FRUITS AND VEGEI'ABLES RECEIVED IN TRuCKS

IN THE

COLUiviBUS \JHOLESALE I'!l:ARKET

1929 .. 1935

by Chas. W. Hauck Department of Rural Economics

Mimeograph Bulletin No. 86

Ohio State University and Agricultural E.xper iment Station

Division of Markets Ohio State Department of Agriculture Cooperating

Columbus, Ohio April, 1936 FRUITS AND VEGETABLES RECEIVED IN TRUCKS IN THE COLUMBUS VVHOLZSALE MARKEl'

1929 - 1935

------

TABLE OF CONI'ENTS Page Introduction- Last of a Series (?) •••••••••••••••• 1

Carlot Unloads not Included •••••••••••••••••••••••• 2

True!: Receipts Show Upward Trend • •••••• •••• •• •o•• •• 2

75 Commodities Received in Trucks ••• •• •• •• •• •• • • ••• 5

Trucking Area Expands •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 6

Mar kat ing Season I..engt hens • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 9

Gross Value Rises While Average Falls •••••••••••••• 17

------

Figure 1- Truck Receipts by Commodities, 1935 •••••••••••••••• 4

Figure 2- Sources of Trucks, 1935 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 8

Figure 3 - Average Daily Truck Receipts, 1935 •• ••• • •• ••• •• ••• • 10

Figure 4 Truck Receipts by Weekst 1935 ••••• ••••••••• •• •• • .... 13

Figure 5- Truck Receipts by Months, 1935 ••••••••···~········• 15

Figure 6 Truck Receipts - Jan. 1929-Dec, 1935 Index of Number of Tons per Iv~onths,, ••••••• ••...... 18

Figure 7 .. Truck Receipts - Jan. 1929-Dec. 1935 Index of Value per Ton ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 20 FRUITS AND VJEGZT.hBLES MC~IVED IN TRUCKS

in the

Columb'Js Wholesale Market (1929-1935)

l:!ast of a Series (?)

This may be the last of a series of annual reports on r.1otor truck arrivals of fruits and vegetables in the Columbus wholesale marl:et. The series has covered the period from July, 1928 through December, 1935, or seven and one->~· ..... half years.

The Ohio Divis ion of Markets maintains a market news re;:;ortor in Columbus and issues daily reports of arrivals and prices of fruits and vegetables in t:1e wholesale market. The daily reports form tho basis of ti1ese annual sum­ maries, v;hich are prepared by the Department of Rural Economics oi' the Ohio Agr icuhural .Experiment Stat ion •

•:.rrivals in the last six months of 1928 and in tre calendar years 1929, 1930, 1931, 1932 and 1933 were recorded in Bulletins No. 16, 25, 40, 45, 62 and 72 of this series respectively. The supply of these bulletins has been exhausted· and they are no longer available for distribution. Receipts during 1934, together with some compar is ens with race ipts in earlier years, ware presented in Bullet in LNo. 80, still available for limited distribution. Records of 1~35 c.rnivn.ls~ are' set forth herein.

As pointed out in previous issues, these summaries are only a partial record of the supplies of fruits and vegetables unloaded from trucks in the city of Columbus. Territory covered by the market reporter includes the grovJers' open air market maintained by th~ municipality, a private market lot adjoi:ninG the municipal r.larl,et, a grower-owned cooperative commission house, e.. nd the curbs re­ served on adjacent streets for wholesaling and jobbing from vehicles. The whole­ saling and jobbing houses are not canvassed for information on receipts in motor trucks and no satisfactory method has yet been developed in this city for record­ ing truckloc.ds delivered direct to retail grocers '01." to chain store wo.rehouses ·~vithout prior hnndling in the ;vholesale market.

No reliable est :imate of the unrecorded volume has been or can be made without .;Jore data than are now available. It is known, however, th::ct the volume is considerable. These incomplete records may be misinterpreted as representing all truck arrivals in Columbus. In order to be reliable a· public record of these receipts should include essentially all arrivals at important distribution agen• cios within the city. Therefore, unless means can be found to secure a reasonably accurate and complete record of supplies arriving by motor trucks at all these agencies, this series of reports will bo discontinued. 2.

Qarlot ~oads not Included

Previous annual reports have included carlot unloads~ or receipts by rail, recorded by the U. S. Bureau of Agricultural Economics. Since ~wt all of the truck receipts are reported, COli1parisons with rail receipts laek significance, and therefore carlot unloads in Columbus are omitted from this report in order to avoid possible misinterpretations.

T:1e tertitory covered throughout the seven and one-half ye2.rs in ·which this market nev;s service has been in operation has been essentially uniform, and therefore the data are comparable.

In the daily market reports of the Ohio Division of lvia.rkets receipts are recorded in original units such as bushels, bunches, cro.tos, dozens, etc., but in this bullet in aro converted into pounds for purposos of comparison.

Receipts in trucks reported in this market have increased l:Jaterially in the seve:1-yec.r period 192g...l935. With one exception each year's receipts have been larger Jchan those of the preceding year. In 1933 truck arrivals o..ggregated about 500 tons, or 4 per cent, less than the previous high record of lG,317 tons attained b 1932. A new high record vms set in 1935 with receipts of 23,923 tons, one-third lo..rger than inl934 and 2·~-tirnes as much us in 1929.

Both the number of truckloads o..rriving and the avero..ge net weight per loud contim;ed to increase. Almost 17,000 loads \'Vera reported in 1935, the larg• .­ est numhcl~ yet recorded in o.ny yoa.r. The avoragc load mounted to 2,817 pounds, 22 per cent larger than in 1929.

The area in which tho sa 1935 supplies origino.tod is l:::.rgcr than in o.ny previous ye~.r. Nineteen sta.tes other tho..n Ohio wero represented in this market during tho ycc..r ~ an inc1·oo.se from 12 sto..tos in 1934 c.nd fran 4 states in 1929. The number of loads from outside Ohio reached a new high record of 1080 loads~ about lit iraes as many as in 1934, and almost 60 times as many as in 1929. Six distant sto..tes not hitherto represented in the Columbus market were recorded - Alubama, Louiso..na, lio.ryland, 1!lissouri, New Jersey, o.nd Texas. These six states furnished a total of 15 loo.ds. 737 loads, or more tha.n tv1o-thirds o:i.' the out-of­ sto..to tot[~l, cume from Michigan, and Kentucky.

