, the fact that total CCC sales of corn, wheat, cotton, and dairy products were very small before July 1, 1949, leads the author to believe that the aggregate impact of CCC domestic sales prior to that time was not great enough to change the indexes presented in the following tables. - 103 - - 104 - Magnitude CC Loan, Purchase, and Disposal groggams of C in Relation £2 Total Farm Output In Table 24 a group of indexes are presented which relate the volume of CCC removal from and additions to the available supply of agricultural commodities to total farm output. The index of removal shown in Table 24 is a measure of aggregate CCC removal of farm comodities based on the index of total farm output. A comparison of the index of removal with the published index provides an indication of the importance of CCC removal in relation to total farm output. For example, in 1953 the index of total farm output was equal to 108 and the index of CCC removal to 11.29. This means that an index number of 97. based on the index of total farm output, could be used to represent total 1953 farm output that was available for sale to buyers other than 000. The remaining output being removed from the available supply by CCC loans and purchases. The level of the index of CCC removal is determined to a large extent by the level of removal of three commodities-uheat. corn, and cotton. Dairy products and tobacco are also relatively important in determining the level of this index. CCC removal during the 1948 through 1955 marketing years has ranged from 1 to 10 per cent of current production. CCC removal has been equal to approximately 5 per cent or more of total farm output in six of the eight years being considered. Only in 1950 and 1951 was 000 removal substantially less than 5 per cent of current production. fihis indicates that CCC loans and purchases have removed a substantial portion of total agricultural production in every marketing year from 1948-1955 except - 105 — those when the Korean conflict was in progress. Total farm output has been rising rather steadily since 1950. Aggregate 000 removal rose over this same period but by a smaller amount than farm output. EABLE 24.-Volume of CC removal from and additions to the available supply of agricultural commodities during the postwar period in relation to total farm output Published Index of Index of Index of Marketing Index 000 000 Net Adjusted Year 1947.49 3 100 Removal Additions Change Index 1 (2) (3) (4) (5) 1948 104 e. 56 __3 - 9 95 1949 101 4.98 1.20 - 4 97 1950 100 .99 8.38 2 102 1951 103 1.80 1.06 0 103 1952 107 6.25 .47 - 6 101 1953 108 11.29 1.70 ~10 8 1954 108 8.62 1.67 - 7 101 1955 112 10.87 1.32 n 9 103 aEstimated to be very close to zero. Sources: Column l-—Changes 13 Farm Production and Efficiency (Washington, D.C.: U. S. Department of.Agriculture, 1956?. pp. 9-10. Columns 2-8-Computed from data in the appendix and base weights used in the published index of total farm output. Column 4-Column 2 minus column 8 (rounded to nearest whole number). Column 5-—Column 1 minus column 4. The index of additions shown in Table 24 is a measure of total 000 sales in the domestic market based.on the index of total farm output. .A comparison of this index with the published index of farm output indicates the importance of these sales in terms of total farm output. Total 000 domestic sales have been equal to from one—half of l per cent - 106 - to slightly more than 3 per cent of current production during the 1948 through 1955 marketing years. 000 domestic sales were at a peak during the 1950 marketing year. Cotton sales during the 1950 marketing year are an important reason for the index of additions being at the high level it attained in that year. A comparison of the index of additions with the index of removal indicates that CCC sales have been relatively small in relation to CCC removal during a majority of the years considered. Only in 1950 were domestic sales by CCC greater than CCC removal. However, in 1951 these sales were sufficient to cancel CCC removal. The index of net change shown in Table 24 is a measure of the net impact of 000 programs on the available supply of agricultural commodities based on the index of total farm output. This impact has ranged from a decrease in available supply of agricultural commodities equal to 9 per cent of current farm output to an increase in available supply equal to 2 per cent of current production. This index has been negative in six. positive in one, and equal to zero in another of the eight years considered. The wide range of values in this index indicates that CCC programs have had a widely varied effect on the avails--lity of farm output. The pre- sence of both positive and negative values in this index indicates the importance of considering both 000 removal and additions when appraising the effects of 000 programs. The adjusted index in Table 24 is a measure of total farm output, excluding products removed from the available supply by 000 plus 000 donestic dispositions. The average year-to-year percentage change in the ~107— adjusted index is precisely the same as that in the published index. The coefficient of variation is somewhat less in the adjusted index. These tests indicate that CCC programs have not dampened year—to-year shifts in the aggregate supply of agricultural products associated with changes in total farm output, but that the programs have limited the range over which these changes have taken place. The absolute level of the adjusted index appears to be rising. This indicates that diSpite heavy CCC removal, rising farm output is causing the level of the aggregate supply of agricul- tural products available to be sold in commercial markets to rise. Magnitude of CCC Loan, Purchase, and Disposal -.- w“ '— Programs in Relation £§~Tota1 Farm Marketimgs and Home Consumption In Table 25 a group of indexes are presented which relate total CCC removal and additions to total farm marketings and home consumption. 1 comparison of this index with the published index of total farm market- ings and home consumption provides an indication of the importance of total CCC removal in relation to total farm marketings and home consump- tion. Total CCC removal has ranged from 1 to 9 per cent of total farm marketing. and home consumption. CCC removal has been equal to more than 7 per cent of total farm marketings in all but three of the eight years considered. The three exceptions are calendar years 1950-1952. The index of CCC additions is a measure of total CCC sales in domes- tic markets based on the total index of farm marketings and home consump- tion. Total CCC sales of agricultural commodities have been equal to from 1 to 3 per cent of total farm marketings and home consumption during the calendar years 1949 through 1956. CCC domestic sales exceeded CCC - 108 — removal during only one year, that being 1950. CCC domestic sales during 1951 and 1952 were sufficient to substantially offset CCC removal. During the other five years considered total CCC domestic sales have been relative- ly small when compared with total CCC removal. TABLE 25.6701ume of CCC removal from and additions to the available supply of agricultural commodities during the postwar period in relation to total farm marketing and home consumption Published Index of CCC Index of Index of Calendar Index Removal CCC Net ‘Adjusted Year 1947-49 a 100 Additions Change Index (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) 1949 10:3 7. 11 . 39° ..7 96 1950 99 2.26 2.84 1 100 1951 101 1.35 .84 -l 100 1952 104 2.22 1.19 -l 103 1953 108 10.11 .80 ~9 99 1954 109 7.28 1.79 ~5 104 1955 112 8.88 1.35 «8 104 1956 117 7.90 1.15 -7 110 a Represents CCC domestic sales during the last six months of 1949 only. Sources: Column l-1949-1954. E. W. Grove and.M. F. Cannon, 52! Index Numbers 2; Farm Marketingg and.Home Consumption (Washington. D.C.: U. S. Department of.Agriculture, 19567: pp. 17-18. 1955-1956 telephone conversation with E. W. Grove. U. S. Department of.Agriculture. Washington, DOG. Columns 2-3——Computed from data in the appendix.and base weights used in the published index of farm marketings and home consumption. Column 4-Column 2 minus column 8 (rounded to nearest whole number). Column 5-Column 1 minus column 4. The index of net change shown in Table 25 is a measure of the net 1mPact of CCC programs on the available supply of farm products based on —109- the hndex of farm marketings and home consumption. The wide range in the values of this index plus the presence of both positive and negative values indicates that the net impact of CCC programs during the calendar years from 1949 through 1955 has been of a widely varied nature. It has ranged from an increase in the aggregate supply of agricultural products available to meet market demand equal to l per cent of current farm.marketings and home consumption to a decrease equal to 8 per cent of current farm market- ings and home consumption. The adjusted index in Table 25 is a measure of farm marketings and home consumption. excluding agricultural commodities removed from the avail- able supply by CCC. plus CCC domestic sales of agricultural products. The average year-toqyear percentage change in the adjusted index is the same as for the published index of total fanm marketings and home consumption. The coefficient of variation is equal to 5.6 for the published index and 3.8 for the adjusted index. These two tests indicate that the values of the published index are dispersed over a wider range but that yearbto- year shifts are of equal importance in either index. From this it would appear that CCC programs have limited the range over which the aggregate supply of agricultural commodities available to meet market demand has varied during the postwar period. However, these tests also indicate that CCC programs have not lessened yearbto-year changes in the flow of agricultural commodities into that supply available to be sold in domes~ tic markets or consumed on home farms. Magnitude 2: CCC Loan. Purchase, and Disposal Programs in Relation to Total Farm Marketings The home consumption component of the index of farm marketings and - 110 ~ home consumption has become a relatively minor’part of the total index. For this reason a comparison of the volume of C00 programs with total farm marketings shows a set of relationships similar to those presented in the previous section. I Indexes in Table 26 indicate that CCC programs have been an important factor influencing the supply of agricultural commodities available in domes- tic markets during the postwar period. TABLE 26.