COST OF PRODUCING APPLES IN WESTERN COLORADO. 3 



time required for each operation, as to equipment, cost of labor, 

 spraying materials, boxes, etc., and as to land and orchard values. 1 



The factors considered in arriving at the annual cost of apple pro- 

 duction have been classified as follows : 



Labor. 



Costs other than labor. 



Maintenance. 



Handling. 



Material costs. 



Fixed costs. 



Manuring. 



Pruning. 



Disposing of brush. 



Plowing. 



Cultivating. 



Irrigating. 



Thinning. 



Spraying. 



Miscellaneous. 



Hauling box shooks. 



Making boxes. 



Hauling loose boxes out. 



Picking. 



Hauling full boxes in. 



Sorting. 



Packing. 



Nailing. 



Other packing labor. 



Haul to station. 



Box shook. 



Nails. 



Paper. 



Labels. 



Spray materials. 



Manure. 



Gasoliae, oil, etc. 



Taxes. 

 Insurance. 

 Water rent. 

 Equipment charge. 

 Machine hire. 

 Interest. 

 Building charge. 



FACTS BROUGHT OUT. 



It was found that the total cost of production 2 for the 125 farms 

 representing the entire region averages $0,844 per box; for Mesa 

 County (Grand Valley), $0,935; for Delta County, $0,795; for Mont- 

 rose County, $0,767. (See Table I.) 



Labor costs average $0,394 per box and $111.88 per acre (46.7 per 

 cent of total cost) . 



Material and fixed costs (manure, spray materials, boxes, water 

 rent, interest on investment, taxes, insurance, etc.) average $0.45 

 per box and $127.91 per acre (53.3 per cent of total cost). Of this 

 cost the principal item is interest on investment in orchard, which is 

 $0,184 per box, or 21.8 per cent of the total cost. 



i It is of vital importance that the method of computation used in this study be fully understood at the 

 outset; otherwise confusion and misapprehension will be inevitable. It should be borne in mind con- 

 stantly that the primary result desired is a figure representing fairly the average regional cost cf apple 

 production — that is, the cost in its relation to the apple biisiness of western Colorado as a whole. To get 

 such an average it is often necessary to use certain averages which in themselves have no agricultural sig- 

 nificance, which have no weight except as they contribute to the determination of the regional average. 

 For example, the average acre cost of manuring for the entire acreage of the district under consideration is 

 represented by a figure too small to have significance as applied to any one ranch, since not all the ranches 

 practice manuring, but which has an economic significance with reference to the business of the district 

 as a whole. For the purposes of this study it is as though the entire region were one farm and the cost per 

 acre for manuring were distributed equally over the whole farm acreage rather than over the particular 

 part of the farm upon which the manure happens to be applied. This method gives an average that may 

 mean nothing as applied to the single operation of manuring, but which may mean much as applied to the 

 business of growing apples in the region studied. To arrive at the result desired in this study, namely, the 

 cost of producing apples as borne by the district as a whole, each orchard operation has been figured against the 

 total number of farms. In this way a regional acre charge is determined for each operation, the acre being 

 used as the unit, so that each orchard, regardless of size, may have the same weight in the final calculation. 

 Thus, so far as these calculations are concerned, each of the 125 orchards involved may be considered as 

 being but one acre in extent. In this way weighted averages are avoided, and the final average cost per 

 box becomes a fairly accurate approximation of the actual cost of producing apples in the region, as repre- 

 sented by the 125 ranches chosen as typical of western Colorado conditions. 



It was thought advisable in this connection to figure separately the costs for each county, as well as for 

 the whole region, as the three districts differ greatly in the factors materially affecting cost. Thus the 

 figures may be compared and the results studied in their bearing upon types and systems of farming, 

 which differ quite widely in the three counties. 



2 Not including orchard depreciation and cost of smudging, omitted for lack of sufficient data. 