Average values per ton declined steadily from 1929 to 1932, recovered slightly in 1933 and still further in 1934, and then dropped off again in 1935 to the lov1est IJoint in the fJeven-yeo..r period. 1935 average va.luos wero only 51 per cent o.s :ligl1 o.s in 1929. The recession in 1935 \~o.s due largely to lower price levels of ccrta.in of the predomilluting commodities.

A condensed comp:::~rison of tho receipts during the seven years 1929 to 1935 inclusive is given in tho following table: 3.

Table 1 -Receipts of Produce in Trucks in Columbus 1929-193 5 ·------·------1929 1930 1931

Total no. of truckloads 12,069 11,320 15,762 -.15.j340 Truckloads from other states 19 273 166 541 Truckloads frou J'rc,nklin Co, 8,013 7,687 9,508 8,597 No. of Ohio counties represented 38 58 60 58 No. of other states represented 4 7 8 10 Wt. of products received (lbs.) 18,948,246 20,248;388 26,570,293 32 ,633 '944 Av. net vrt. )6r truck (lbs.) 1,570 1,788 19606 2,127 Av. one-wny i1aul per truck (mi.) 18.~ 27.0 25.9 37.6 Largest mont illy receipts August September Scj!tOLlber September Largest rnontLly receipts (trucks) 2,809 2,450 3,474 3,070 Largest mollthly receipts (lbs.) 5,094,266 5,229,960 6,689,127 7,671,445 Largest vwokly roce ipt s (trucks) 656 589 888 779 Largest vw"i:ly ncoipts (lbs.) 1,270,789 1,356,082 1,735~826 1,972,126 Largest daily receipts (trucks) 159 175 202 183 Largest daily roce ipts (lbs.) 336 '728 389,400 442,725 501,144 Estimated value of receipts $740,301.25 $744,141.53 $747 ,G75.62 ~558,791.03 Est irnatod value por ton $78.14 $73.50 :;56. 28 $40.37 No. of comhiOd it ios of for ad 78 79 85 86 Roundtrip d ista:1co traveled (mi.) 456H-32 612,110 817' 13LJ: 1,153,670

1933 1934 lS35 -----·------·---·---- Total no, of true kloads 14,568 14,813 16,986 Truckloads from other states 486 758 1,080 Truckloads fro1:1 :l!'ranklin Co, 7,621 8,143 9,059 No. of Ohio counties represented 56 59 73 No. of other st :1.te s represented 10 12 19 Vrt. of products received (lbs.) 31,531,016 34,298,704 47,845,176 Av. net wt. per truck (lbs.) 2,164 2,315 2,817 Av. one-way hill.ll per truck (mi.) 40.3 40.1 52.3 Largest monthly receipts September August September Largest monthly receipts (trucks) 3,125 2,891 3,381 Largest monthly receipts {lbs.) 7 ,5'75,541 7,891,582 9,6S'7,259 Largest weekly receipts {trucks) 809 688 830 Largest weekly receipts (1bs.) 1,981,299 1,886,172 2,324,872 Largest daily receipts (trucks) 185 172 217 Largest daily receipts (1bs .) 500,045 436,521 '137 ,283 Estimated value of receipts $660,575.20 $729,810;21. $949 ,J,.81 .. ~3 Estinated value per ton $41.90 $42.56 ~·:~3 9. 60 No. of comuodities offered 76 73 75 Roundtrip distance traveled (mi.) 1,174,462 1,187,718 1,?77,136 ------·------·------Figure 1.--Reported Truck Receipts by Corrmodities, 1935

-Cabba.O'e IToma t: e s t , \, , -. .,, , , , \ \ : . , , , , \,, , " , \ '· .., \ , \, ' \.,., , \ \" Corn Canta­ l,.upes [~i:SvYS{~~·\\\\\\'~\~~ Peaches !0\\'0\\\\\\\\\\0\S\\\\\\;zw Straw­ ! berries·_,,,.,,,-_ II\'·'·\,.,-. .,..,._,\.,\\\! Turnips

Carrots Beans

Celery Water­ melons - 01fion_J.$ 1 ,dry) ·Grapes Spinach Lettuce Rasp­ berriesp-.,,.,,, i3eets All Others .., Thous.cf lbs. lOi)O 2:'JOO ~n 3000 40ou 5000 6-oo 7000 3ooo 90JO s.

During 1S35 seventy-five com!nodities ware recorded o.r;Jon:; ti1esa truck unloads. For J..Wrposas of sii;lplification they have been consolidated in this rel';ort t.mclcr 55 headings; the volume of each is shown in Table 2 •

•Ul l:inds of beans are listed together. Broccoli is iacluded with "cavlL'lc·\;er." "Greens" includes various kinds of greens or salad :1lants, such as turDip tGps and vvater cress. "l~iscallaneous" is made up of a variety of minor cou,:Jo~ities~ L1cluding dill, horseradish, mint, okra, pawpaws, persir.nnons, pop­ corn, s~1.,;e a:.1d others. Several kinds of nuts are represented under the one head­ L1s• "Pop:;.)ers" includes pimentos and mangoes, and "onions (groen)" includes leek as wel.l as r;reen onions.

Eic;·ri:; loading commodities accounted for two thirds of ·~;le receipts. In order of c,u:.;.n·city {weight) these eight ranl:ed as followsJ potatoes, apples, cab­ bage, to,,J:d:;uos, corn, cantaloupes, peaches and strawberries.

In ?i.;ure 1 tho leading commodit ios are compared in terms of volume received.