-Volume of CCC removal from and additions to the available supply of agricultural commodities during the postwar period in relation to total farm marketings Published Index of Index of Index of Calendar Index CCC CCC Net Adjusted Year 1947-49 . 100 Removal Additions Change Index (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) 1949 103 7.70 .423 - 7 96 1950 100 2.45 3.08 1 101 1951 101 1.46 .91 - 1 100 1952 105 2.41 1.29 - l 104 1953 110 10.96 .87 ~10 100 1954 111 7.89 1.94 - 6 105 1955 115 9.62 1.45 - 8 107 1956 118 8.56 1.24 - 7 111 ERepresents CCC domestic sales for last six months of 1949 only. Sources: Column l-Farm Income Situation (Washington, D.C.: U. S. Department of.Agriculture, 19575. p. 9. Columns 2-3-Computed from data in the appendix and base weights used in the published index of farm marketings. Column 4—-Column 2 minus column 3 (rounded to nearest whole number). Column 5——Column 1 minus column 4. The index of removal shown in column 2 of Table 26 is a measure of ~ 111 - CCC removal based on the index of total farm marketings. This removal has been equal to from 1 to 10 per cent of total farm marketings during the calendar years from 1949 through 1356. The index of CCC additions shown in Table 26 is a measure of CCC domestic sales in relation to total farm marketings. From the level of this index it would appear that CCC sales have not been a large part of total farm marketings during a majority of the years considered. Yet in 1950 CCC sold a quantity of agricultural commodities equal to 3 per cent of total farm marketings. Total CCC domestic sales have been equal to from 1 to 3 per cent of current farm marketings during the calendar years from 1949 through 1956. The fact that CCC domestic sales have been equal to a significant part of total farm marketings indicates that these sales are important factors to consider when evaluating the impact of government programs on.American agriculture. The index of net change shown in Table 26 is a measure of the net change in the available supply of farm products as a result of CCC programs based on the index of total farm marketings. The net impact of CCC programs during the calendar years from 1949 through .1956 has ranged from an in- crease in available supply equal to 1 per cent of current farm marketings. to a reduction in available supply equal to 9 per cent of current farm marketings. These values indicate that CCC programs have exerted consider- able influence on the flow of agricultural products into domestic markets. The adjusted index shown in Table 26 is a measure of farm marketings excluding those quantities removed from supply by CCC plus CCC sales in the domestic market. The average year-to—year percentage change in this index ..112... is equal to 3.6 as compared to 2.8 for the published index. The coef- ficient of variation is 4.61 for the adjusted index and 6.04 for the published index. These two tests indicate that 033 programs may have accentuated year-to-year shifts in available supply while limiting the range over which these shifts occurred. From these three comparisons it would appear that CCC programs have tended to limit the range over which the aggregate supply of agricultural commodities available to be sold in commercial markets or consumed on home farms has varied in the 1948 through 1956 period. It appears that CCC programs have not appreciably decreased year-to-year shifts in the available supply of agricultural commodities. There is some indication. given that CCC Operations may have accentuated year-toqyear variations in available 8Upply. In all three of the adjusted indexes the general trend appears to be upward. This indicates that despite large scale removal Operations CCC programs have not completely offset the rising levels of farm output, farm marketings, and farm marketings and home consumption. CHAPTER XI ESTIMATES OF INCOME TRANSFER Government loan and purchase programs have been the primary means of supporting farm prices during the postwar period. Operation of these programs has generally resulted in a lower aggregate supply of agricultural commodities available to meet market demand in a given year than the available supply which would have existed had these programs not been in operation. However, in at least one year these programs have had the effect of raising the available supply of agricultural products. These shifts in the available supply of agricultural commodities have undoubted- ly caused agricultural prices to be somewhat different than they would have been had agricultural producers marketed their entir production in commercial markets. Changing of price levels in commercial markets re- sults in consumers paying either more or less for agricultural commodities than would have occurred had governmental programs been absent. Changes in farm income as a result of these price changes constitute an income transfer between the farm and non-farm sector of the economy. The estimates of income transfer presented in the following tables are based on two assumptions: (1) That agricultural producers would have marketed the same quantities of agricultural products within each year considered with or without CCC programs in operation, and (2) that - 113 ~ - 114 ~ the coefficient of price flexibility of demand for agricultural pro- duction is equal to four.1 With these assumptions plus the percentage change2 in available supply resulting from CCC programs, a first approxi- mation of income transfer as a result of these programs is presented in Tables 27 and 28. The assumption of an equal quantity of agricultural products with or without CCC programs means that the percentage change in price caused by changes in available supply is also the percentage in income. The estimate of income transfer in Table 27 is based on (1) the percentage change in available supply of total farm output. and (2) rea- lized gross farm income excluding government payments and including changes in farm inventories. The percentage change in the available supply is determined by dividing the index of net change based on the index of farm output by the index of total farm output. If the assumptions are realistic it is evident that CCC programs have resulted in rather sizable income transfers between the farm and non-farm sectors or the economy. The income transfer figures are not . cost to the government, but rather they are the difference in value of farm output resulting from changes in the available supply as a result of CCC programs. During all years except 1950 this income transfer has been from the non-farm to the farm sector of the economy; However, in 1950 1mm: coefficient of price flexibility of demand 13 the reciprocal of an estimated price elasticity of demand for total farm output of .25. 2Percentage change in supply is obtained by dividing the index of net change by the published index upon which it is based. Indexes of net change resulting from CCC programs based on the index of total farm output, total farm marketings, and total farm marketings and home consumption are pre— sented in the previous chapter. - 115 ~ large CCC domestic sales resulted in an increase in the available supply of agricultural commodities. we have estimated that these sales caused market prices to be lower by an amount sufficient to lower gross farm income by 2,614.4 million dollars. This means that these sales limited the rise in farm prices to an extent that the value of farm output was reduced by 2,614.4 million dollars. This would amount to an income trans— fer from the farm to the non-farm sector equal to that amount. TABLE 27,-Estimated income transfer as a result of CCC programs based on changes in the availability of farm output Total Gross Per cent Change Per cent Change Transfer of in- Farm Incomel in‘Available in Income come from non- Calendar Million Dollars Supply farm to farm sector Year (1) (2) (:3) Million Dollars (4) 1948 36,081 ~8.6 34.4 12,4ll.8 1949 30,589 -3.9 15.6 4,771.8 1950 32,681 2.0 - 8.0 - 2,614.4 1951 38,084 0.0 0.0 0.0 1952 37,821 -5.6 22.4 8,859.9 1958 34,296 -9.2 36.8 12,620.9 1954 33,672 -6.4 25.6 8,620.0 1955 33,050 «8.0 32.0 10,576.0 1Excluding government payments but including the net change in farm inventories. ' Sources: Column l-fighg Farm Income Situation (washington, D.C.: U. S. Department of.Agriculture, July, 1956), p. 19. Column Z-Computed from data in Chapter X of this thesis. Column 3-Column 2 multiplied by the coefficient of price flexi- bility of demand. Column 4-—Column 1 multiplied by column 3. - 116 - In 1953 CCC programs reduced the available supply of agricultural commodities by an amount equal to 9.2 per cent of current production. Lowering available supply by this amount has been estimated to raise the value of total farm output by 12,620.9 million dollars. This rise in the value of farm output due to CCC programs can be thought of as an income transfer from the non-farm to the farm sector of the economy. In Table 28 we have presented estimates of income transfer based on the percentage change in available supply as a result of CCC programs in relation to total farm marketings. The estimates of income transfer in Table 27 and Table 28 differ widely because of the different time periods over which the change in supply is measured. TABLE 28.