Budgeting Costs and Returns for Southwest Florida Citrus Production, 2004-051
The following is the abstract of a much larger report, which is only available in pdf format. To access the complete report, please click here or go to (http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/pdffiles/FE/FE63100.pdf).
Abstract
Estimated costs and returns of growing processed-market round oranges and fresh-market seedless grapefruit in the Southwest area of Florida are presented for the tenth consecutive year. While Southwest Florida refers primarily to Charlotte, Collier, Glades, Hendry, and Lee Counties, the costs shown are also applicable to Okeechobee and Sarasota Counties. The format presented may be used by individual growers to budget costs and returns, utilizing individual data on specific groves.
The budgeted cost information presented herein is the most current available. The budget cost items have been revised to reflect current grove practices being used by growers (e.g., chemical mowing, different spray materials and rates of fertilization, microsprinkler irrigation, more reset trees, etc.). The 2004-2005 budgets reflect major cost increases in all production inputs: fuel averaged a 22% increase; fertilizer products increased 15%; chemicals averaged an 8% increase; and equipment operation costs increased 7%. Along with the increased costs, three major hurricanes (storms) during August and September 2004 resulted in wide tree damage and fruit loss. The Indian River region experienced fruit losses of 70% to 80% on red and white grapefruit. Hamlin orange losses in the Central Florida (ridge) region were 30% to 40%, with Valencia orange losses between 20% and 30%. The only citrus growing region that was not significantly affected by the three storms was the Southwest Florida citrus region. As a result of the excessive fruit loss, the per box, per pound-solid, and per carton costs for the Indian River and Central (ridge) growing regions were higher than in recent years.
The budget costs in this report represent an owner-managed operation for the production of oranges for processing and grapefruit for the fresh market. Therefore, the 10 percent handling and supervision charge added to the material cost for a custom-managed operation is not included in the costs.
Although the estimated annual per acre grove costs listed are representative for a mature citrus grove (10+ years old), the grove care costs for a specific grove site may differ depending upon the tree age, tree density, and the grove practices performed (e.g., spot herbicide for grass/brush regrowth under trees could add an additional $11.88 per acre; Diaprepes control could add $84.18 per acre for each foliar application; extensive tree loss due to blight or tristeza could substantially increase the tree replacement and care costs; spray applications to control citrus leafminer and nematicide applications, such as Temik at $116.94 per acre, could increase the total cultural costs per acre above the average costs shown in the comparative budgets; travel and set-up costs may vary due to size of the citrus grove and distance from the grove equipment barn, adding $28.86 per acre; etc.).
Footnotes
This is EDIS document FE631, a publication of the Food and Resource Economics Department, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL. Published June 2006. Please visit the EDIS website at http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu.
Ronald P. Muraro, Professor, Food and Resource Economics Department, Citrus Research and Education Center, Lake Alfred, FL; Fritz M. Roka, Associate Professor, Food and Resource Economics Department, Southwest Florida Research and Education Center, Immokalee, FL; and Robert E. Rouse, Associate Professor, Horticultural Science Department, Southwest Florida Research and Education Center, Immokalee, FL, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL.
The Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (IFAS) is an Equal
Opportunity Institution authorized to provide research, educational
information and other services only to individuals and institutions
that function with non-discrimination with respect to race, creed,
color, religion, age, disability, sex, sexual orientation, marital
status, national origin, political opinions or affiliations.
For more information on obtaining other extension publications,
contact your county Cooperative Extension service.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Cooperative Extension Service,
University of Florida, IFAS, Florida A. & M. University Cooperative
Extension Program, and Boards of County Commissioners Cooperating. Larry Arrington, Dean.
