Fetrow, W W

English

OSU Journals (Oklahoma State University)

V. SOME ECONOMIC CONDITIONS OF COTTONFARMERS IN OKLAHOMA WHICH AFFECT THEIRATTITUDE TOWARD COOPERATIVE MARKETINGW. W. FetrowOklahoma Agricultural and Mechanical CollegeThe attempts at organization by farmers in the United Statestc improve their economic and social conditions are not of re-cent origin. Such organizations date back to the Revolutionarydays. However, these organizations among farmers prior to theCivil War. concerned themselves very little with the marketingOT farm products. Marketing questions were not so much in thefe-reground as now, because agricultural commerce was muchsimpler than at present.However, since the Civil War, marketing has been one ofthe chief problems of the farmer and during the past decadethere has been rapid development of farmers' organizations whosemain purpose has been more efficient marketing of the productsof the farm.There are now approximately 12,000 farmers' business or-ganizations in the United States and two-thirds of these organi-zations have been formed since the beginning of 1915. The mem-bership in these organizations has been increased from 651,000in 1915 to over 2,700,000 at the present time. This means an in-crease of over 300% during the eleven year period. The businesscf these farmers' organizations in the United States is now overtwo and one-half billion dollars.The farmers of Oklahoma have had their part in this rapidincrease in farmers' business organizations. Since '1920, threelarge cooperative marketing organizations have been formed·in the state among the cotton, wheat, and broomcorn growers.During this same period a number of smaller organizations forboth buying and selling have been formed so that the totalnumber of farmers in Oklahoma now doing business throughtheir own organizations is probably fifty thousand. This meansthat about one farmer out of four in this state does a part of hisbuying or selling through his own organization.Last year 20,472 farmers in' Oklahoma marketed 206,542bales of cotton through the Oklahoma Cotton Growers' Associa-tion. This meant that their organization did a business of over$17.000,000. This is larger than the ordinary business in Oklaho-ma and yet only a little over 12% of the cotton in Oklahoma220 THE UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMAlast year. was handled through the farmers' cooperative cottonn~arketing associations.Interviews with over 800 farmers in Oklahoma both mem-bers and non-members of the association show that the farmersare strong for c~operative marketing and believe the OklahomaCotton Growers' Association has been of great benefit to Ok-lahoma farmers. Five hundred and three members of the asso-ciation were asked if they would like to see the association dis-continued.. Of the positive answers only twenty said "yes" and453 said "no." Fourteen said they did not know and sixteen saidthey did not care. Only forty-eight out of 327 non-membersanswered that they would like to see the association discontinued,v, hile 230 said they would not. Fifteen non-members said theydid not know and 24 said they did not care. In other words, of830 representative farmers in Oklahoma, only 68 or 8.2% saidthey would like to sec the Cotton Growers' Association dis-continued. Six hundred ninety-two or 83.4% said they would notlike to see the Association discontinued. When these same mem-bers were asked if they believed a larger membership would im-prove the ssaociation, 91.Jf'/r said they believed it would. Only.t8l'j, said it would not and the remainder said they did not know01' made conditional answers.These figures reveal very clearly that the Oklahoma farmersare in favor of cooperative marketing and want to see it succeed.The reason more farmers do not take advantage of a marketingorganization ,the primary purpose of which is to help them se-cure better prices is a question which those interested in thefarmers' welfare are trying to answer.Without any reference to the efficiency with which the of-ficials of an organization might handle its business and theeffect this might have on the membership, there are no doubtother factors which might affect the use farmers make of acooperative organization. A number of these factors in Ok1a-home are economic and for the purpose of clearness will betreated under the three following heads: Tenancy, Types ofFarming. and Credit ConditionsTenancyA high per cent of tenancy means a less stahle farm popu-lation than where a large per cent of the farms are operated byowners. In Oklahoma 58.6% of all farms are operated by tenantsand half of these tenants moved in 1924. Nine and three-tenthsper cent of all farm owners moved this same year. In otherwords. about 66.000 farms had new operators that year. In someparts of the cotton section the per cent of tenants who movedTHE ACADEMY OF SCIENCE 221eelch year is even greater than for the state as a whole. In 25counties in the eastern and southern part of the state twa out('If every three tenants moved in 1924.The fact that tenants move so often makes them hesitantabout' signing a contract to deliver their cotton to an organi-zation for a number of years. This is illustrated by the fact thatout of each one hundred members of the association, 52 aret~nants and out of each one hundred non-members 74 are tenants.And then, there is the difficulty resulting from the changein trading