Table 2 - Trucl~ Unloads in Columbus by Commodities 1935

-----··--·-·----T~uck -Tct:O:f______T_r_v-.ckP~t:-;f

.Q£[email protected]_.H.L_ ____Unloa.ds _!_otal__ . g,ommodit,X_ Unloads T.Q,t.;:;..:::::a::.l __ (pounds) (pounds)

Apples 5,102;807 10.66 Onions (dry) '891,692 1.86 Asparagus 137,590 .29 Onions (green) 1,066;999 2.23 Beans 1,098,479 2.30 Oranges 58,740 .12 Beets 473; 695 .99 Parsley 38 ;947 .08 Berries (other) 33~492 .07 Parsnips 276;209 .58 Blackberries 229~874 .48 Peaches 2,300,531 ?.81 Cabbage 4~140~613 8.65 Pears 255;725 .53 CQbbaze Sprouts· 10;434 .02 Peas 216;515 .45 Cantaloupes 2; 715 ;240 5.68 Peppers 417 '900 .87 Carrots 1,165,148 2.44 Pickles 290;290 .61 Cauliflower 198;921 .42 Plums . 148;145 .31 Collards 6;935 .01 Potatoes 8,610;636 18.00 Celery 1,050,813 2.20 Pumpkins 39;600 .o8 Cherries 190;144 .40 Quinces 15,210 ~03 Chinese Cabbage 120,916 .25 Radishes 1,075,015 2.25 Corn (green) 3,426~250 7.16 Raspberries 508;!.:09 1.06 Cucumbers 324,374 .68 Rhubarb 314;170 .66 Currai.'lts 11 ,8·1-2 .02 Salsify 6;755 .01 Eggplant 48,525 .10 Spinach 674;055 1.41 Endive 103,710 .22 Squash 167;445 .35 Grapefruit 136;650 .29 Strawberries 1,732;484 3.62 GrQpes 753,225 1.57 Sweet Potatoes 379;580 .79 Greens 17,570 .04 Tangerines 23,660 .os Kale 121;220 .25 Tomatoes 3,847;261 8~04 Kohlrabi 8,410 .02 Turnips 1,175;647 2.46 Lettuce 564;082 1.18 Watermelons 1,013;947 2.12 Mustard 81;885 .17 Miscellaneous 18,765 .04 Nuts 8,000 .02 Total 47,845,176 100. ------6.

Recorded trucl: arrivals in Columbus i11 1935 originated. in 71 Ohio counties, n:.:.ned specifically~ in addition to 1231 loads reported o..s orizinating in "Nort:_er:l Chio" <:end '/65 loads reported as originating in 11 Sout:1er:1 Ghi0. 11 1080 loads ar:·ived fro;n 19 states other than Ohio.

i::is is the largest nu··>Jber of Ohio counties and the lar:::;est nulDber of ot~;er st~..:.tes yet recorded. Clearly the area supplying this iDarket b motor trucks is ex pan~ i:1;:_;. ;,lmo s-G twice as many Ohio counties and five t iues as uany other stc:.tes v;ere represented as in 192S.

T'o.blo 3 - Ohio Counties and other States Supplying TrucHoa.ds i.J.1, Colu>Dbus, 1929-1935

l92S 38 100 4 100 1930 58 153 7 175 1931 60 158 8 200 1932 58 153 10 250 1933 56 147 10 250 1934 59 155 12 300 1935 71 187 19 475

Distances traveled varied from an average of about 5 Iniles lor the trucks originat i."lg in Franklin County, in ·which Columbus is located~ to approx­ imately llOO rdles for each of 4 trucks originating in Texas. The average one­ way haul per- truck vvas 52.3 miles, 30 per cent longer than the ~~revious high recor-d, and 21- t L:aes as long as in 1929. The total round tr i:._) distance traveled·

by the tn.:cl(s VJhich broucht 16,986 loads to Columbus in 1935 vJas 1 9 777 9 136 ;;Jiles, a much ;;rea:ter r::iloage than was covered in any previous year.

Ti-;e round trip distance traveled by these trucks serves as an index to (a) tile con~L-uous expansion of area from v;llich Columbus has beon receiving motor­ dra'.m supplies sin co lS29, and (~))the :::;ror;bc use of trucks in supplying this market.

Table 4 .. Milec::.ge Tr&velod by Reported Trucks 1929-1935 ------·---_Round :£_rip Dis!_f!:r;ce -=----- Aver;:-l;e One::~~l Index Index __Xca..r______Miles --1.2~2 ....::_;100 ~-----±-929 .l!-100

1929 456,432 100 18.9 100 1930 612,110 134 27.0 143 1931 817,134 179 25.9 137 1932 1,153,670 253 37.6 199 1933 1,174,462 257 40.3 213 1934 1,187,718 260 40.1 212 1;935 1,777,136 389 52.3 277 ------7.

In Table 5 truckloads from Ohio are compared vvith truc~:loads from other s·co.tec for each of the yea.rs 1929 to 1935 inclusive. It 1Nill be noted that ·t:1e jJerce:ltage of loads from other states has increased subs·~ant ially since 1929. Since trucks from greuter distances usually carry larger loads, a small increase in number of loads from distunt points represento n. lur;i:cr L1crc::::..se in volume o.:. produce. Budget limitations prevented a complete ~1alysis of che records in lS3L1 and 1935? hence the volume (weight) and kinds of J::rcduce received from each county n.nd state in those yeo.rs c.re not known.

Tc.:ble 5 - Sources of Reported Trucklon.ds in Columbus 1929-1935

.. ··------·---··~------___fQL.9.£nt ------Load.s Loads from Total from Year from Ohio other states Loads from Ohio other stn.tes ----~---~------..------1929 12;050 19 12;069 9S.8 .2 1930 11;047 273 11;320 97.6 2.4 1931 15,596 166 15;762 98.9 1.1 1932 14,799 541 15;340 96.5 3.5 1933 14-;082 486 14,568 96.7 3.3 1934 H,055 758 14,813 94.9 5.1 1935 15' 906 1080 16,986 93.6 6.4

~~ra:1klin County as usual furnished a greater part of the rej_)Orted truck­ loads than c:.ny other county. 9059 loads, or 53.3 per cent of tl1e total, origin,.. ated in t i1is county. Pickaway County ranked second, as in earlier ye:Ts, >vith 1537 loads, or 9.0 per cent. Fairfield, Licking~ De1avJare and Stark Counties ranked ne;;t in order, with 3.6 per cent, 2.5 per cent, 1.6 per ce:r~, and 1.5 per cent respectively •• These six counties supplied almost three-fourt:1s of the total truckloo.ds re~!ol-ted in this market in 1935.