-Estimated income transfer as a result of CCC programs based on changes in the availability of farm marketings Transfer of Cash Receipts Income from Non-farm from Marketings1 Per cent change Per cent change to Farm Sector Calendar Million Dollars in available supply in Income Million Dollars Year (1) (2) (3) (4) 1949 27,864 «6.7 26.8 7,467.5 1950 28,405 1.0 - 4.0 - 1,136.2 1951 32,909 - .9 3.6 1,184.7 1952 32,538 - .9 3.6 1,171.3 1953 31,168 -9.0 36.0 11,220.8 1954 29,714 ~5.4 21.6 - 6,418.2 1955 29,264 ~6.9 27.6 8,078.8 1956 29,999 -5.9 23.6 7,079.7 1Excluding government payments. Sources: Column 1-The Farm Income Situation (Washington, D.C.: U. S. Department of,Agriculture, July, 19565, p. 28. Column 2-—Computed from data shown in chapter I of this thesis. — ll7 - Column 3-Column 2 multiplied by the coefficient of price flexi- bility of demand. Column 4-Column multiplied by column 3. The income transfer figures in Table 28 are estimates of the difference in the value of farm marketings resulting from the Operation of CCC pro~ grams from 1949 through.l956. During each year except 1950 CCC programs lowered the available supply of farm products in domestic markets. In 1956 CCC programs lowered the available supply of agricultural commodities by an amount equal to 5.9 per cent of current farm marketings. With a coefficient of price flexibility of demand of 4, this would mean that farm prices would have been lower by 23.6 per cent had the quantity removed by CCC been sold in commercial markets. Under these circumstances the value of farm marketing would have been lower by 7,079.7 million dollars. The accuracy of these estimates of income transfer hinge rather heavily on the degree of realism in the two assumptions set forth. If they are relatively accurate CCC programs have resulted in some rather sizeable income transfers between the farm and non-farm sectors. CHAPTER XII LALARY AND CONCLUSIONS To determine the effects of CCC programs on the domestically available supply of major agricultural commodities involved in price support programs two factors have been considered: (1) removal from the domestically available supply of agricultural commodities by CCC loans and purchase programs, and (2) additions to that supply through CCC domestic disposal progrmns. The fact that CCC programs have had a significant impact on the available supply of various agricultural commodities has been pointed out in various parts of this study. The exact'nature of this impact has varied from year to year and from commodity to commodity within a given year. Institutional factors surrounding the individual commodity programs appear to have had an important influence on how CCC programs have affected the available supply of the individual commodities. With commodities such as cotton, for which no domestic sales have been made at less than 105 per cent of the current support price, very small amounts of the commodity removed by CCC have re-entered domestic market channels except during periods of rising prices. For commodities involved in domestic donation programs such as dairy products. rather substantial quantities have re—entered the domestic market at various times including times when prices were falling. This is also the case with commodities which have - 118 a ~ 119 - been sold as out-of-condition. These sales have been made during times of both rising and falling prices. Outuof-condition sales of corn repre- sent a significant part of total domestic corn sales; Indexes based on the published indexes of farm output, farm marketings, and farm marketings and home consumption have been used in comparing the volume of CCC loan, purchase. and disposal programs with total farm out~ put. farm marketings. and farm marketings and home consumption. CCC programs have had a net effect on the available supply of individual commodities ranging from a net addition equal to 31 per cent of current production to a reduction equal to 40 per cent of current production. It so happens that these extreme values both apply to cotton, but very large percentage changes have also occurred in other commodities and commodity groups. The net effects of these programs on the aggregate supply of agricultural commodities have ranged from an increase equal to 2 per cent of current production to a decrease equal to 9 per cent of current pro- duction. The net effect of these programs in relation to farm marketing and farm marketings and home consumption are equal to slightly higher percentages of the total due to the lesser quantities involved in these totals. The fact that these programs have raised the available supply of individual agricultural commodities in a number of years and the aggregate available supply in 1950 indicates that CCC sales in domestic markets must be considered if one is to fully evaluate these effects of CCC programs on the available supply of agricultural products during the postwar period. The effects of CCC programs on year-to-year shifts in the available -120— supply of agricultural products appears to vary from commodity to commodity. With some commodities such as food grains, feed grains, and dairy products CCC programs have tended to dampen year-to-yeer shifts in the domestically available supply associated with changes in the level of production or marketings. with other crops, notably oilseeds, these programs appear to have added to the year-toqyear variations in available supply. In the aggregate it appears that CCC programs did not reduce year-to-year variations in the available supply associated with changing levels of production and may have accentuated shifts in the quantity of agricultural products entering domestic markets. The range over which the availability of individual cemmodities has varied appears to have been limited by CCC programs. In most instances these programs have tended to limit the rise in availability associated with rising levels of production and marketings. However, there have been years when CCC domestic sales held the available supply above the level it would have attained had these sales not taken place. In a general sense it appears that these programs have tended to limit the rise in the available supply of agricultural products, but have not been able to offset completely rising levels of farm output and marketings. In light of the fact that CCC removal and additions have been equal to rather large parts of the published indexes. it would seem that the adjusted indexes developed in this study might be more relevant measures if one is concerned with production available to be sold in commercial markets or farm marketings to buyers other than CCC. It would seem that these indexes provide a more accurate picture of the quantity of farm production available to meet market demand or the quantity of agricultural ~121- commodities entering domestic markets. In weighting CCC domestic distributions into indexes of additions two different methods were used. In one set of indexes all domestic distri~ butions are weighted equally. In another set additions were weighted to reflect their impact on the available supply of the commodity distributed. In most instances it was found that such a weighting system did not change the indexes appreciably. However. for dairy products, in which domestic donations have played an important part in total domestic distributions. such a weighting system results in significantly different indexes of additions. The fact that use of such a weishting system did not radi- cally shift the indexes of additions does not indicate that CCC sales, other than commercial sales, are unimportant, but rather it Shows that in the Judgment of the author there is very little difference in the impact of commercial sales and out-of—condition sales on the available supply of the commodity being sold. CCC programs exist primarily to maintain the income level of the farm sector of the economy. These programs necessarily result in an income transfer from the non-farm sector of the economy. This transfer results from CCC programs holding farm prices above their equilibrium level.by restricting the available supply of agricultural commodities.1 However. in at least one year 000 programs resulted in a greater available supply of agricultural commodities. ‘Under these circumstances farm prices were held beIOV'their equilibrium level. The exact amount of income transferred 1We use the term equilibrium price to mean the price that would have existed had agricultural producers marketed the same quantity of agricultural products but with 000 programs not in Operation. u 122 - between the farm and non-farm sectors as a result of these programs is not known. However, estimates based on changes in available supply as measured in this study indicate that this income transfer has very likely been substantial in a number of postwar years. Relationships which have been examined in this paper far from exhaust the list which need to be examined when evaluating CCC programs. I shall not attempt to list the numerous research projects which appear to be needed to evaluate completely present and past farm policy in the United States. However, it is hoped that information developed in this study will prove useful in performing objective evaluations of CCC programs as they have operated in the postwar period. BIBLIOGRAPHY Books Agricultural Statistics. 1955. Washington. D.C.: United States Government Printing Office. 1956. Benedict. Hurray. and Stine. Oscar. The Aggiculturaj: Commodity Programs. New York: The Twentieth Century Fund. 1956. Groxton. 1'. 3.. and Cowden. D. J. Applied General Statistics. New York: Prentice-Hall. Inc" 1955. Fisher. I. The Making_ of _I_____ndex Numbers. Cambridge. Massachusetts: Houghton Mifflin 00.. 1927. Schickele. Rainer. Agricultural Policy. New York: McGraw—Hill Book Company, Inc., 1954. Bulletins Anonymous. Chapges i3 Farm Production and Efficiency. Washington. D.C.: U. 8. Department of Agriculture. 1956. Anonymous. Compilation of Statutes Beletirgg to Soil Conservation. Marketing 933th and Allotments, Soil Bank. CrOp Insurance. Sugar Payments and 930 tas. P_____rice Support. Commodity Credit Corporation and Related Statutes. Aggcultural Handbook No. 113. Washington. D. 0.: U. S. Department of Agriculture. 195l. Anonymous. Conversion Factors and Weights ap__d Measures _f____or Agricultural Commodities and Their Products. Washington. D. C.:—— U. S. Department of Agriculture, 1952. Anonymous. Co____r_n_ Price-Support Loan Operations. 1933-l_9_'__52. Washington, D.C.: U. S. Department of Agriculture. 1953. Anonymous. Pric____e_ Pro rogram s, Agriculture Information Bulletin No. _l_.___:35. Washington, ‘ D. 6.: U. S. Department of Agriculture, 1955. Anonymous. Tobacco Price Support and Related Qperation. 