center as a result of this moving. All farmers in thesurvey had changed their trading center every 8.3 years. Mem-bers changed evei-y 9.9 years and non-members every 6.9 years.All owners changed their trading center every 12 years. All ten-ants every 7 years. Sixty-seven per cent of all moving in thestate in 1924 took place during December and January. The percent of moving during these same months by districts was 84.7('/cip the south central and 77.1 % in the southeast.This high per cent of tenancy in the cotton section with itsshifting farm population, changes in trading center and timeof moving does not fit into the business methods of the asso-ciation. The association pays about sixty per cent of the valueof the cotton to the farmer when he delivers it to the associa-tion. He receives the remainder in three or four payments, asthe cotton is sold. He usually does not receive his last paymentuntil about nine months or a year after it has been deliveredtv the association the tenant who moves may find it necessary todo his banking at a different place from that to which he haspreviously notified the association to make his payments. He willalso be in need of this money to make settlement with hislandlord. to put in his crops in the spring, or to pay the cost{.·f moving.The common practice is for the landlord to divide the cottonin the bale. If the landlord is not willing for the co~ton to besold through the association, the tenants finds it difficult to buyhis landlord's share in order to send his own cotton throughthe association.Replies from 448 tenants both in and out of the associationS:10WS that 54% of the landlords were opposed to the associationand 41 % were favorable. Five per cent said their landlords wereneutral. For the members, 55% of the landlords were unfavorableand 33% favorable.Tenancy is thus one of the big problems of the cotton coop-erative association in Oklahoma.THE UNIVERSITY ··OF OKLAHOMATypes of FarmingThe. growing of cotton fits easily into a tenant system offarming. Cotton is the principal source' of income to farmers· inthe cotton section of the state a.nd often the only source of in-come. Figures on farm sales sh'ow the extent that farmers dependon cotton for their income. Sixty-two. and five-tenth per centof all the members received from 76 to 100 per cent of their sales0; all products from cotton. For the owners it was 53% and forthe tenants 72%. Cotton makes up over half of the total re-ceipts from the sale of all farm products or 83.7% of all mem-bas. For owners, cotton made up over one half of the receiptsfor 80%, and for tenants 87.5%.The members of the association supplem~nted their cottonreceipts by sales of livestock and livestock products to a greaterextent than did non-members. The sales of livestock and live-stock products was $274 for members and $197 for non-mem-bers. The members also used more livestock and livestock pro-riucts on the farm. The average of these products used by themembers was $296 and for non-members $259. The average size.of the household for members and non-members was approxi-mately the same. If farmers of the cotton belt were receiving alarger per cent of their farm receipts from livestock or othercrops and placing less dependence on cotton they would find itea!'iier to adju!'it themselves to the method of payment by theassociation.Credit ConditionsTenancy and the system of farming in the cotton sectionan' closely tied up with the system of credit. The heavy bor-rowing period for the farmer is in the spring when he is makingarrangements for his year's work. It was found that 55% of allloans were made during the first three months of the year orbefore the cotton is planted. All of the farmers' cotton, livestockand machinery is usually taken as security for these loans. Agreat majority of the loans are made to finance the growing ofthe year's crop, and it is necessary for about one half of thef:..rmers in the cotton section to use credit during the year. Andsince 55% of this credit is taken before cotton is pla~ted anda mortgage is usually taken on the cotton, about one-fourth ofthe cotton is mortgaged before it is planted. The average amountborrowed by alit farmers in 1925 was $392 and for owners was$560 and for tenants, $345.Because cotton is the principal crop most of the loans mustb" paid out of the sate of cotton. For all toans in the cottonsection in 1925 on personal and collateral security, 86.9% wereTHE ACADEMY OF SCIENCE 223made to come due in October and November. The banker ormerchant expects to cotlect at this time because he knows it isu~ually his only chance during the year. The sixty per centpaid by the association when the cotton is delivered will not inmany cases take care of these loans.The above conditions which exist among farmers influencevery greatly the attitude they take toward a cooperative market-ing association. We must recognize these facts; and not expectmore loyalty from farmers to cooperative marketing than theireconomic conditions justify.

Some Economic Conditions of Cotton Farmers in Oklahoma Which Affect Their Attitude Toward Cooperative Marketing

https://ojs.library.okstate.edu/osu/index.php/OAS/article/download/2538/2236

Some Economic Conditions of Cotton Farmers in Oklahoma Which Affect Their Attitude Toward Cooperative Marketing

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

OSU Journals (Oklahoma State University)