The distribution of loads by counties of or1g1n cannot be :Jo.de vuith as much accuracy as in former years, since in 1935 many truckloads v.ere reJ_)Orted as "Northern 0!1io" or "Southern Ohio," instead of by counties. 1231louds, or 7,2- per cent of the total, came from "Northern Ohio" and 765 loads, or 4,5 pt;r cant, from "Sout hcrn Ohio."

Ju:10ng other states furnishing supplies to this mart•et l.:ichign.n led in 1935 \Uith 356 loal.s, or 2.1 per cent. Indianu vias second v~ith 273 loads, or 1,6 per cent. Franklin Co·.

Pickaway Co.

Fig. 2.--Scurces of Truckloads *'Northern Chio reported in Colurabus, 1935.

*Southern Ohio

Fairfield Co.

Licking Co.

Michigan

Delaware Co.

Indiana

Stark County

Ross County

Huron. County

All Others ro : I N1llllber of\.----} 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 trucks ~ *Counties not otherwise. identi.fied . 9.

Table 6 - Sources of Reported Truck Loads in Columuus by States und Counties, 1935

------·Number --Number -----·-·-·----Number f£!!!l."tY~----..D:u c kloa!!.L_...Q.ount x:.....:. _. --.::.T:..r..:::.u.c k~a.ds_ ~'!iL_ __ Truckloa4§

Ada1ns 2 Lake 1 Vinton 26 Allen 9 Lawrence 50 Washbgton 32 Ashland 8 Licking 422 Wayne 86 Ashtabula 4 Logan 3 Wood 19 Athens 2 Lorain 42 Wya.ndot 45 Auglaize 37 Lucas 2 Ohio Points 15'006 Belmont 1 Madison 90 Brown 1 Mahoning 12 Champaign 3 Mar ion 54 Clinton 3 Medina 3 Columbiana 9 Meigs 105. Alabama. 5 Coshocton 7 Mercer 1 Florida 39 Crawford 39 Miami 4 Georgia 81 Cuyahoga 16 Monroe 3 Illinois 12 Darke 1 Montgomery 1 Indiana 273 Delaware 281 Morgan 7 Kentucky lOS Fairfield 614 l~iorrow 51 Louisiana 2 Fayette 7 Muskingum 14 ll'laryland 1 Franklin 9059 Northern Ohio 1231 Iuichicun 356 Fulton 9 Perry 1 lUssouri 2 Gallia 25 Picka\'!Jay 1537 New Jersey 1 Geauga 6 Portage 4 84 Greene 3 Putnam 19 North Carolina 21 Guernsey 5 Richland 27 PennsylvQnin 9 Hamilton 49 Ross 172 South Ccxolina. 1 Hancock 6 Sandusky 6 Tem1essee 49 Hardin 111 Scioto 125 Texas 4 Henry 46 Seneca. 34 Virginia 7 Highland 11 Southern Ohio 765 West Virginia. 25 Hockin~; 46 Stark 256 Other Stutes 1080 Holmes 6 Summit 2 Huron 137 Trumbull 4 Jackson 24 Tuscarawas l TOTAL 16 986 Knox 58 Union 4 ------~ ------

Ilfmrketing Season Lengt.!:ruu!

In 1935 trucks were reported in the Columbus market on 287 days, a gre.:~ter number than in any preceding your. The previous hish record v1us 266 days in 1930. i~.lthouch the municipal farmers' wholesa.le market in Colur:Jbus is essen.. tially r:. three day market .. Tuesday, Thursday a.nd Sa.turda.y each week ..,. yet during much of the season trucks arrive and sales are made every day.

Receipts on Saturday exceed those of any other day, usually representing about one-fourth of the total for the week. In 1935 the three so-called "market days" accounted for 62 per cent of the truckloads and 58 per cent of the produce. Average receipts in Table 7 and in Figur~ 3 are based on the number of days on which arrivals Vi ere reported, not on the number of days in the year. Figure 3.--Average Daily Truck Receipts Reported in Columbus, 1935 Thous, of lbs.

2~)_(),------·------~

200

J.SO

160 ....

30

60

40

c !1lon. Tues. Vled. Thurs. Fri. Sat. 11.

Table 7 - Daily Receipts Reported, 1935

No.-- of T:r;ucklol¥!!1 ------Pouadp of...!!:.£S!_uce Day of I::arket Pet.-- of Pet. of -·~-leel£_ _ _Days Total Average Tot§l__ Tot a.l_&!SH' g.ge _ _!ot a.J.

Monday 42 1830 44 10.77 5j814;477 138;439 12.15 1'uesday 50 3554 71 20.92 9,134,517 182;690 19.09 7/ednesduy 47 2299 49 13.54 7,034,912 149,679 14.71 Thursday 47 3029 64 17.83 8,379,739 1'18;292 17.51 Friday 51 2228 44 ~.1a 7 ;163,896 140;468 14.97 So.turday 50 4040 8l 23.i2 10,317,635 206,352 21.57

Total 287 16986 59 100. 47 ,845p176 166,708 100.

The largest single dny's reca.ipts were recorded-- on Tue.sdt17, August 20, with 217 trucks bearing 525,923 pounds of produce. Crowding·of the market on this and other days of heavy receipts wo.s a. serious handicap, both to the buyers and sellers. Tro.ffic congestion is u difficult problem in this market, loca.ted as it is in r.Jidtown Columbus. Access to the ma.rket district is by streets o.nd o.lleys used hec.v Uy by passenger vehicles a.nd trucks omp1oyod by other businossoa as well ns by produce \lholosa.lers and jobbers a.nd by fn.rmers. 'rhis market is sever~! blocks removod from tho noa.rost ra.ilroa.d ya.rds o.nd cold stor~ge wa.ro­ housos, thus nocossita.t ing unusua.1ly largo a.mounts of oxtra. handling a.nd true ld..ng.