1986-1949. Washington. D.O.: U. S. Department of Agriculture. 1949. Anonymous. Wheat Stabilization Activities. Washington, D.C.: U. S. Depart- ment of Agriculture. 1955. -123- f a Proker. Rudolph. and Hardin. Clifford, m Producers for Pat and Solids Np_t_ Pat _i_n_____ Milk. University of Wisconsin: 1942. Gray. R. w.. Sorrenson. 7.1... and Cochrane. w. W. The Impact o__f_ Government Program app file Potato Industgy. University of Minnesota. 1954. Grove. 3. V.. and Cannon. M. 1'. New Index Numbers p_f_ Farm Marketings and R_g___me Consumption. Washington. D.C.: U. S. Department of Agriculture. 1956. Johnson. Glenn 1.. Burley Tobacco Contrgl. Programs. University of Kentucky. 1952. Reports Commodity Stabilization Service. U. S. Department of Agriculture. Report _o_f Financial Condition and Operations. Commodity Credit Corporation 2..” of June _32. 1947 through December §__l. _l______956. Washington. D.C.: U. S. Government Printing Office. 1947-1957. Articles and Periodi cal 3 Anonymous. Cotton Situation. April. 1957. Anonymous. Dairy Situation. May. 1949. Anonymous. Daigz Situation. March. 1957. Frish. Ragnar. I'1'he Problem of Index Numbers." Econometrica. IV (1936) 1-38. Leontief, V. "Composite Commodities and the Problem of Index Numbers". Econometrica. :17 (1936) 39-59. Unpubli shed Mat 9 rial 8 Barton. G. T. . at 51;. Manuscript of Statistical Handbook being prepared by the Agricultural Marketing and Research Services. U. S. Department of Agriculture. Washington. D. C. Cromarty. William A. “Economic Structure in American Agriculture.“ Un- published Ph. D. dissertation. Michigan State University. 1957. l'oote. Richard J. “Price Elasticities of Demand for Non-Durable Goods.‘I Paper presented at a conference sponsored by the National Bureau of Economic Research. New York. New York. October 21-22. 1955. APPEND I CE S APPENDIX A ...... I as mm. H H mm am. a as... a «.ma 0.» H.m scavengednaaud nouosnomooo Haaouusnuoaan as neuouunsua m ..m a .3 a. :3 “II I!” H MHIm. H cease toque 39» 0393th a .3 5 4H s ..n II: 2093 .n .m b .m mm .0." Ho ..v m own n .3” 0 on 0.300309 30.63 533233 ... . E .IH a: .fl. .3... .mm 93.. .fl. ..wfl .3 .3: .fi .3: .fl. ....mm mom»... mmm." 32.. nmmd mood Hum." 82” 90H 3H no» pgaogwor 83-82 :8.» 3338 an Sagan 5:3 no .833223 coonfia a 25 on .Abmma .nohdx .onflugouhM4 Ho «sandman .m .b «econ .aovwdanudtv dogmas—«m Nmnon “condom u a 1 3...: 3.3 5.3 32 i been 0.8” «.03 32 980 Adam «.an 33 v.5...“ . 0.8... «.8» ES 93 a.» ”.3 some 0.8 o. m. 83 e48 €02 SSH 82 name new man 33 35a 8:3: 35S .3335 350a .3335 .8.» ”as ha 8.38 .833 needed—o a.» «on 3:34 3313.3 330» nausea .8. 33.08." base we eons—Adana 000...!" a - 126 - ado» «Jam 32: use PM a6 ad»: I 33 Base mess: 0.9.“ add «.3 m. v.8 I amazon $62 «.8 «a: flea “A a; «.8. 3:38 I I I 33239.33 38 PMS m6: «.2. MUM I I a.» I awn-son v né. 0.8 can 32.2.8 3.? :03on $3338 I I I H H H .5 .. .. a 143 .3: ”kn HII. I I I we 333” a ‘8 o 3 H4. continua: 339:3on 33:33am on «IRONOEB I m6 I n. I m. 92E. I...“ nods. tonne geese—condom «d o... n. I I I I I . .293 e ..n a .m an .8 «6 H .H a g. a .9... 322.8 «.066. Hick—CHICO scone unudonb mem 0.02.. odd" «63 HI! who..." use” BB 33 398 ... .moa n .03 « £3 H .3 I v .9. 338.— 0..an A. .93 .38” Com «.3. «$3 or; mos-.ss“ I I I .aozgnta 38 no.8 .35 p.03 ”Mm I I 0.5 I . .393.— .. fee «.2. ...on 332.8 «0: flOdflOOm .flflOfivdfla in as... a. I I... HI! HII H 83%»3354 383.» on «.2... v.3 5.8. 13 as: .u .p 8 .fl. .wlm .fl and... .Mm ..wlx .fl. «mm. .mm ..Humm .fl. ..mm ..plm .fllx .fl. 4mm 82 82 $2 32 «02 82 Sad $3 I: asan-flog? “356m 83:3 H.« .233 3338.. $333.5 .««3 .3 3.34 «3.3 .33 32:3 .3 83.0 Ihdnwu you douoanaaoo «up «was noun: a“ 000 «a «doc «muono «gm «awash mo «oupaanddv «ouaaounw .ovqson aoaaaaa «.0 .chbad« «odsaoaHH «.9; «.««« «.«3 «.«3 «.«« «.«8 «.3« «.«3 ~33 32¢ H ««.« « .««« o .««« « .«3 « .o« «.«3 o .H«« « 63 «383 K.....«3 « .«« «.««« «.3 «.«« «.3 «.3 «.3 mudvooiofi I I I I I I 3033233 «38 «. a. I I I I I ««.« «. a. a. I I «9383 .«|.mo« «.««« «.«3 MM... I «.«« «.2. I 383 « «.2. «.«« «.3 «.3 3:38 «0H0 nonvoom “33.3309. 3. «ml 3. «.« «.« I I I «:4 .« .p «a . «p.33 «.« mm. .«hm NM. «I «I.|«.H «« 838m 3 m «.«... «.3 «.3 Snags-323 1. naauduonooo Huaoaudnuoann «a . ”uuouuqaua «.«... «.«b «.«3 .«.....«.« m...o.« «.«« 3.3 «B3 .38 32¢. 33833853 «.8 «.8 «.« «.« «.« I «.35 «.fi «.3 «.«B «.« «.5 «.3 «.3 I «on» «1:5 .3.— «34 «.3 «.« 3.0 «.3 «.9 «.8 «335:8 «in: «3 «3330.09 ..oduu gauche-loo coma noon vnma moau «can HDQH coma uvo H liaH 32w «38.x. duuudan60IPH nunafl omm.8m.oam aqua 60.7 new. mom . an 0.3 .mom.no coma nutmmoimd 3063.3..." 563.8 93.3.5.9. 3.2" «3335 37:33 And-nanny Acacia—5 an.» .7523.— Nada-ado undo." No 332-39»: .3333 coo can undo." 3 again-n 5 000 3 3% van own-Ac ooh 23.33 53830 3.30.5.5 595.3» “.833. £335 30792 .58» .3338 an 3.8 no its: Sonia a .mm ..H .982 £98: ...—£35.34 no 9853.5" .u 6 .65 533285 83558 fig 38:8 £33» 153.3 3 30.9mm .ms— 3 23:8 35$ 82:... H6 .oufioflm 65333.3 7:3 3 3.38 load: Add: b3 «canon no c.2309 3.3:. n6 and 0.0vo .236vo no cannon a033- n.o nod—53$ .38...» 83 a! .33.. no 9:3 .8132 .818 .323 P: .m .p 3 .8388 33330 ~128- 691: «3.3 33.30 cannon “33.3. H..." no handshake 3.3.3de .3 330% at: 3333‘. cm: Qvaoom “Odd.” IflOHfldflOfl Odvnflaod flOgHOQHN .uvgom «33.36 $.00 .3023 35538an a «129—. «00.02.60 03.8-13 unfingfim 80:36.8 .3536...“ ¢0H.§.o« 30.6.3.0“ 9.3.5.3.3 90.810 31.8023“ $038.00 .33" 5.8%.: nuc‘uoKH 80." AD" :3 23.3- a... p.363; 28.3..» 3.33% “Haunt-5v 7.7.133 50.35.05 “anon-8v Anus-3v no.7- uodun node- 003 and! coon 8o 38. 8.. .g .m .39...— 3283 .8822.— 3am Audi-13v Anna—03v hack and! O 0? 38:0 «3.3 .303 0.33.8.0 Inelado .gouolloo 82-83 ...!» 32:8 3 9.8 no .38 8?..." a $me .8 uzfloomhsauo 3.3...” 22...ka .u .p to... 333%.: 8:8 no 333.35 as. 833.8 7.33: no flflolm 2: 5 3.32.3 33 .3... 339.8 .898 mood . an henna 00 0.30.3 «don—.80 30.53.00» 000.306» 2.0.30.3» coinage—u. coon 03.0.3.3.» 30.03.00 30.08.03 9.0.30.3. 30." 80.30.80 03.08.00 I 30.35.05 03.5.0.0... 33 30.35.00» 08.08.03 0.8.08.0: 50.35.00 no: 03.5.0.3 ... 00130.5 I $908.0 000.3 N00." 30600.3 3.13.00 ... 05.45.00 «3.000; .80..” “33.83 A3335 A3333 A5333 .8.» Eel-u 32333.5 283" no undo-innu- 33.70 000 ca: 233.. «a a; 3 000 3 330.30 .8.- 3 can 03:33 3.3130 . 323930 095.23 3.3.33 9:83 gag—00A a -130- «538.8» «3.83.3 5.63.. «8.3.12 33 Anna—1:3 Auden-s3 non-£35 _ ...—21.5 Auden-93 .3.» 3.30M»...— dnrogou :33 39 .30» «3.3.3: .3.» 3:33. .3.» 3:85.... 03 an: no «355 33 no 330 a «a on. no 3nd. 2? an cacao 23 ad and..." I: as nail-ohm: «flag-ado 330a he «an: 5 cannon—E A385 3. 3.38 con 3 3.253. So .3 3.33 mono £8930 no.3 3933 A80 «dong .8 2385 no 9335 no $358 é Bunéou ..udoh 30% 3 as no aural...— OOOIoom a 6&3; ins-noes .896 bailoo .338 3.3 .28: B 1533!. .833 .38 82:8 mafifiaid «3.02.6 3068.9 Suing“. I... «8.62.3 «2.63:: 32 0363.3” 0.8.ommha Because 2563.3 3...» «358.8 39.80.» 32 «3.83.8 II 89.2».3 90.3.32.” amnesia ”8.8043 «368.3 33 89.0563 ....l $3.236” 2.5.80.3 39E.» v8.9.9.9 3m.§o.$ 33 2H.§.$« mafia—oi. ”3.80.3“ Bios --§.§.a3 «can .3333 “3338 53335 73.35 A5335 “£3.89 A5333 .3.» OQH‘ coal. and... ...—”l. ...—”l. 6.0% .0? ...—ud- :03 So any o3 ..H .m 983.- 3:38 gel 83:38 3:28... 3% £9.58 .gfioloo 5.: ~131— «3.0.3.3 ,ooo.bma.§:.uao.vm H.233; 05.35.: 32.. “3335 6:335 A3333 A3333 «anon-.95 6:335 “Easily .30» :7. no.7- oodl sodo- oodoo doom :7. no.7- 3:3 000 ion 8... 3H .m «3&3 ode-o5 goo. 33333 3:08... . aloe Inigo 27.3.3.8 33:33 £8» 53.3.. 3 88 no 3?- 8».qu a . 3 .8 ago?» nous—5 32 .omlonu» .253 233.8 ago-838 .u .p. “.06 .asgiv . .83.... «8 8388c 7385.— uo a a: 5 33%.” 33 .s.: 339.8 3238 3...Ev.§ H «3.318« .8388 ”3&8... 33 35.568 II «3.35.5.5 Bnébio 0843.2 32 Soifiafi 33606.8 o3.$o.8 3....«85 83 «8.93.3»... a9.5...m moimaogim 8.398.: E696 23 0362.6 . .. “8.5.96 98.8 82 50...”..5. .. 3.3km." amass)». 9.8.8.3 50.3 83 o3.«8.m.fi 25.323» 5.8%. $8.8... 32 33:5 633:5 5:333 .5335 .3333 a...» .5233. ago-.8 23o." 3o ado» gosh-I «do» 3.3.8.3. pooh US$03.31 80 non no ago-hoe“ on» no oooao .5 no 0.5 no oooao on» an ooodo 33 on auto." on» no noon-louv- go ado gluon «o ado-bun 3 3.3935 5935 up «.838 So 8 3.35%... 08 h 3.33. mono 2.0.»qu mono «goo no.3 3.5.. «a 235.5 no 5.39.5 no #335 - I I'm {IIII’ 33.3 a nEme .. 39305 ... mmoimm 5.3.3 .83 30.85.07 3n.amm.¢.n1 .9353.» 03.03 8m." 30.0.3.3 ana.omo.p.n mmNKObJ www.mmbfi 3m." “$3.5. Anaqfiamv “£3.53 A3335 .8» H6580." madcap-ado undo." no 3.8808»: «35.70 80 can .93..” a." «523m 3 coo 3 3.33.99 can 03 non don-5.7.0 3.3330 ...-.303“ .3993» 1.3.3 93830 $3.32 ......» 382.. B :3 no 3.83....» fig 6.... £39.33... 533338 3898 mason-goo 523.3 can? .73: hp 6053...“!- uuowaoa :3 .0938 . m. $930.3: {3.35.0 Sofadu n$.nmm.§ ....l Hmm.mm¢.mu $43... 83 _ www.moméfi Qumfié «3.62.8 30.2.13 www.ms $049.5 8.....8J 32 «8.3%.»... II ASKS...» Hm...oS.~8 «$.83.» n8.§u.3a 3108.3 32 «8.08.2. I 8.230.: ”3.39% Ed... 8053.5 8n.mnm.3 ~an m8.sm.8H ll 8m.o§.m umm.$m.ama II 25.3...» «3.33: 82 «3.58.8 «3.30.3 2368.8 $a€85a «3&8...» 82 “38.35 5:33... “32.35 A3333 A3335 ASH-.5 Angina. .3.» undue ...—"d. and... cod:- ooda. doom condo no.7- 3.3.3.3: 08 asan o3 ... ... .896 322.3 53.2...— 82389 322.8 go... 1.7.8 ...-.888“. 35039-3 a - 133 — Duo $3 no 2336 H."- pawn... ommdlmvodu ..udoh 9350.30 ha. undo no nude- OOOIopn a Bug}: ....H m8.n$.m www.mfié 39%...." £6.80; Saginaa 33 Q3436” II Sm.» 9363.“: oSBMmJH 318 $858 9an 83.8.» «3.3;. Sn.mmo.m II 3m; 8.....50.» ~an $0.3m.» II 356$.» «868$ I... «926 R158...“ 82 8068;“ H 3». “Edmofi I 08.03 ”338; 82 Gogofim mooiué 3°63 n8.m8 086$ .. $2 38353 3333 332.5 Azofisfl 3335 5:335 Aioflflv a8» nods. condo no.3- uoada coda- .ooou nodu- uoado «59310 03 gas 03. :H .m ono&n 03:30.0 boqowuoafl 333:3 . 3:886 :38 ..«oépo 33.8038 c3293 .3328 .393. S “Baalloon $3.3» m2: .3 unpuaooon .253 magnum 23838 .m .p ”.06 .aswfifiufi 303.3190 ..ollga «0.3330 .3393: Mia» ...-mold: 05 3 coda—«Sun .33 £93 63.99800 “cannon 31.8.9.3 m¢mJSJmu Smd3§n wom.vm¢.n 83 8m.So.mo 20.936 I 83393 $0.586 on...” 05.8an «8.30.3 omo.8¢.nn 8902.6 32 35.318 9362.3 #8636 9568.» 83 mmo.¢mu.n m¢¢.nmu.n Hmn.mnm oao.pn mama “Sonofiv Auflofiufl A5235 A3335 .3.» acres: 33:33.90 undo." no 35303? H3570 08 :2 :33 3 Saga 5 08 3 8293“ can 03 no: douobdaod 5.3435 conga gonna 35380...." a 3N..