The city-owned property a.ccommoda.tes a. ma.ximum of 75 ve:1icles. Trucks in excess of the ca.pucity of the mo.rket grounds ha.va to be a.ccouaodo.ted :J.long curbs of' adjoL1in;; streets, thus a.ccentua.ting the dela.ys a.nd inefficiencies of distribu• tion resulting from congestion. The number of' truckloads arriving exceeded 75 per da.y on 8'/ days in 1931, 88 da.ys in 1932, 77 da.ys in 1933, 73 dc..ys in 1934, and 91 do.ys in 1935. The 1o.rgest number of trucks recorded in one da.y·wc..s 159 in 1929, 175 in 1930, 208 in 1931, 183 in 1932, 195 in 1933, 172 in 1934, ~nd 217 in 1935.

Table 8 .. Frequency Distribution of Tr uck1oa.ds by Da.ys 1935 and 7 Yea.rs, 1929•1935 - No. of '.i.'rucks 1935 1929•1935 ,_~jng lusive per da.y_ ijo, of I>g.ys Per cent No• o,f Dc.,yp__ , ~Per cent :' ,:.~

0 .. 25 98 34.15 608 33.61 26 - 50 56 19,51 394 21.78 51 - 75 42 14.63 284 15.70 76 - 100 32 l1.15 204 11,28 . 101 .. 125 31 10.80 150 8.29 126 - 150 13 4.53 100 5.53 151 .. 175 9 3.14 52 2.87 176 or more 6 2.09 17 ,94

Toto.l 287 100. 1809 lQOI. 12.

Receipts in 1935 are recorded by weeks in Table 9 and ::i:~ure 4. The greatest c;uantity of produce reported in a single week arrived during the six days Septer.Jber 16 to 21, \Vhen 787 true ks arrived bearing 2,682,402 pounds. The largest nuLJber of trucks reported in one week was 830 in the v1eok of to August 3. Tho volume roce ivod in the week of Soptembor 16 to 21 v~as 111 per cent larger than tho largest amount rocoivod in any wock of 1929, and 42 per cent larger than in 1934.

Tabla 9 - Rocoipts by Weaks, 1935

No.7£--No. of No. of ---No. of li£9!_of ..-·---Truckle~ Pounds Wook of - 'l'ruckloads PouB£!s

Jan. 1- 5 63 157,946 - 6 477 1,031,681 7-12 98 241,951 8-13 599 1,434,621 11--19 68 235,286 15-20 661 1958'/;866 '21-26 68 163,084 22-27 697 1,717;155 2&-Fob. 2 60 174,476 29-Aug.3 830 2,115,889 Fob. 4- 9 59 145,342 Aug. 5-10 769 1,968,183 11-16 57 155,957 12-17 687 1,920,849 18-23 63 154,186 19-24 792 1,987,522 25- Liar.2 47 74,073 26-31 704 2,050,049 !Viar. 4- 9 66 165,534 Sept .2- 7 568 2,324,872 11-16 64 169,618 9-14 708 2,282;077 18-23 84 268,195 16-21 787 2,682,402 25-30 112 255,674 23-28 607 29131,052 Apr. 1- 6 125 205,579 30-0ct. 5 595 2,165,787 S-13 140 199,553 Oct .. 7-12 365 1,526,284 15-20 99 219,472 14-19 464 1,649,097 22-27 130 227,654 21-26 469 1,625,779 29-~u:r 4 148 314,473 28-Nov.2 392 1,230,636 May 6-·11 174 270,485 Nov. 4--- 9 342 1;055;912 13-18 229 434,590 11-16 294 1,050,379 20-25 246 790,276 18-23 271 807,525 2'7-June l 233 659 ,'771 25-30 126 275,315 June 3- 8 374 780,784 Dec. 2- 7 145 417,939 10.. 15 373 902,634 9-14 213 633,461 17-22 476 930,317 16-21 136 384,965 24-29 545 1,271,693 23-28 57 128,942 3Q-3l 30 90,634

TOTAL 16,986 47j845,176

~------~------

The smallest receipts in a single week in 1935 were recorded during the period February 25 to 1-larch 2, with 47 truckloads aggregating a little more than 74,000 pom1d3. The largest and smallest vJee kly race ipts in each of the seven years 1929 to E135 inclusive are shown in Table 10. Thous. of lbs. Fig.4.--Truck Receipts by Weeks, 17JJ I 3000

2700

24CO

2100

1300

1500

1200

900

6oo

300

1-' w 0 14. Tu.hle 10 - Largest and Smallest \'JeeHy Rece i11ts 1929-1935

--·---·-· ---.. .. -~------·-----·------·------Largest Weokly Rqco ipts Smallest ·fE:.:ol(1X. I'-.2.£.£.1Ei§ _..l.9.Q£.______Trucks Pounds Trucks ______L.Q.unds __

lS1 29 656 1,2'70,789 7 8,750 1930 589 1,356,082 20 15,020 CJ') 820 1;:n 888 1,735,826 29& f'J••' /1 l : ··: ') ..L.....- ... }{..,J 779 1,972',126 55 58,845L:!:. 1:::33 809 1,981,299 30 24-; 580 l·-1·-,,:;_ 688 1,88E,l72 33 26,025 1935 830 2,68<2,402 4r1 H, 073 -·------·------Lh Excopt for ono wook of sovore won.thor in clhich no race ipts in truclw wimtovor vJoro roportod.

Se~:,te~aber race ipts exceeded those of any other month in 1935, ;·; iJch 2750 loacis a,:,;_::n: ~;u:t inc 9,697, 259 pounds. The number of truckloads arri v inr; L that montL :r.s oxceodod ·both in July and in Aur,ust, but the avorago load in Soptei:Jber was larger. 'lho vJoight oi' produce rocoivod in Soptembor const 'Lttr~od 20.3 par cent of the total, r;horoas in August tho qut:.ntity '.'Jas 18.8 par cone, aitd in July H-.3 par cm1t.

Tho mo~ltll:J of July, August, So:t)toubor and October accounted for 69 por cent of tho <:JJOunt reported in l935, a smaller per cent than 11as received in tho four large :;t r,onths in any previous year. A tendency to extend tile .. ,ar:;,_ t ing soa­ Gon over a lorl[}cr period hc.s boon ohacrvod s incc 192 9. In that yc::r i;:o"·c \.; imn 82 per COClt Ut -~ho JOO.l' 1 G receipts \/OrO reported in tliO fOUl' rJonths ciuri;: tho hoight of Lho soo.so;:L In 1935 o.lmos'i the so.r-:10 OJilOunt, o~' 85 por CC1l"L, ':;r·.s G_;_.·roc.d ever the six ;nor:tt1G Juno to Novombor incluaivo. The fivo lc:rgcst ;.JOri!:.l1S i:n lS35, Juno to Octotcr, :1.ccountod for only 77.6 per cent of the total tonnf'.gr; ll!:' ·i;!-:c yortr. 15.

Figure 5.--Truck 'tleceipts by Months, 1935 Thous. by lbs. 10000~------~--~------_,

9<)00 ...... ··············································

sooo ...... ,......

7000 ......

6ooo · ·

5000 ......

3000· 16.

Tublo 11 - Truck Haec ipt s by l';lon-ths, 1935

------Total We igl'rt Pet. of No. of Pet. of ------1..... v. C.7e ight per !.£nt!L____ l£O und s) Total Truckloads Total Tru.£1.J.l2ounds)

January 889,863 1.8 322 1.9 2;764 February 5'76 ,567 1.2 234 1.4 2,464 March 894,592 1.9 353 2.1 2,534 April . 991,446 2.1 548 3.2 1,809 May 2,168,506 4.5 907 5.3 2,391 June 4,047,329 8.5 1 ,.837 10.8 2,203 ,023,096 14.3 2,835 16.7 2,407 August 8' 990,719 18.8 3,381 19.9 2,659 September 9,697,259 20.3 2,750 16.2 3,526 October 7,515;965 15.7 2,051 12.1 3,665 November 3,593;893 7.5 1,187 7.0 3;040 December 1,655 '941 3.4 581 3.4 2,850 Total 47,845,176 100. 16,986 100. 2,817 ------

Table 12 • Seasonal Peak of Truck Race ipts 1929-1935

------~------Per cent of A!!nual Recei~in Pounds -·- Year ------=4..1l:!rgest :Uonths Largest Single :..;oJ:!th .

1929 82.1 26.9 1930 79.9 25.9 1931 78.9 25.2 1932 74.2 23.5 1933 74.0 24.0 1934 74.2 23.0 1935 69.1 20.3 -- 17. ----Gross Value Rises While- Average Falls Est ir,Jated values of truck arrivals of produce in Columbus reported in 1935 were calculated by multiplying the volume of each commodity received each day by t;1e average wholesale price on the municipal farmers' 1:1arket on that day as reported by the Ohio Division of Markets. Prices and quantities both were con­ sidered L1 terms of original units. Values of certain minor comruodities were con• solidated in the same manner as described on pago5 in connection with the quan­ ti t ios reported.

Table 13 • Estimated Value of Reported Receipts by Commodities, 1935 ----·--- Commodity Gross Value· Per cen;l1

Apples 0 92;955.68 9.79 Onions (dry) $ 13,166.91 1,39 Asparagus 6,576.39 .69 Onions {green) 19;102.37 2.01 Beans 38;890.63 4.10 Oranges 4;249.32 .45 Bellts 7,962.94 .84 Parsley 2;334.47 .25 Berries (othor) 21 C36.34 .:u Parsnips 6;889.11 .73 Blackberries 12,624.42 1.36 Peaches 43j453.42 4.58 Cabbage 33,221.07 3.50 Pears 8,920.54 .94 Cabbage Sprouts 474.40 .os Peas 7;508.29 .79 Cantaloupes 32,422~39 3.42 Peppers 8;446.22 .89 Carrots 24,384.35 2.57 Pickles 9,844.40 1.04 Cauliflower 6;973.77 .73 Plums ?,740.70 .39 Celery 4;3, 932.96 4.63 Potatoes 91,178.57 9.61 Cherries 8,354.77 .as Pumpkins 408.57 .04 Chinese Cabbage 4,115.13 .43 Quinces 544.64 .06 Collards 213.25 .02 Radishes 24;786.84 2.61 Corn (green) 43,458.19 4.58 Raspberries 31,341.89 3.30 Cucumbers 9;474.42 1.00 Rhubarb 11,910.47 1.26 Currants 1,064.78 .11 Salsify 225.43 .02 Eggplant 2;015.22 .21 Spinach 26,8C8.29 2.83 Endive 4,808.59 .51 Squash 2,729.89 .29 Grapefruit 4;693.01 .49 Strawberries 57,011.99 6.01 Grapes 12,174.73 1.28 Sweet fot at oes 8 ~011.29 .84 Greens -480.94 .os Ta.ngerines 1,861.25 .20 Kula 3,498.37 .37 Toma.toes 113;740.04 11.98 Kohlra.bi 279.63 .03 Turnips 1G,006.17 1.69 Lettuce 28,150,50 2.97 Watermelons 3;422.75 .36 Mustard 2;110.01 .22 lviisce llc.ne ous 2,002.87 .21 Nuts 1,800.00 .19 Total 949,181.58 100. ------

In each of the years 1929 to 1935 inclusive, tomatoes led in value ex­ cept in 1933 v;hen they were exceeded slightly by apples. In 1935 ·t;omatoes reported in this market sold for $113,740.04, or 11.98 per cent of the total for the year. Applos as usual wore second, with a value of $92,955.68, or 9.79 per cant. Potatoes followed closely ~vith $91,178.57, or 9,61 per cent. Stra1,Nberries, celery, poaches and cori'l r

Fis~re 6.--Truck neceipts of Proiuce in Columbus, Jan.l929-Dece.1935·

Index of Number of Tons per Month

oo ...... • .. ········· ...... - ..... - ...... T . +...... -. j· ...... \

j 1

OQ ...... ·······r··· I l (JO ··· · ·········\····· ··················A····>··· I

I>< Q) \ rd 1=1 \ ~-~ . I 3 ''(}··········-··-r ················· ...... I, ... :··· ...... ······ ...... ···~···· ...... ·········•· ...... I I i --- o...... ····r-r························· ...... 1.:. k.t.t~~ ...... Trend li_) ---t: I I ! tl-- I i 1/12 ~f 19 9 ~ 1 0

·\

1929 1931 1932 1933 1935 19.