§.H.NH @910an own 5503. findnmufi abo.w.3.m «mad “.363 «8.35; 935$; v3.23 8."; 33 $5.80; .. nmméomd 818p; Sacha . So; 83 fiasco; 3.me «3.806 mafimmod 33.3 32 «8.313 «8.3 unfifioi 85.52:. 368... 32 Riofiumv A3335 A5335 gauging “£333 .83 Managua: H2530.— .53H .30 .30» 3303.38 ado» wagon—ud- udoh M83832- ooo “on no anon—5&8 23 mo 83o 83 no one no cacao -134- 3.3 ad 330 on» «a use." on» an 3 Bacon? Mega-auo 233” no anoabun 3 0.13% A9553 .3 donors coo 0» 3353. one 3 causes no.3 «HP—Hub no.3 30% no.8 page no 5.3560 no 3.3g «o 5.330 Hr Ill HI, MI @3732 .3.» $523.23 .3 33 no inflate” Eng .06 .qSufifia: .nosouofioo .398 532500 .nosam £2334 d35— B 25353 :83: 3H8 “condom 83.2.3 89mm «853$» 8121: II oopéo.» Sadat: 33 8335.3 $62.6 m3.§.8 $568.5 m8.~ 21306 H3491: 83 “$335 niofiufi “£335 A3333 A5335 “3333 c5335 .33 nod! no.3» no.7. coda- :duo coon nond- uodd- 35.70 one 739 8* ..H .m 2098 3233 58.825 83:38 3288 gas uuououo .73228 «3333 g ~185— nmbéoé II 93.8» @562. “II «a; ”2.8.. «m2 ....ande ll Sade...” 25.5...» I... ”3.8 §.$~..n Sm.” 03.4.26 III... 3123... _ fidfim; ll mmméfi £9.35.” 83 m$.o$.n $n.$m.m 30.93; $3.5m $0.2m 32 “332.5 A3335 “3335 Aoflofinmv A3835 A3325 A3333 .80» no?» uodaw and} no.3. no.3. doom coda no.3. 9:33.38 08 3.8 8.. ..H .m tonne 322.3 58...»qu 83:38 3:33 38 nae-28 .13338 mmmdtmvma .hdoh Mddpoufida_hn .060 no oofldo ooulodn Hands 483 .8 non-3n.» £9.85 33 .mm 33. .833 3333 "8338 .m .p ”.05 .8355; 2038.30 23 33330 Hafiofinfi no fiofim on... 3 63.33.» 33 a8“ 3398 «338 mom.¢om.m¢ nah.mmo.vd ll 5m.¢¢.mm @8634“ 82 oom.$€mm «8.393 89.0.3.3 85.91.. 33 "8.898 «8.80 ...S.m$.3 Swine.“ 234an 82 A3338 5:333 A3335 Afionafl A3035 .2.» mafia—ax adios?" Snood v.3 ado» 3303.2:- uaoh $593.22: ado» Mafia So «on no 32.53 33 no 83.. on» no a: no 23.. on» ad 330 on» ad 233” Magus-ado .93.." no anon—ban 5 hp 68:00 one 3 douobfioc no.3 05.38 none «noun—6 «o 53330 no 53936 on» ad 33208»: 3.30% awn—0.3a 08 B 33.93 A80 ugh—6 no 33936 635.333 5 anmémfiuvo mam.mm¢.m7 8958.: 212%.; coma www.mmpfi. GoJSJT $063.2 $059.5 mama 80.58.? §.¢mo.8 ¢om£8£m «848$ 33 flinomém SmeoJm «35%; ~36? $2 o8§m¢$ .. m2.m$.o .. nmo.nmo.m Sufi: $2 «$63.07 mmmJgJT ommgmmi «$43 $3 02.5.me Eméam.» ... $059.8 8o.mmo.n 83 $068.8 $123.3 §.8m.8 3936.2 9.3 Aflofigv AJSEBV A3335 “:3qu .80» Haas?" madcgugo :33” no naaoaoouma Magoo 80 $2 :83 3 32?.” 5 So 3 830% c8 09:30 you 3.3.5.36 33:45 .8qu £38.23 32%? 533.5 mmmdlmfima .hdoh 5:50.30 ho. moans no €080“!on Ea .od 533233 60333.80 p.898 53893 528.3 333.34 .333 up 603.333. 9330.” oodam .0938 85.80;» 3.0.68; 8063.3. «9.65;. ..l www.mmoJ momefin mama Sm.mm¢.$ $0.5.» 348.2 0858.8 25.3. m8.$o.m 026%.2 33 25:33.3 n8; 2H.nnm.3 mbmgwooin n86? 3m.§m.n 83 Afiofiafi A3333 “Soggy Aflofigv A3325 “Soggy Aoaofigv 3.» coda undo. nods. nod: coda. doom and: no?» Managua: coo H.309 84‘ ..H .m anomxfi oauuoaoc bucomuosfl aoaaadcoo 0.3-2.3 3.8 .4933 43025.8 353813 a ~187- .0.n .qoamfifius .nofiagonfioo 0.398 .3 303300 Join 30.3.34 Hana: ha. 00533.3 unowuoa madam .0938 30.30.: 8062.3 Smdmfiaa 2.0.0006 $0.08; 08.0%; aama 025.100 Ea..fl.a..a 8063.5 00130.0. mataamé 03.3.0; aaaa $980.3 ll madamaia amimaad 30.08..." 000.3... 33 aBJada ...l 03.0006 $0.034 Eaéa aba.a:.a mama “3.30.3 ll 03.30.: 02.306 80.... 02.03:... . mama 20.0.2.3 I... $103.3 $a.000.m 30.0.." am¢.map.m Ham; 0.3.03.3 ...| 80.00.06 ~00;an 80.0: 80.0.8.0 80H 2.0.30.2 00068.0 $0.000 ama.08 mmaéma 238 :33... a: «$332 $0335 $3535 $3323 “£2150 A3333 A3335 .8.» 00H: IOHS madam 00H“. coda. nodu- hddfloado 000 H300 00¢ ..H .m 0.303 03.2.8 833.80 322.80 .339 13.30 #38258 307003 .58» 3082... .3 .323 no :7. 80:3... mama . aaaa .8 39.880 :38”: gamuéa “3.830 .333 3353 333290 .a .p 10.0 533335 «3.3.3 00 3080 ”30858 no .aosfiamm as. 8:380 2.8.3.2 Mm imam ca» 5 0813.30 33 e8.“ 03.530 8988 3535013 Ems... 3043.3" mmmfimm$ $0.306 «3..an @3633 $3 3335 33.3. 32.33 3335 32.33 Anaofifiv .8» condo coac- aodau no.7. no.3. 333.3: one .33 8... ..H .m toga 322.8 3.338 3:83 H.309 Inocpuo 203090580 mmmdlmwod .hdoh Maggi.- P bod; no and: could... g .62: .8 ..opi.%m n38... m3. .omlafiu .333 93...... 2.8.2.8 .m .p .65 .....wuaasv .33....«8 as. 83330 385...: «o 935 33 a. €8.39... 33 a2... .3333 :58 03 .moa .2. .ll «mm .08.» 96. $0. an awn. .356 mama 0858.3 3180.2” 50.30.: omnimmfi «can 0363.3 $0.an noodofima 3936.3 HB.3¢.N new." «3.3m nmmeoJ await. mmménmé $0.30 mom." nvvdnmfi 09103..” $0.36..“ @3582” 80:8 .33 amméos.” ESQN $60.96...” RoJaoé owns—5." 3a.." 30.05.: ”09.3..."6 03.5.3.5 $65 moo." «8.08...» 93.5 806$.» 3m.8m.3 8.2g; 33 332.5 “33.33 “Satay A3333 “3ng .3» 3303.3: 15088 .53" 30 .30» 333...!- udoh M93398. .3?» Magenta... coo can no ado-Ramon 05 no cacao on» no on» no 330 on» on 330 on» an .93." no ado-Sum a.“ 68333. no.3 odour—Bo «o 3:85 Magda-ado canon hp vouoboo no.3 «.8qu no 53; 000 3 on» as 35.89%.» 3.30% 99:3 0 hp dead—53 no.3 £8.33 no .9335 33.32 ......» 333.....- .R #21 go 7.3.... coo-.3 a 39- wmmu.bmn and” HQO.”H®.¢NI gbgfifibamfi 80.$M¢.H #00." 6563.3 nmn $328 39.5% 89.3 mom." 02.636 I 80.366 .. 35.8.» H36 «mad 08.9.»..5 www.mmméa 80.3m6a $868 .83 momfiofimo 0328.13... napdfiudb 30.3.19 coma 30.2.13. 3.9.4.86 30.313 02.30.» m3." A3335 $.35an A3335 5381di 33533.90 .53 «0 35.80.55 .30» Anzac.” name." 3 32.—bum 3 000 3 3.3939 and $65.30 08 won owfifi «on 3.33% .3335 8.32% $3.33 6833.. 93980 83.32 .53» 333.. B 5538 38% «o .2589. 8?:8 3.3 66 $3333: 50393930 360.5 3.309800 .noqcun 3:634 H393 ha. ~333ng 9330..” modem «condom padaadm H863... SQNmtom mafigfin 08.3...» 03.03; 83 mm...m8.8 89.6.0.6 5.8.2.3»... miim...» Edam.m 399$. 32 $0.3m... I... 02.2.»; 25.3.. mmmdfi 0.9.8» nmma «5.3.; II 895.6 «8.93.» «.363.» 33 «3.25.3 II 23.3%.: 80.2....m gnaw 813...... 33 2.9.13 «5.8.23 $0.3...» «8.8 mooJmo.» 82" . 3333 33.55 3335 33.35 A3355 A5333 .s.-u. noda- uoad. condo and... ooduu and: wagon—.3: 8o 1.8 8.. ..H .m 285 3:83 833:8 32.8.8 3% $9.23 338850 I.’ 33:63 a - 14o - 38 3,: no 23qu u: :3. Ending Sign...“ 8m.mmn.nn 0863.0 mafigmé ”8.53” 83 a8.8m.8 ll $.3m6a 80.033 amigo.» 83:. .H $2 H863; ...l @863; www.moa ... ... named 83 ”$586 ll 8m.m2. .... «833$ 306$ 9563; $2 312%? ll Emdafii. fiméotm 036qu 9863; Bad andmfid...‘ ll 3&8on www.mmHJ Redwod o8.m3.m 8m." Swdofima I! ”868.3 08;: 08:3 .33 3335 Amazing 3235 Am H333 “5.555 73139 3.» madam madam uofldu uoadu nodda sedan uddnoawo ooo Haves om¢ .A .m anogun anaconda dowuauaoo oauuoaou 38 $9.38 .fidaoaaoo fl 8343a .39» 3530 B gamma 39% no nova 08.45 a .303 .3 nopaooon smacks gamma “358.9 .8360 mammflum fiEfiWS .m .p ”.od 533335 nosflofioo 33.8 H3238 no 333qu 28 33850 333a; no team 3» 3 dosing 33 a8» 33930 825% nao.dvn.m¢ Hmn.nwm.¢¢l nos.nwn.mm nam.mnm coma maa.nn¢.voa mam.>¢m.a omn.n¢m.ood aao.mmn.m mama A3335 $5333 “3333 5:335 muddquauado added «o nanoaoonwu Ado» Hdboauu canon a“ onoabun nu coo on oudnounn can haddoado 8° :2 amino «on «8333 b35536 ....‘aeg.H ”385 6823: 535.5 3380.3 89a —141- mam-Hmm.mn Com-Pm." 8N .vmm Whmfinmin 0969.; new." Emémm ..ln www.mm 08.on 0.3.5 mama 9.065 amatnmm Nahum Hum." 9568.3 3033 Q.» Goéonfia _ 3m." 9.52812. .30th 30.05.»... $3.85.? u8.mnm.n 3m." @8536» I wanna $5.813 mafia.» 3.3 A3333 A3335 7.33.95 “:23an Anaonunmv 30h 3335: Ages?" undo." 33 .30» Magenta.- .ndoh wqgouflda .30» 3.30833 coo new no anon—human on» no cacao on» no on» no ocean on» on cacao one an 380." an» ad .3830an mugged“. added «a «8% 3 3.30.39 £38.39 hp «.3250 one 3 @3333 coo .3 can??? no.3 23.3.3 no.3 9:09.30 no.3 «83.30 no 33% .3 338.5 .3 332% g @3732 .39» wflpfiua 3. 5532. 59% no 3309.3 a 6.9 603353. .aofifiomnoo 360.8 588380 53de 393.34 #3.: .3 353508 chowdoa aodam . Sufism www.mmndo Eoggé Sinmmdm $m.m§.fi ”$.8m.m . nRJSJ 83 Aflqfisfl Aiofismv A5233 ASSEEV Afiofiufi “Joanna .8.» code. no?» cod: .33 .39.. no.2! .3233 000 its 8w .n .m «.395 3:83 3.33:8 3:38 #38 avocado .73258 ....Illl'l’ll «363801;. a -142— bmb.poo.b www.5mm.n _vmnv.OHn.H . o a 80.38; ll 83% oQKNH B» 23 a ”39% mm” oanmoJa I 23.81: 93.30; BnJooJ madman 3m." omnsmzcb ll 313.23 81mg; 03.85 . 82mg; 83 mmméooén 0343.8 03.08.» @8686 333; $2 A3325 A3335 Auaflopfl “.3555 A5335 53.5an .8.» sedan undue coda. nodd- noda- coda. US$3.53. 08 3.8 8w .a .m tofin 93.2.3 83380 3:83 38 $9.28 .fidouoaaoo 82:3: £8» 9.3333 B an... flaw no 8?. 8?..8 g .bmnaa .8 «onions £3.95» 3.3 .omlouflh. .0330 Magnum anon—Fuchs .m .D ”6.9 .aoawdflidav .wnowpfiomm dad nouaggo Haaogh no wagon on» 5 Edapsm .33 Son“ 2559.8 ”0358 H8.m$.8 coma 35.3 8033.3 $0.8m 83 n8.«%.~2 Saga 0848 31.32.03 08.5} 32 “£335 €23an “£3.55 A3335 Aiofifiv .30» .uflaofiuz dares?" 283” go .30» 3.3832. .30» wagons udoh magenta 000 «on no aficiom 33 no 30.3 23 no 33 no cacao on» on cacao on» ad ended“ on» as canon—ooh»- wadundouafio undo." no anon—bum a." 3.38.3 59.653 3 2:5». coo 3 3.233 coo .3 utgaoa 993 38.3.8 no.3 «550 90.3 «nose no 3355 no has; no 3335 Gaga—dog a -143.- ..uéJmoémm m5.mmw.mm t Hmmémnémm www.mmHJm 83 5.3.3068 35.30.02... mgdbfimmn $565.2" mom." 8553...? 53.80.00 .. 85.03.03 8130.3 ‘ 33 80636.5. Homégém @8609?» gamma—".9. n03 nmp.mmm.mpm «$62.05 53.898 8m.mfi..o ~an 8H.n$.mn $0.393 u 03.815 30.30.." 33 umm.m¢o.mma 30.000.4‘NHI omo.m§.n¢m #0683 0mm.” 80 J3 J9. mum . $6 .mm .50. 53. SN 3m :36 .05 m3." A3338 A3333 A3333 A3333 .30» H0380.» gonaooado 0900." no 0000300.“- gnoaao ooo pom 0000a 5 0:03.93 3 ooo 3 0.30% 6:0 033% 00% 00005.39 49.895 0.0333 .33an #002600 .3 3:30 83.003 .08.» 3838 .3 080: .3 #388 coo-.8 a .05 330033: 5030.393 330.8 3305.00 .nogm 30.3004 Hannah .2. .0033508 nuowooa nodum ”ooh—pom 08.35.? 8o.o$.m 8103.3 0.2.50.0 2.0.03.0. 086$... 83 0368.2. 80.80; 80.30.00 80.3.0 03.036 80.0.3.0 $2 A3335 Anaofinnv €335 A3333 A3333 A3233 .8.» 0 0H0. 0 0H0. 0 0.98 0 0.70 00d: 00.?- 3303.3: coo H039 8.... ..H .m tans 3:33 838:8 30.83 38 ..uouauo £32.58 6333.30.60 a ~144+~ .05 $8333: .qosfiofioo 9896 33°58 58an .3234 Huang .3. 15333 .333 23 338» www.mmmaon 8m.m8.om 2m.m8.m8 $0.3».ma ll swim”; $5636 82 madgamm 8m.m.m.m.§ «@6363 3930.3 31.3: 8180.0 mm¢.$o.m 82 demodS I... 8m.m$.d3 nom.m8.8 Sofima§ “”3686 omn.3m.ma $3 mmimmmab II $933.8 8.363;. ....I Bo.$o.m 803.36 Baa nmm.m8.mm ...! 9368.2. mSJmHJH ....l momdmo 80.¢$.3 mama e8.8¢.$a ...... «8.2».mfi finémms I... 26.08; m8.8¢.p .53 «$685: ....I 23.3043 ofiémflfl ...I #663.» 