The aggregate value of re perted truck race ipts was greater in 1935 than in any previous year. The value of $949,181.58 in 1935 was 28 per cent greater than the value of receipts reported in 1929, arrl 30 per cent greater thon that of 1934.

~veruge values per ton, a rough measure cf prices, sho~ed some tendency to recover in 1033 and 1934, but in 1935 again weakened and reached the lowest point in the seven years under con.sidero.tion. The average value L1 1S35 v1as ~3£.68 a ton, three points lower than in 1934 and only 51 per cent as high as iri 1929.

Table 14 -Total and Average Values of Reported Receipts, 192 9-1935

------Total Va:.:::l.:::.:ue~------::..v, Value J.?Q!....,i.Q!! ------Index Index Xear -----~11~!-- 19~.... ; .. J:2,Q______Do;klars __]-929_.:_!QQ_ __ _

1929 $ 740,301.25 100 $ 78.14 100 1930 744,141.53 101 73.50 9-4 1931 747,675.62 101 56.28 72 1932 658,791.03 89 40.37 52 1933 660,575.20 89 41.90 54 1934 729,810.21 98 42.56 54 1935 949,181.58 128 39.68 51 ------·--

Total value of the reported receipts in 1935 was greater in .July than· in any other r.1ont h, though almost equalled in September. Values approximated . ~174,000., or 18.3 per cent of the total, in each month. In the five ruonths June to October inclusive valUE)S ranged from 95 thousand to 1r14 thousand dollars per month, and aggregated $710,715,91, or 74,8 per cent of the year' a total.

Table 15 - Est :i.mat ed Value of Reported Receipts by Months 1935

--- Pet. of -- _ ____,Mw_hs Gross Value Total ---- (dollars)- --

January 17,376.15 1.8 February 9;811.18 1.0 l.~arch 15 ;,010,30 1.6 April 26,412.92 2.8 i(J.a.y 62,192.02 6.6 June 95,045.94 10.0 July 174;013.83 18.3 August 144,679.90 15.2 September 173;704.99 18.3 October 123,271.25 13.0 November 64,332.64 6.8 Dece:.:bor 43,330.46 4.6

Total 949,181.58 100. ___ .. ------20.

Figure 7.--Truck Receipts of Produce in Columbus, Jan.l929-Dec.1935 Index of Value per Ton

lr-----·;-·-··---~-~----r-·--·-··----, - !,;:,. : j 1 I I ; j . 1fe ------·-···· -; ------~- --- - ____ L ------j-- _----- ___ .

.. .. ········- ·······-·. ,_ -······-········------· .. ----- r. ------·-····· ------.·r------·-,·· ··- ... ------..

: : ...... ;...... : ...... ) ~ ...... , ...... +i ...... 1,, \___ ' ' ' I I i I '1929 - 100 i -- ~~~, ~~ h.\ -:-,-r- fl ~- J1:/\i ~!I II . ! \!) . \. : I . : 8 ...... r .~ ·······r·...... ,...... _ ...... , I · "-.... , , ' ,:,(' ------I . :II I vj Trend I , !'-l \ ; ; I \ 6 · ......

l ! v'1! ~ 1 j \(____ {J 4 - - -I -----; - -- -~!- \ j__ -- -~' ...... + - .···-

1 . l 0 \ii :

1.: !1 \ l 2 ...... ····-·· ...... ·-t··-·-········· ...... ''"'''!·········- .. ··· .. ··········· ...... ············!······ ········-·························-~---·-·····························"''''''''''''i'"'''''''' -·-········· ···············

i,,: l i ' ]

:.'· '.'·:. I

__! _____L _____ ... __p ___ • _ _L______I 0 1930 1931 1932 1933 1935 21.

Table 16 reveals that during tho five years 1929 to 1933 inclusive tho highest uonthlJ values doclinod steadily from 171 thousand dollars in 1929 to 138 thousand i:1 1933~ despite the gradually increr:.sing volume of receipts. This mo.y be accounted for very largely by declining pricoso 1934 o.nd 1935 showed incrcusos the val uc in July, 1935 being 174 thousnnd dollars, lo.rgor tho.n in any previous month durin£; the seven years since the data have been recorded.

A tendency to lower the seasonal peak, or more correctly, to extend the sen.son over o. longer period, is apparent, with a slightly smaller proportion of' tho your's sales being mudo each yoa:r in tho peak month. Note that tho pcrconta.ge of the aggregate annual value in tho pouk month has declined fror,J 23 per cent in 1929 to 18 :)cr cent in 1935. Likewise tho porcenta.gc in tho five peak months Juno to OcGob-.r inclusive ho.s declined slightly c::1ch yca.r, so that in 19:35 these five - months uccuuntcd for only 75 per cent of the your's total whorea.s in 1929 they accounted for 88 per cont.