2.0.3.».3 83 §$6$£m unfifiqk Sfiiaéa mmmém» 3o.mmb.2 3:3 338 a: £3332 “£233 Aflofisfl “305:5 A3333 A3233 Auaofismv Afiofiafl .So» an?» undue coda: undo: coda. doom 3ch 30.23 Haddoddo ooo aways om¢ .n .m anogna oaouoaod hoaomuoafi nououunoo ouauoadd fiance Inolauo .daaouoaaoo lema 73 nopaouon .oofimho Madunuhm anofiquMboa .m D mmmdlmvmd ..ndoh hdddodno ha. 962.? Mo no.3. ooulfio 3 To a .uovwadnnaxv dogma umo 303830 wlqa 838:8 2332.— Mm 2% 3:5 5 25.3qu 38 8d 8333 .83 .8 gonaooon $3.3» 8 .398 H3258 .0938 den—henna; as 036363 Namingfia mmm.omn.2 Suvdmofi SQHRJH $3 “3333 A3333 33¢ng Aaaufifiv Aflofisfi A3833 “Soggy .23» no.3. no.3- uodan :23 no? coon sedan node» 330MB; ooo H.309 03. 2H .m «Icahn c.3333 honowuoan defiance 03:33. #38 uuoépo 4383.80 82:32 .39» wagofiaa B «in: no 2:3 89.46 559 .smfl .on nomlaofiom $8.3» 83 .81.. 83. .893 3353 33528 .m .p ..od .qoawflfiai .ncoaaflodd vim“ 5.33200 .3393: wlo» :03 on» a." donuaapnm «add 33% coadmaoo ”condom muo.m9.£m H 3.58.5 8o.$a.$m Spdmmgfl 32 fiaémoémn ...... mpoJmméa www.mwpéon fimébga .32 03.9343. . 034%.: H8.Rn.mmn madaome $2 amnioémn mafia; m3.$¢.mm 3....81mmm Safwan $2 8m.m3.8 2&63.» omm.$m.fi mmoéami. amnion; SE peoénfifi momémmdfl £486 H8636» mmmdam 82 SKfiQfim 80$an $m§m¢£m omo.$o.¢mm 53.625 33 a” «8.0533 3.5.3:. Smsmmaa 8kmmm£8 EnJonch 33 M... _ “3335 Azofisfl Auaofiafl “£333 “32353 no.» ...dpoaou ended 30 .30.» 9303?; .30» 333:3... adv» wad» ouflda $5903.32 000 new no 9353 on» no cacao on» no on» no 330 on» an cacao 23 on 283 wqaaauauo 233 Mo 23:53 5 on» aw nuaoaoonwa 830.39 and .3 douohoo 000 3 60925.36 338.3 £95.23 no.3 33.30 n93 «mounds coo hp .0833.» no 33530 no .3336 moan 20.3.3 no 3385 83:33 :89» mavens— ? 383 no 1:88 3923 a «146-. Gméek 8562.; BnJNNJ 812;. 33 vnb.nmm.n pnm.om¢.n Hmo.noa owm.nm moan ooo.b>m I mon.awm I HQH.H pma.n «can 3mg? .. 2.13m u 392 53.3 32 www.5mn.fl oom.mb¢ mmm.nmb Hmo.awd coma Snéomé $9on mmménn 08.30 $3 “3335 5:31.95 _ A3335 A3335 ado» Ease." waagdanauo A .93..“ no sauna-0H9: «330.30 000 new .93." a.“ £33wa 5 000 3 3.30.39 .335 03% non 68:33 53350 «0.3039 5.993» 3333 3:23 mama-dew." ..ndoh .3303 hp Oh" No Antonin 80:23. a 6.9 533.33: .Sflfiofioo «398 53°58 Hogan ...-284 18.2 P 35333 2.33 .36 a .50m 2b . Ham .mbm Admins .noa me.mHo.Nm.n mmm .mmm .mflm 213.8 8.10:.an «$68.3 ll pmn.abm.vm mmp.u¢ dongmofi. «3.92.6 one ..nmmcp unambnga on an 3m." www.mangfi ll $993.3” oaa.n¢o.3 Schumaé «8.505 @8636 noun 5.30.8 II 98.8i3 ominfloin ...l and: . H8683“ $3 58.8“.an .II «8.9.993 madam.» _ ...l cannon»; RNJLNJ San m3.n$.¢3 mafinoimfl 0852.3 8m.m$.m 8n.3~.3 8S A3335 A3335 A3355 A3235 A3353 A3335 c5335 .3.» cod». :3. and». no.7- uodi doom nod». ...39 $5903.32 8o H38 03 .A .m r398 33338 3:83 0.3- 033. gamma...“ H399 . 438 .38238 Sadodooldo a .33 $2 mo 2308 a: $3.. 00050.0 .....ull 000.000; 000.000; 000.000.” 30.02 003 000.mmb.m ll «paws; $0.000; €0.30 000.00 $3 030.00 I... ...l 30.00 000E 000.2 003 000.00 I... 000.00 000.00 «03 30.30... I 000.000 30.3 0.5.0 000.? 83 $0.05.” I... 30.03; 000.3 000.2 000.00 002 8043 03.03 000.60 000.2 000.00 .. 33 A3335 A3335 5:355 A3333 A3333 “523$ .38. :13 036... .33 no.3. coda. cadd- 936360 000 :52“ 00¢ ..H .m 2250 03.306 033008 32.280 638 £9.30 .fidouaaaoo 80H30¢0H .53.» 30868 .3. an no 3?. 80:5. 3 . L002 .mm uBaooon 09.85 M. 06B .6... “Beacon .0330 wflofium aaoafllwpoo .0 .p 10.0 533235 nosfiofloo 3630 a 1 wlo 203238 mm 032080 $35.03 wt... lam .fi 5 03.3.30 .300 3.5 6300.50 .0938 _ 30.506 2.0.03.0: 000.000.: 08.000.” 002 80.05.: 03.000.» 000.0006 000.08 83 A3335 Auaofigfl Azofiufl “3.330 .20» dupes?" 906693308 053 no 36230.56 aqua-duo can «on 283 a" ago-hon 3 coo 3 34555 .363 ago 902 680536 3.3.350 :03th £35.30 63303 53:36. 635350.55 a www.mmh .# mam .vmm.m H$.nbd.m mum .Nmm nmmfl mam . .3 m3 . an 3% . mm mom .3 n$hwum moon «8:3 .. $3.» $12 mmm.m II _ 33 mm.” Jo t mum-HWHH m3 .3. «mm .m . 83 0.86% mafia? $2.68 #3 d. 3.3 www.mmm II 83.3 8....§ Nahum.“ $2 Auaonuumv A3333 A3335 nudging “333.5 .30» doboaou 2.83 .30 .32» 33333. udoh M30338. ado» Mano: magenta: coo eon no aaoahumom 05 «o cacao 83 no on» no ouoao . an» an cacao on» an 233 on» ad 3580956 mflufizuauo undo." «o anoabam 3 83.6% .23 ha. 68250 000 on 6935.36 393% £39.23 no.3 9:03.90 mono «gonna coo hp cad—83 no .933 no 5353.0 no.3 «89.30 . no 33an 83:33 .22" wqflaouuaa an an Mo 388 805.3 Ema 6.9 .qoawfifiax 50393300 360.3 9308800 30¢de .3534 duos: ha. 6339568 uuomdo." :3 30.38 . -148-- 0368.2 ”8.336 «8.93.» So.v8.m «3.3” 83 333$ 332$ 333$ A5335 “@335 33.35 .8.» and: soda. undue coda. coda» no.7- 33.5.3 08 ~38 o2. .n .m 933— 328.3 83880 Spaces. H.809 lacing .dudouonaoo IIIIIHL LII‘ $1 ‘4‘ (“III dosn—«c.2515. a. 08.8 H 80.8 II.” 85.8 $3 533 II 33.5 80.3 898 33 $8.30 I 3.52. 08.3 «Bé Sada. 83 $.me $062. «2.6m «3.3 «no.3 93 A3335 Aflofiufl “3335 5:335 Aoaofiumv A A3333 “new node: uodou :13 no.3. sedan coda: goon—Hi: con H33. 8' :H .m «hogan 3:83 83330 322.8 38 Inigo .Hfiouoaaoo mmmHImva ranch waauoxnda h.» 9a." no «odd. coulodb g .393 .Bluopaofiom aways: $2 .omloaé 6330 3353 «8338 .m 6 .65 33333.5 ..aozfiono Eu 8:325 Haflogflm no team as 3 dofifiea 33 3.: 339.8 .838 - 1'19 - mwnivmia l 09.30 3913.2” «243:... mama QR. $2. . m can . mam . H new $3 .v 03 . 3m 3m." A3335 A3238 5:335 A3333 A3335 .3.» Huron—on ago." 30 Much wagon?!— ndoh wagging. H3» 3.333.9— 3333: coo non mo anon—mama 05 no ouoao 33 no 33 no cacao on» an 330 33 an 053." on» an $5.80.»? 33539.3 233 no 2»an 5 093055 33 ha. 683.00 000 0» 60.3533. 0330.39 £93.23 no.3 oaoubpo 993 £39.30 000 ha. vegan—wad no 5.3535 «0 5,3330 no.8 0550 no 5353 35380.3 519 fin.8¢.3 «$69.3 Enema; «5.8.3 32 $0.8m 0863 En as.» 82 omm.¢m¢.a I poo.VFo.a c. nwo.obv +~h.d¢ mum” oso.mHo.m mam.mma.a bmo.ov Huo.ma Hum” mam.aao.n nmm.amo.a I «90.0mm om¢.oam.n coma 5mm.omp.a Ham.ooa.a Hob.n obn.mou “(ad “is 7:3 7:3 7:3 3.» .3»an $398330 name." no 35:80."? . anaconda So «on .53 5 Sega 3 8° 3 8323 23 0353 can 63233 53:56 conga £3.85 2: 83¢ .3 :55 33$me .3.» “£333 .3 no..." no 28.8.. 08.30 8349 . .o .n .qufifiax .noapuuomuoo vuuouo huduoaaoo .noqdum uauhduq<.daou«h kn doqadanaua chowdoa ocean .oonubm Swamp; H... 98.536 www.mwnfi 80.536 Danica £3 www.mvn... ll «mummy.» viimmé iipmdu 08.8 32 maimed amino“ 58.3 manna 32 , 33.33 3335 A3233 A3235 A5335 A3335 .3.» condo coda. condo scan. condo coda. wqupouudx 80 329 8+ ..H .m £25. 3333 833:8 3:33 .38 131.8 .iaaoaaoo dosfiavn0016b aumdfl ~151o~ .33 3.3 no .58... a: $3.. 23.83" H II Rtondn 8B Swami... $2 gum ll ~85. I 8.3 $3 3.3m II mafia 8.3.03 2063 $3 «8.3» II Quinn 30.2. .5an 13...? 33 m8.¢wp.m II 58.2... 43.3“} momnmm 818°.“ 83 $06 306 m8.» . 33 3:3 3:3 3:3 3:3 3:3 3»: .3.» no.3. coda. no?! no.2... ooaun coda. “33.96 80 Uses 8e ..H .m tong 3:33 83:38 03.33. :38 Janene 432338 3mm .8 nonfiooml .883 3.33.8 uaoaamlops .m .p wio oaouagog mllad 53338 .3333 wlo aaommm on» 5 wonuzpdm 633 30.5 dungeon .0938 i it; mmmdtmfimfi lunch 5:30.63 hp 00.2 Ho nod...- OOOIJb a . 83 .3 uBaooon A3843 ”dd .aoamflfiév 5:80 8 «898 ”283 8.13%.? nmoJmoJ ... «84.3.3 03.0.8.5 3m." mo¢.HnH.w¢ snn.mmn.a s awn.npm.na mn¢.omn.mm mama 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3: Acheson $33333 undo." no 338039. 35.30 coo «an union 3" 30% a.“ 000 3 3.30.3.“ can smudge «on 2.9333 3.3955 3.39:5 Haw—6.3» 081.3 .3325 cognac: a «00.0 moo 9.0.0 mom." 306.3 SE 2.3.2? mnnhmlnu 3m." $3.3 .. «36¢ 03:. 0mm." Reapm.» 3. mahmom gin? 99935 82 «8.: ..l 3m can.» «an.» 32 A233 “.533 A333 A533 A333 ado» H.388." added .30 .30» wagoufida .39» wuapoxuda .39» magmas: $33833 coo «an no anon—baud 33 mo owoao on» no on» no 330 on» ad ouoao on» ad undo." on» ad aaaoaoouwa 3393350 «53 no 38% a.“ Samoan noxdnd .3 00.3.30 coo 3 60.35.30 333.3 £96.23 mono «gouge mono 3050 000 hp 60.23606 no 53330 No 5.3930 no.3 959.30 no 23530 33$me :89» 933a .3 .3." no H988 80.3 a 6.9 633.3% 503.3033 33.8 330588 £3.95 39334 Huang ha. 603358. :50." modem 30.38 ~152— www.mmoch 2n.8m.m 08.3%» «magpie 81mm: 5mm.mmo.m $2 $n§mm4m Bmamo «$.QO mmoJonam «8.3» nnp.~.mm.2 83 3.3 “is 23 3:. 3.3 3.3 .33 no.3. no.3» undue and? 00.3: coda. H3570 coo H33 03 ..H .m p.393 3383 83:38 3:38 #38 £9.30 .iaouoaaoo defladudogw a nmu.mflm .uuu Hpo.mom mmp.amm mmp.pmm ‘ amma 2.98m 8068 «36:. v3 .5 03.62. 83 omn.a¢a.n pm».mmp.a an.«H¢.H mam .m ¢m>.aa¢.a o¢ma 1:3 733 3.5 35 1:3 123 8: 3.3.. no?» no.3: sedan 33¢ :13 wnduoxndx ooo Haves omw .q .m auogun oflpuoaod doaoacaoo capaoaoc Hupoa unocaso .Haaohoaaoo $3.32 .3?» 93353 .3 82 no 3:... 80:3 33 483.8 nopamfiom $8.3» $3 .8 33. .833 3353 20538 .m 6 ..od .qswfifiafi nodpfiofioo 338 “33058 no 383325 .mmm 333380 Huaoadddh Mm fumflmm on» a.“ .0213de 33 song dopfimaoo “condom my “3.53.8 SnJS «8.30.3 3m.m9.3 83 m «mimifin 35.3 08536 Rimmoda 2,1218 32 _ «mm.mmm.n oso.n o+b.mmm 0mm.ubm mmm.ov¢.~ mama 123 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 .3: E033 ago." 30 use» 333.33 .39» mdauflfiua .3.» 338739 ungoxuux ooo non no unashaom an» no cacao on» no on» no 330 on» «a cacao on» an 283 on» an 352.8956 Mdfléduuuao undo.“ no uaoabdm .3 330.3% hexand .3 68930 80 0» 6325.76 330.39 gonna no.3 adage no.3 33.36 ooo 5 60.1230.» no .3 3930 no 9333.8 90.3 30qu «a 3335 defiananoolom a Nam.mmo.a vam.¢oa I ¢amhmmm.a mom «ama 80.8006 036006 o..m..m.l mama aam.maa amm.awa ama.¢mm mama amoéna 856mm 53$ mWMnm aama maa.a.vo.mv aa0.mma.Nt aaa.nm ..II 0ama $m.oo¢.a 92.8%? a8.a2..m m3: Anoadpv Auoadnv Auoadnv Anoadnv know agoaon $5.35»..de undoa no uuaoaoonwu Haddoado ooo aoz undoa da ageing na ooo on 3.30.30 and 0935 won oouobaaoc 53336 «$30.30 £9.93» '1 3.33.. 53.3.6 32-3.2 £8» "Susana .3. coupon ufiamb Ho afloat coonam Ema . 6.9 633333 M 503930.30 p.380 332830 33:93 uauhaa aneuah .8. 003353. uuowcoa uoadm ”condom 1 . m0a.0aa.m amm.ama.a aaa.ma¢.m panama.» mmm.mam mafiaoa.» aama amd.aam.om mamuIaba #aaéva a8.aaa.0m mom.ama 80:03.8 ¢ama «:3 Jam II. «3. Jam mom-Hm mun .aaa aama a2. JVNN aom . «.mm a2. Jam mama 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 ......3 3.3 .s.» ooado noaao uoado moan» uoadu coadn 330%.»: So afioa 8... ..H .m toqua 3:38 33330 03.33 aduoa $9.050 .adaouoaaoo vouaaaaoOIdm Hag .33 83 no 328 a: :3... 8..ka H ....H 8.....b. H 8.5.. 3.. .III .Ilu III. aama mma.m ill. mma.m .Ilu mma.m mama a00.um all. ammhm aaa.mm III. aaa.ma aama 80336 ....I I... 08.30.» I... 806%.» 83 movie m3.ma motma o mama Auoaanv Auoadpv Aaoadpv Auoadpv “moadnv Aaoadnv ado» cease noadu uoaau coal. seams uoadu uduqoado 000 adage 03 ....a ..a enemas 03333 33:53 03330... adaoa snoteso .adaouoaaoo ~155- aama.m¢ma ..adoh Banana hp nonvoo gang no noad. ooo-Ram Ea oaaama .an hoe—Boon £90.23 mmma .aa nopaaoon .ooauuo Mdaaaaum.»aoaquobom .m An ”.0 .9 .ao»Mdanuaav noaaaummnoo aavouo “waug no unoaaanumo and doapavnoo aaaoacQah no» :mmo on» aa donaaapsm_duad Honk dovumaoo ”cannon aha .aam ..v a3.“ .maa .al mua .306 .5 aama aaa . aaa .v aaa .bma.al mom.a¢0.a 0am . m aama Auoacpv Auoadpv Anoadnv Auoaupv ado» aaoaou 3393.. 96.0 nqdoa no nauoeoouwu haddoaao ooo non undoa ca uaoahdm ca 000 on cannonsn dad owqdno pom dauobaaou haaagdaa nonunonsn awaonnu douasvoc haaaqana g vfififiooém 53 - 156 — n8.8n 818m H SEN» 63 Sad 5mg“ II ...I... 03.— mmmem mmm . an mam .va .II II @va mar.wb>.m cam.d¢ smm.wam.n m¢md A2135 A333 Aggy Aaogv flood»: .30» H983 233 .30 .30» Mad wound.- .udoh wagoxnda mach $.30an 330396: ooo «on no gain 05 no cacao on» no on» no cacao . on» u.- onoHo an» an undo." on» an 3353’ waddfiououo added no 23953 3 34:08.5 9&2? 3 60.353 80 3 6935.3”. 365% gauge no.3 among no.3 £3830 ooo hp dad—God no 3.39an no 53.35 90.3 :0.»qu no 5933.6 82.2.3 .53» 393:: B 838 33.3 no 388 8?.8 a .05 333333 50330300 3.3.6 330300 32»de 32334 anon: hp 00335.:- uuowuoa :dwm “condom www.mbmJ. 93.2; 5.63.» 58.an H 58.8” Baa «3.9.: 36.8 9»; mats 02.3 83 “3.2.5 Academy A335 Anogv $0.33 @333 .3.» noun. ...—".3 god: no.7. no.7. nod!— 5:016 ooo H39... 8. ..H .m 9398 3:23... 333:8 328.3 3.8 .438 438358 u g 6353—3015 a 005.HmH.n ll mmflm .Bfinvdn ...l $.53.» 83 $.58 n3 $8 «3.8» $2 Anoadnv nuoadnv Auoadpv Auaad#v Aooaunv A-oadpv ado» ooaau uoadu uoano scan. aoado undue mauuoxnmz ooo Hopes owd .n .m vacuum oauuoaqu doaoaunoo cup-oaoc Haves Incleuo .Hdwonoaaoo 839023 :39» 2.3..an .3 338 «5:3 no 3.3. ooo-.8 Ba 32 .8 33. .833 9333 202538 .m 6 P82 .8 3.33%» nwuoafi I. III. II. u.o.n .noawnanmntv noapanonuoo vuoono Maddoaaoo no uaoaawummm and nowadUQoo Hawoqadah no phenom on» ad donuaapsn dead scum vaudnaoo “3.30m npm.moo.m 36.8 ”3.806 M HI... mama nom.m0m.a mmm.u&¢ mom.ovm.a III. nil. ¢mma . mudfiod Soéfi as .83 I... 33 m 35.43; «3.3 92.52.; 08.3 mama 1 _ Auoadpv Auoadnv Aooadnv Auoadnv nuoadnv ado» Hakeem“ nqdoa 6H0 ado» wdaaoxuua u¢oh mauvoxuda ado» wuapoxnda wcaaoxnd: ooo can no unashamom on» no cacao on» no on» no cacao on» ad ouoao on» ad aqaoa on» ad uuqoaoouwu waaundpmupo 233” no 33% a." 3.30% 90):? hp douohoo mono odouhuo no .33ch ooo on douobdaod mono aqouuno we 53.3.6 occnohunnnwsouna ooo hp confisvod mono aqoaudo no 539.3 35:35.“ End. §.nmm.mfi onimwmdfi IIH Ema 3.060me $2.593 mmmnbwmrn I..l mam." 08 . omo. mod cam . omo. me." I... mama 5mm. ado. mm man . m3 .5 m9. 6%. H II. Sm." $43.3 .. «mmfioaiw ... mommwpfi ll 83 mam.mom.om nam.mom.om m¢ma Amvgomv Auugomv Amdnsomv $6583 amok H988." wagguado 233 no 2323956 “$53.8 ooo won 333 a.“ puma: a.“ ooo o» 3393“ and 03 non c3333 5353.0 oomdnoudn 590.3» dougdod 3398.6 It wmmfllmaymd ..«dch nudgedwo ha. 00033. no Huhoaoh oool.do.n H.548 .od .aSwSfiax 8 503.3093 «Soho 330580 £2"de nanhagd Huang .3. 63.2333 30mg." uodmm 30.33 5 l . II... nomemJ m¢m£m 80.8w; EQmNH II 9553 mama 03.0“: ammunmm and.“ «8.2. ..II ngb 32 metro.” .II II aggro." l.| mSKOH mom." Em; II II «$4 ...I. «SA «93 «2.? «3.2. 35.2. 8,3 Auoadpv 7033 Anogv Auoadnv “3.73 €0.35 .30» and? .33 mod:— uodou coda» condo 3303.32 ooo H38 03 ..H .m p.898 3233 83:38 3:83 538. Include ..nduonoaaoo § 635.“ £30le 53 .33 $3 no 3»an a: :3. 9363; HI! II 935an gamma.“ 3% 03.30; ll 03.304 fishuMm ooofiom 33 $0.80; ll ”RE.” mfihmma II mafia: 33 email I ..I ...... II 8M... 82 I... II I... 83 «2&3 ll 8meth ....l 3&3 coma 8.“..39» 03685 . .. 33 A5563 A3563 Q3303 “c.3503 A5303 “c.3303 .30» uodwu node. and». nodmu .33 no.3» 3330 ooo H33. 03 ..H .m tags 3338 83380 03.33 :38 £9.30 .fifloaoaaoo 82-2%” .58» 35.30 P 893.8 no 33. 89.3.2 g .Gmma .3 nopaooon nwsoufi _ gal-H. .Hm uopfiooon Innovate 3.35.8 pdmanmlmpoo .m .b u. o .n .qopwngudxv noapmnoquoo p.393 Nmacoaa mw mlo 283.30g vlqlm “333:8 agenda; wlo phenom on» 3 .0053de 3.3 39C 63.99500 .0933 l _ 31m$$n madmbmén ll 83 8902.63 nmm.o§.m¢a .ll 30." A3503 Aucudomv Auvdfiomv A3583 .30» H3080." $3933.90 :33” no 3530an R3530 ooo pea undo." 8. auoahdm 3 ooo 3 333.9.” .38 ago now 63:33 3393.0 nongoudm A933» dongdoa 5.3qu g confidence-ac." a ~160- hwaquqnm BHJmm .mHH mom :va . mun II: Ema 5063.8 893543 «3.8%?» H ....l 33 «36920.: $63.an 3.945.053 II. II- mum." $n.mwo.nn.n «3.3“me Homfimnéam II II. Hum." ommemJo ... 03.36.me map.mmn.mma III II: 8m." «8.319.. .. $0.8m53 8923.8 II II 33 mmm.m¢.n.m 30.0%...an mao.pn¢.¢om Q3." Augav A3553 A3363 Angomv A3553 know Hares: ago." 30 “a 3303.33 .30» 3333.3 ado» 3333.3 3303.3: ooo 33.. no 95533 on» no 330 on» no 05 no 336 on» «a Scan 05 ad undo." on» as 388009»: 33503.90 333” 6039238 «398 53088 .fiafim .3534 38% .3 35353 39.33 32m ho. vouoboo gone package no 33930 no 035me 3 80 on 63333 mono among .3 .3335 330.3“ 90):? 333.3. 4%.:ng 80 .3 6838 mono among no 3335 83:32 .32" 3332... B 3933 «a 3658 08.62 a 6.9 533322. “coupon «v9.2 ll ...... «9.? 8.13. I 82 A3533 A3563 Aoaomv Auuadomv A3553 nudgomv udoH coda nodu- uoado no.7: nodd- uodon 3:30.30 ooo $39 8* ..H .m uuofin 3:88 8:38... 3:38 H38 .3125 .1saoaoo cadence-#0..” a www.mom.mH moa.mm¢.ma www.mm¢.m me.mmm wmmfl 2.0.80; $2.3m Smfin on Name $0.3m 30.0mm N313 m2. .. 33 mm¢.m¢m.m aoa.mom.m www.0p 0n0.5 omma 0am.an¢.0a 0on.mo pmm.amp.o nam.oam.n m¢ma Auaonqspv Aufionmspv Andonuanv Auaonqapv ado» #05080.” $030,300.90 00.00..” H0 nanosmouwd 8300.23 ooo «oz 333 3 uqogm a.“ ooo 0» cannon?“ and 0.9530 902 08330.0 5300.00 08.20.35 Haw—00.3» 00.3.9000 3.30.36 E onmatm¢md ..udmh Adenodoo ha. ugophom Ho 3080.» oooiodHH a .GmmH .8 309303 038% m¢mfl .on 00:0 .000000 maapafium eaoaquopoa .m .0 «.0.0 .aopmqanuasv neapwuommoo pfluouo Nuavoaaoo mm. Sozfiomo mm 5:308 028qu mm flaolm 2: 3 uafifipfi £8 55 030038 8038 33.8.2. 03.8.35 08.09.30 ..I. . ll 82 “008903 “0.3303 509303 Audqsomv Auddfionv .30» .3530." 0800a .30 , .30.» 333206 Mach Magnesia .30» #38308 wqgoflndx ooo Haaoa no aqoabcgom an» no cacao «00 we on» «0 cacao on» 00 000.3 83 ad 00.00..” on» ad 308.0050 33933.00 0000." no ado-bum, a.“ omunoha “£080 .3 08:00 ooo 3 03:30.0 oudnogm 5.90.3» 90.3 000830 @090 000.300 ooo hp dongs «0 3.3030 «0 3.3005 90.3 0009.30 no 50000010 doguoaoolxx a «8&3; ll 3v.» mafia; 83% Swan»; 32 $0434.. ....I 30.8 8w.o$.m anohmma 80434.. 33 “Exam IIH Saul vkém ....I 3.5.8 «9: 3w...” «an imé £2 momJoo.» I 03.80; 3.8m «3.3 ”8.3.”. 83 08686 I.I aqmfia H8636 83.6 cage... A33 .58... a: tucmga “Soggy 3333 Eofifiv Soaps Auaofifiv 3333 .3.» I Owa u odan OOHdO I Odd. nodaw OOH: h5g0 H60 08 dance 8w :H .m «.395 osaoaou 33880 3338 data $9.30 .23338 g mfimw .Hm hopaooon .ooauno Mddaaaum onoanhoboa .m .D - 162 - oomflumga 53» ~38?» up «5358 no .38 80.32 g :33 .3 napaooon $3.3» «oo.n .douwdanwdsv nonpdnodeo undouo “macoaaoo no unoflpwnomd and aoaafiunoo Haaoqaaflh mm anommm an» ma conuaapnn mead scum voodnsao ”oouuom mma.mmn.mm 5mm.bmm.wm moo.aoa mama mmb.nos.¢a mnn.nmm I nma.mmo.ma mmp.m¢¢ mama mom.om¢ I «mn.nmm I mmp.nma www.ma «oma Auaonmapv Auaonmnpv Auaogmppv Auaoguapv Ado» ddpoawu wddugdomudo waded no uaaoaoouwa addqoado ooo uoz nndOH :« unoahmm a“ ooo o» omQQOHum and oMano «on couobaaod hp«»Qd10 nomdnoaam nwsonnu doundvuu hp«»Qdaq 333833 Ema Nmo.¢mm.n ¢o¢.¢m ban.mdn.d nmo.bnm.m III: who.mma mama mum.Hm ¢o¢.vn vmm.wn m III. Hood «8.3 .. ”8.3% 30.3 v8.3 83 smm.nHH ¢mbhmw mmo.m¢a Haa.mn HH¢.b o¢ma moo.aom.afl «Ho.oma oao.mmm.o «mo.mmw.v wvma Auaonmspv “vanguapv Aoaonmypv Auaonuupv Aoaonmunv Ado» Hmboson uqdoa vac anon Mdapoxuma nook wqaaoxnca hack wcwpoxuaa madpoxndx ooo Haves no oaoahdmom on» no cacao on» no on» no omoao on» on Cacao on» ad added on» an noqoauouwa mcwunapuadb waded no unoabdm ad omdnunsa uO\dcd kn donoboo ooo o» couobaaod ouunouun.nwsouna mono snounno mayo amounao ooo an dwuasvod no huaaadna no huauqdaa mono aaouufio .8 hinge _ 32.33 .32" 3333.. .3 .3358 no H.382 08.63 Eng 3 6 1 . .od .qoamfifig .qoauauonuoo audouo hoacoaaoo .noqdum uauhfidfid acoufih an doaadaqada chowdoa noadm «oouuom 0868 H 85.8 350$ 93.3 $053 82 Hmm.moa.na oan.mu¢.v mam.mmo.0a mmm.omn.a mmm.a¢o.m mama nuaonmvpv Anaonmunv Annonmnpv Anfionmnpv Auaonuupv - Amflonmunv Ado» uoadn uoamu uoaau guano ooada moan: uddaoado ooo aduoa cow .H .m anomua napaoaod doaadcaoo capmoaod Hanan Imotodo .Haaouosaoo dodudpnOOInHH Humda 19 'II -’-I 256nm moo.an cacao." H IIH @863 83 .333 ..II 30.4. 39.3 ..II 03.8 .82” n36 ..ll 80.» 3&6 3&6 8m." 3558.6 noonm.» 30.0.3.“ 30.3 «3.3m; 36.." Anaofigv A3333 A335: “5325 «33.25 A5318: .8.» non... coda. no.7. coda coda. no.7. 9.33.38 ooo H309 8¢ ..H .m vacuum 03333 3.3333 03:36 38.. IuoIauo 3333-8 83.5va .58» 393.3. .3 3.3.8. no .33. 80:63 a . 82 .8 non-3.5 58.3» load .8 antennae when?" nae-amps .n .9 find 6385...: 33% 8 .896 H3818 no £33283 can 333:8 388: «a ma .5 3 352%.. 33 can 325-8 88:8 ~164- noo 69 I Bag «3.3 one.” ...I 82 9563.3 "5.8..” 03.3 2.0.03.3” N363 . 3m." 30.52.. I 30.03 5.3.3 30.3 30..." no: Azofiupv 5:335 A3335 033:5 Auaofigv .3.» "upon: undo." .33 .3.» 9.3.3.3... .30» 9533.36 .3.» 3.33.3. gains: ooo gag no ado-has a no cacao 05 no a no 0.30 23 an :30 05 an 233” on» ad 3363qu gang undo." no ago-ban 3 8309A kiddo hp 6805.3 000 3 63:33 3% 5.90.53 “80 289.30 993 £39.30 ooo hp dogged no 3399.6 no 3.3530 no.3 9333 no #335 canvaoo-bfld a ~165~ Hmmgmdmba 0.2.. .366 .- 3193 .bod mm» .mmhm moan m3.moH.wS «8633.3 $6.80... I: 8.3 mnm.pwv.om I #mm.mno.mmml mmn.pmo.¢ma .Ilu van pm... .8» 6% m3 . Ga .08 mmm..wbb.mm new." nma.mmn.m Nm¢.¢o¢.mm I III. mmm.mom.mm moon nmm.n8.$¢ 393927 ...I ”3.30.30 33 mmo.mmm.m.3 .3068 :5...“ II: 30:80:93 8m." 30.3936 pmmfimndp anm.m.vm.ooo mg." Anaonogv An Honmupv Anaonmgv Andgomv noon Hopoaon waauqdanaao naooa no naaoaoonmo nodnoaoo ooo pom nadoa nu anoahdn a“ ooo on occnongn dad owndno non douobaaoc ha«»Qdac nononousn nwsoana - e833... 93:3 [Lllll “II wnmflumoma :23.» .833. 3 3:53 no ages...” Salad 53 . 6.9 539.35%» .aoaowuomhoo 9398 532530 £3th 39334 Hannah 3. 6333.38 nnowcoa nodmm 3938 83.5.0 HII «$.33.» $058..“ H863 3o.a$.m 83 new 65 .o II 3180. 984.86 0% Jam; «awake «m3 mama“; 03.2.“ n3 and an...” Aaaofisfi €3.qu A3353 A3833. “Snappy “Sofie: 3o» nodwn nodon nodan noadn noadn noadn 333.3: ooo H38 8... ..H .m to?" 03.38 233:8 3:38 :58 units 738038 . x 33380.. ...: Ema 33 $3 no gain. a: :3... .od .qoamflfig .doavdnomnoo addono hpauoaaoo .noqdnm mamhaaqd.adom«h hp confidaadda unowdoa madam “cannon mmm.