Tabla 16 - Sousonul Vnluos of Roportod Rocoipts 1929•1935 ------• Vp.luc in one I.lonth_ Vc.1uc, June to Cct. inc. :.:onth of Per cant hr cent Greatest of Annual of Annual X2.£::!:. ______Value Dollars~--~V.~ql~u~o~------Do11c~s _ __l~!Y.~o ____

1929 August $171,605.10 23.2 $652 ,061.8'/ 88.1 1930 August 170,127.61 22.9 644' 97'3. 3,1 86.8 1931 July 169,065.58 22.6 639,849.03 85.6 1932 September 140,909.58 21.4 560,126.21 85.0 1933 August 138,632.32 21.0 538,350.20 81.5 1934 July 155,709.75 21.3 ;)93,924.15 81.4 1935 July 174,0i.3.83 18.3 710,715.91 74.9

Highest values per ton occurred in the late spring r.JOnths of each year during tl1is seven year period, as vvill be noted by reference tu Ta'ule 17 arrl Figure 7. Durinc; these months this market receives from nearby sources large quan­ titius of carl:/ vegetables, berries, greenhouse products, etc., vJhich usually sell for higher-than-average pricos and thus carry the index to a poc..l' at that t imc.

r.r;1e indox of valuo per ton is a composite of the values o:L 78 cornmoditicc in 1929, 79 in 1930, 85 in 1931, 86 in 1932, 76 in 1933, 73 in 1934, and 75 in 193::: By usin~c t:w avcrago value per ton of produce reported in 1929, or ~~78.14-, as a base the bdox for each yoar has boon calculated by dividing the avoro.ge for each month by ;p78.14. Thus comparisons uro fa.cilito.tcd.

J~ rough measure of the relative purchasing power of tLe reported produce may be :1ud by comparing the index of average value per ton 'vVith the index of prices paid by faruers for commodities bought as prepared by the u. s. Bureau ro:f Agricul­ tural ,ii;conor.1ics. In tabla 17 the B. A. E .. index has been co:1Vorted to the 1929 buso and t:1e rut io of the tvw indexes calculated for each month. Pt1rchasing power as expressed by this ratio :was at parity (100) or above in 6 montlls in 1929, 6 in 1930, 5 in 1931~ 2 in 1932, 3 in 1933, 2 in 1934, and none in lc..:35. The composite annual ro..tio or measure of purchasing power declined in 1935 to 62~ the lowest of the sevon yoo..rs, six points below that of 1934, the previous lovJ record. Thus with incroas ing quant it ios, the o.vorago roul valuo to growers ha.s doclL1cd to loss than tlivo-thirds what it vms in 1929. 22.

':L'ab1e 17 - Trend of Prices and Purchasing Po'IJIIer -·-Li=1-----·----·------Value per ton of Index of prices truck receipts paid by farmers Ratio of prices Columbus for commodities received (Cola.) Year and ------Index _ bough:L__ to prices paid Month.... ___, ___ Do~s 19~9 ;; 100.,_ _1929 • lOQ --~(.Y.z._§_J_ __ 1929-Total 078.14 100 100 100 _January 90.02 115 102 113 February 81.29 104 103 101 lliiarch 78.97 101 103 98 .April 78.94 101 102 99 fviay 90.74 116 102 114 June 111.01 142 101 141 ;July 97,37 125 102 123 August 67.37 86 102 84 September 70.51 90 102 88 pctobor 65.97 84 102 82 November 78.00 100 102 98 :pecembor 86.12 100 102 108 ------·------·------1930-Tota.1 73.50 94 95 99 ~anuary 62.92 81 101 80 February 66.72 85 100 85 Murch 93.35 120 99 121 Jt.pril 59.99 77 99 78 lliay 82.53 106 99 107 June 135,94 174 98 177 July 100.08 128 97 132 J\ugust 76.38 98 97 101 September 59.27 76 96 79 October 49.85 64 95 67 ~ovember 52.86 68 93 73 D~ecember 75.29 96 91 105 ---·------193l..q,tot al 56.28 72 81 88 January 66.50 85 90 94 F,ebruary 55.99 72 89 81 March 84.51 108 88 123 April 109.93 141 87 162 May 101.20 130 86 151 June 113,96 146 85 172 July 91.41 117 84 139 August 45.42 58 83 70 September 39.84 51 82 62 October 44.96 58 81 72 November 37.45 48 81 59 December 36.99 47 81 58 ------·l932-Tota1 40.37 52 70 74 January 29.08 37 78 47 Febr'uary 29.91 38 76 50 March 49.72 64 75 85 April 50.38 65 74 88 May 64.74 83 74 112 June 77.79 99 72 137 Table 17 - c ont inued ------Zi-,.1______. ____ _ Value per ton of Index of prices truck receipts paid by farmers Ratio of prices Columbus _____ for commodities race ived {Co1s.) Year and Index bought, to prices paid ~onth ______D~o~l;.1_a~r~a~l~9~2.~9--~l~O~Q------~1~22~9~·~loo~-·------__ ___llh_~·--- 1932-July $55.25 71 72 99 .August 33.83 43 71 60 September 36.74 47 70 67 October 31.31 40 70 57 November 27.52 35 70 50 De camber 17.25 22 69 32 ______... ______...... ,______~------1933-Total 41.90 54 71 75 January 27.88 36 67 54 February 35.06 45 66 68 March 47.70 61 66 92 April 46.28 59 66 89 May 65.97 84 67 125 June 71.11 91 68 134 July 59.29 76 70 108 August 37.13 48 74 '65 peptember 32.23 41 76 54 Pctober 37.19 48 76 63 l'Jovember 41.44 53 76 70 December 27.42 35 76 46 --' -- --·- : 1934-Total 42.56 54 80 68 January 44.40 57 76 75 february 50.10 64 78 82 ¥arch 48,60 62 78 79 ~pril 51.40 66 78 85 May 64.84 83 79 105 June 75.70 97 79 123 July 53.24 68 80 85 .August 36 .. 10 46 82 56 September 36.46 47 82 57 October 34 .. 02 44 82 54 November 32.42 41 82 50 December 35.78 46 82 56 ..,..... ___ -- 1935-Total 39,68 51 82 62 January 39.05 50 82 61 February 34,03 44 uJ83 53 March 33.56 43 83 52 April 53.28 68 83 82 May 57.46 74 83 89 Ju)le 46.97 60 83 72 JJiy 51.01 65 82 79 August 32,18 41 82 50 September 35,82 46 80 58 October 32.79 42 80 53 November 35.80 46 80 58 December 52,33 67 80 84 ' -----,.-\' ·---- Z1 Bureau of AgricultUiral Economics. Converted to 1929 base.