§..m2 ...-...... 80.313 Sofimhama Bmfiwmémfl egg; 82 8 I... mm I new: EQNQfinmm ll m3.8o.fid m8.mmo.mmn m8.mmo.mma ll 33 $120.3 II ”Swmen 20;.013 93.5015 ....l 33 Smgmoéom ll amm.umo.m8 §.pmo.m8 83 08.3.»;3 ll $863.... Sammfimfl EQmEJQ. nmo.mmm..oa 33 m8.nmm.m5 II 08.8m6m moo.¢3.mmn 80.31%.» 83 A.” ”8.813% Bo..§.$ 80.0.3.3» 83.8.8 o5.8p.8m ...33 m _ Audgomv Audnfionv “c.8303 Audgomv A3533 Auvgomv Hook coda» mead. «mama ooadn madam coda: uduqodao ooo H38 03 ..H .m tofin 03833 6330 can 333% Haves Ado odauoaon .Hddouoaaoo 83433 .53» uéaoio .3 3:33 no .33 80:53 33 .8an .3 aBaooon nwsafl 3w“. :5 93508 .883 335.8 pfifiwmpoc .m .p “.05 .qufifiai 538398 page 58838 no 3036903 and «833500 High no anomum on» 3" donoznbm 3.3 scum con—#980 “coupon cosqfiuoonafi a Inga .8 SE. .833 3333 sneaks .m .p .6an .8 "333%..” $5923 .65 533335 332258 aiwcouo 33°28 Mic 2336.33 can do: 3:80 .333th .mlo g on» a“ 353de dead Eon.“ venue—80 “condom 086365 I... www.mkén www.mNaméH $m.mhm.m 82 «865.3 v8.v$.2 ...l 32 wboéndfi «3.93; mSJSJN magmndfl I... 33 amnfivmgn 8n.$~..mm _vmm.8«.$ 3m.mmm.ma mama _ www.mmmég «“3623? mam.$~..mm II SoJumfinm .32 7 mafifimwgfi «8.80.2 gnéofimv ll $185.30 82 m 05.2.0.on mhfimmpim 53.8mm“: II. $5.3mem $3 . «anaemia» ¢8.oom.¢mu $3 Audqaomv Aadquomv Amdqdomv Anuqflomv “academy ado» Huboaon added 0H0 mach wdapoxuda ado» wqflaouuda udoh wadaoxuda mudpoxunx ooo 339 no oqofiamom 23 Ho 830 a: no a: no 830 on» an 30.3 05 ad Samoa on» ad oucoaoouwa hp coughs none among no 335:5 3353de added no anon—ham 5 ooo 3 donobflnod Ago pswgfio Mo 5325 33055 “Quad 3.30.3“ awash? ooo B @3933 no.3 adorn—5 Ho hpuvngd 82:33 .29» 3:qu .3 33qu no H388 80:62 33 oan.m¢n.ma wmb.mmo.oa pm¢.mao.n mmn.¢no.m mama oov.am>.a bma.m¢o.a mon.na nmo.ao Nona “fig? 936$ 086$ «51$ Sm” Hom.mom.m onm.aon.o I mmh.¢m¢.m ma¢.m¢m coma 2.3.2.2 «SJBJ «8.68 3930..» $2 Audanmvpv A5335 Auden-.25 Auaofigv .3.» Hapoaou wnauqdanasb ended no uaaoaoonwd uddqoado ooo can undoa a“ anoaohum ad ooo on oumnoaam can ondgo «on oouobaaod huauqdna nonunohum awaounu 33%8 3335 as onmflzmga .32" 33:8 .3. 335:» no H288 8?.de mama .05 5323533, - 168 - .qouuauomnoo caucus huudoaaoo .noqdum mamhadq<.ddoayh an coaficanadavuuowdoa uoadm ”condom F853;: ..H 893». bmmémpéd 53.02.03 H 83 on}? Am ...I 08 .an .n 8p .80 .3 9K 63.3 I... 32 §8.mm~..mmm ...... Em.m.mm.8a Bdafidmfl 2.181an I 33 Sméwflov ...I . 2568.9 ”853.9 . 83 $180.98 I... 08.98;. 2m.mm«.mmm 3§Sm6$ 2mg86 82 «3.310% ...I Saéadfi. swimnofii. mom.$n.mn¢ 2.933“. 82 mma.$m.§n 53.5353 8930.53. Sm§$JHm modomménm $3 Aadqsomv Aavnsomv Auuqsomv Anuqflomv Aacquomv Aucdaomv ado» uoada guano uuada moan. ooadu uoaau wdupwxnax ooo H38 8* ..H .m p.393 3:38 .33.. 28 3:33 dance Hao owauoaon .dadonoaaoo 32:33 .2.» 33353 .3 353% no :2. 08..de mama 35 9.3 «o :33... S. :3... fiflmmmi H 0858; Hoofimmd 03.13 3486‘ 83 5258.: ...... «nun-amp; Sauna; . «SJ: 3198.” $2 $043; ...... II @434 3mm...» «3.31” 33 H863 II £38 533 mama 2;;an ...I 52.58.." 8o.$n.o 813 03486 32 «3.5.8.3 II 09.0%; mifinoia 898 n?.moo.3 83 www.5m.» 39$ www.mgd so; 8155.» .. $3 A3335 Auflofifiv Anson-3v Auaofigv “3333 53335 .3...» mead: sedan nodd- uoadn ooadu undue uduaoaao ooo Hate 8w ..H .m tau“— ofluoaou 833:8 3:38 .38 $0.28 432380 - 169 ~ 83:...va .23» “38.30 up do: Had no «3.8 08....an 33 . mum” .Hn nopaooon nwsouna 3B. .8 nopaooofioocmo magenta aqoaquza .m .p 10d .aouwflfiusv 3380 8 338 “08850 no uuouumuomm cad qoapuuqoo Haaoadnfih no vacuum 0:» nu donuuaaam spud soak doasnaoo ”condom o»m.n§m.m nmm.omb.o o¢m.mb Hmv.m mama 80.813 «8.35 306$; 966$; 83 93.8.3 8045;... finches: momdnfia $2 nuaonaupv noaonmspv Auaononpv Anaonuupv Ado» Huboaou madcadumudo uqdoa no nanoamonwd «dunoado ooo eon added a« aaoahdm nu ooo o» oudnonam dud owamno no: donohaaov huaaqddd noadnonun nwfionnp 3393 5385 dodddvd0016nd HANdE $268.3 mafia 13 .805 monamméa 25.13; 33 $86me mEH 03.05 Sign.» @868; mama oEJmH 30.3: ~86 www.ml 33 51mg .. Human“. 03.02 on”; 83 H3635 08.8.“ En.omm.m 3m.$m.o «823» $3 8903.3 and» 086mm 33.2. 5863.8 Smfl Anaonmsnv Auaonwanv Auaonnspv Auaogmdpv Anaonuppv “wow anoaun agdofi 6H0 ado» unauoxnaa nan» wuapoxhda ado» wqflpoxuma mnduoxhwz ooo 3.8 no pgiamom 3... no 830 on» no on» no 80.8 on» an cacao onu ad quoH on» ad upaoaoonwa wdadqaacado uqdoa mo aqoahdm a“ ocdnonan uo\de hp donoboo ooo o» doumbaaod ondnousm nwnonno mono anonnuo mono anonuso 000 An doudswod no hauuqaqd no haaundnd mono «gonaso .3 5323.0 83:32 :8» «wagers. P 88 and no H283 08:63 a ~170~ .o.n .aoowdanuda .nowaduomuoo pavouo haauoaaoo .noqdum aamhadqd enough hfi donadaaada uuowuoa noaww ”ounuom @869... 0368 v9.3 «at?» 33 Aflofisé Aflofiafl Aflofigv Eofigv 5:335 “Soggy .30» mod»: uoado ands. coach mead: uoadu uddqoado ooo 3.8. 8v ..H .m tonne 3338 83380 2:38 H.309 $9.88 #30238 g donuHaHOOIan munda $863 ......H ...... Eodma ll £3.33 $2 $362.» ...I. «365 @363.» $3.30.». 83 Smfimfifi ll 08.»an 25.38;. 35.3 036mm... 83 2903.2 .8068 m8.m¢m.oa Boa mmo.$m.oa $2 Aflofisfl “Soggy Andofifiv A3233 Afiofigv Auaofifiv So» no.3» mega 33¢ :23 madam undue wqapoufidz ooo H38 .09. ..H .m ”comma 3:33 83:38 33.58 3.3. unanfis #22038 :. mmmflzm¢mfl .32" 338:3 3 38 and no and: 89.63 Ema. .Gmma .8 nopasmom fisfifi '9va .on 3.3. .owMMuo mfluaaum adogmwboa .m .D «6.9 Joannfimdsv nouufiofluoo p.398 3303200 no 283933 can «333300 Hwaogdh no «ham on» 5 623.3de .35 893 609.258 30.38 _ n www.mn FEE 80.an «2.3 I... 82 m. $¢.Sm.m Sodom p.563}. H8.Rn.a $3 “3335 Aflofigv A3053 “33:55 A3355 .33 H383.» undo.” vac .30.» waauoufima .30» 3303.36 .33» mnauoauda 31308.32 ooo 339 «a pacing; on» no 23? a: no .5 no 830 on» «a cacao on» ad .93." on» ad 3553? wngqfiuauo undo." no «3% a.“ 3.33% hofifid hp douoboo ooo 3 632.33 2.39:5 £36.23 980 «39.30 mono £3de ooo up @3263 no 33936 no 53530 no.3 «93.30 no 3355 doddgaooiomd HHS .393. 3 .3803 $3.5 mvmla .3 nupaooon Lacuna Masada.” unmanngow .m .D 70.0. .5»qude aoflpgaoo 3.095 5308900 mlo Eggnog cal.“ €33.80 4.305.th wane 9.3qu on» a.“ dogmflpam 33 39G 6359300 30.38 mmm.m¢n.$ l H www.mgéw $3 $993.3 $903.0: ..ll 53.03.50 8m." pom.nom.m¢ pw>.nnu.a ¢¢m.onm.u¢ m¢ma 133 3.3 3.3 3.3 ...... ...dpoeon 33933.90 made." no nanoaoouma ugaoado ooo won 383 3 308.3% 5 ooo a» 330.25 and owadno aoz 609330... 3393.0 nausea £38.23 63.289» 33:55 83:33 .3?» .8820 .3 $333 no .3388 going @349 . 2 .o .n .aoawuanudz W. 53930300 3698 538380 .Aoadum «3.3.34 .333 ha. 35333 9333 nodwm .0933 _ mmméwm...“ ..II @563; mamémmJ H862” mdvfimoJ mom." m3.mnp.m II Entnmmfi. 5.32.05. p.35: 05.0mm; 3m." mmm.n$.¢ m8.$m.m £98m...“ 9.5.2. «8.31m Baa Am Honmdnv no H2325 An H2323 Au H2325 Au H0355 An .3553 know «33 =ch coded nod.» nodu- ooacm @303?de So .238 8.. ..H .m ouofia 03353. .8338» 3:38 H38. Incipuo .Hdaouoaaoo dgauadoolga Ea Ffifl .8 non-39m H302» im¢ma .on aqua .ooammo wadpnanm uaoaqnoboa .m JD ”.0. n .douMdanmdsv nowuunomuoo advouo Nuacog 88on no mqoapdumqo was doaofiunoo Haaogmaah no» :omm on» ad donuaapdm «add aouu doauaaoo ~173~ “oounom 9368;» «8.0% 1.... H 8562.3 82 www.mmm.mv menmmm who.0¢m .III mmm.¢mm.m¢ mvma m8 .mmpi. . own .mNo mafimmmab $3 123 “is 35 3.5 3.5 3: amboaou ended ufio udoh maauoxuma mach Mdupoxnda amok wdapounwa wqauoxudx ooo Haves no aaoahdmom on» no cacao on» no on» no cacao on» ad cacao onu an aqdoa on» an nanoaoouwu muddgouaufio waded no anoahdm ca cannonfin n0\ddd ha couoboo ooo on conobaaod oadnonum awuonnu noun uqoausb moan adopnsu ooo an douusvod no hadquQG no baadeqa mono snouudo no 33535 82:33 .58» goofing .3 3332“ no H988 89.53 53 APPENDIX B UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AGRICULTURAL MARKETING SERVICE WASHINGTON 25, n. c. June 27: 1957 Mr. John F. Stollsteiner Department of Agricultural Economics bflchigan State University East Lansing, Michigan Dear Mr. Stollsteiner: In reply to your letter of June 7, I am enclosing the two tables that you sent but in modified form. Upon checking the data which you had included in the tables, I found that you had assumed the marketing year for tobacco as a whole to be October-September. For flue-cured, the largest single class of tobacco, the marketing year is July-June. For all tobacco types combined, I consider it preferable to regard July-June (same as fiscal year) as more satisfactory than October-September. For analytical purposes, the July-June period is more useful and comparable data can be compiled more readily. Therefore, I have inserted at the bottom of your tables the data on that basis for 1919-50 through 1955-56. I would like to comment on your reference to "removal from and additions to the commercially marketable supply. " Tobacco when placed under CCC loans is not in any sense a "set—aside" or really removed from the available supply. It is available to all purchasers (dealers, eXporters, and manu- facturers) at stipulated. prices by grades. The tobacco under loan is held by farmers' cooperative associations and is always included in stocks and considered a part of supply in governmental publications reporting such figures. With reference to the question as to whether tobacco under loans and in the hands of the marketing association could move directly into the eXport market, you also raised the question as to whether the "sales" and "other distributions" in your table 2 could be broken down to show export and domestic sales. There are no figures available which would provide such a breakdown, The farmers‘ associations when they dispose of tobacco, usually do so to dealers or manufacturers. The dealers may export the tobacco or sell to other dealers and.manufacturers. It is probable that sizable quantities of tobacco have been sold by the associations to dealers who immediately export such tdbacco. However, there is no quantitative breakdown of what was exported and what went into channels for ultimate domestic use. “174- 2-Mr. John F. Stollsteiner-6-27-57 - 175 - I hope this infirmation will be of some help to you and regret that because of pressing work, we could not compile and send you this information earlier. Enclosures-2 Very truly yours, (55%"1/457/ digit-0Z7 Arthur G. Conover, Head Tobacco and Specialty CrOps Section Statistical and Historical Research Branch Date Due Demco-293 ..m n m N