Transportation of Texas Cotton

Transcription

1 D.on EthridgO MP-1592 November 1985 Transportation of Texas Cotton THE TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION/Neville P. Clarke, Director/The Texas A&M University System/College Station, Texas

2 TRANSPORTATION OF TEXAS COTTON Stephen Fuller Professor, Department of Agricultural Economics Texas Agricultural Experiment Station College Station, Texas

3 Table of Contents Introduction. I Texas' Cotton Flows and Transportation Corridors I Development of Transportation Link to the West Coast...4 Transportation Mode Share and Rates over Principal Corridors... 5 Corridor Linking Texas to West Coast Ports...6 Corridor Linking Texas to Texas Ports...6 Corridor Linking Texas to Southeast U.S. Mills...9 Factors Affecting Transportation Mode Choice and Carrier Performance...9 Summary...II References...16 Appendix...17

4 TRANSPORTATION OF TEXAS COTTON Significant shifts have occurred in Texas' geographical cotton flow patterns during the past decade due to expanding exports to Asia, declining domestic mill demand, and altered transportation arrangements. This publication reports these changes, compares transportation rates on major transportation corridors over which Texas cotton moves, and provides insight into transportation mode characteristics that shippers view as important. The changing relative role of domestic and foreign markets has affected flow patterns and the associated magnitude of flows during the past two decades. During the mid-1960's, domestic and foreign markets were responsible for about 70 and 30 percent of the United States' annual cotton disappearance, respectively [3]. For example, during the crop year, domestic markets took 9.3 million bales (69 percent), while exports accounted for 4.2 million bales (31 percent) of annual disappearance. Domestic consumption declined to about 60 percent of annual disappearance in the mid 1970's, and since 1980 the two markets have taken nearly equal quantities [3]. Recently, annual disappearance of U.S. cotton in the domestic and foreign markets has varied between 5.2 and 6.8 million bales [3]. Texas' Cotton Flows and Transportation Corridors Historically, Texas has been linked to domestic and foreign markets by two major transportation corridors. Domestically consumed cotton was transported to Texas ports for transfer to oceangoing vessels. The quantity of Texas cotton moving to southeastern mills has declined over the past two decades; however, due to declining cotton production, the share of Texas' production transported to southeastern mills has been relatively constant. A study by Potter and Pritchard shows 31 percent of the Southwest's (Texas-Oklahoma) cotton shipments moved to southeastern mills [8]. Similarly, , , and studies estimated 31.3, 32.9, and 29.0 percent of Texas cotton moved to southeastern mills, respectively [4, 5, 61. A Texas Agricultural Experiment Station (TAES) survey of Texas cotton shipper and warehouse operators showed similar proportions moving to southeastern mills [101. Previous studies estimate that 8 to 14 percent of Texas' annual cotton shipments are to Canada and reconcentration points in Texas other than port warehouses, while the remainder (51 to 62 percent of shipments) moves to export. Until 1980, 80 to 100 percent of Texas' export shipments were through Texas ports; consequently, a major transportation link existed between the Texas hinterland and these port areas. However, recent changes in transportation and logistics have significantly altered the role of Texas ports. In the mid-1970's and the season, changes in the cotton logistics system altered the transportation linkage between inland Texas shippers and Texas ports. As shown in Tables I and 2, the role of Texas ports declined, while California ports' export volume more than doubled. The altered port flows are partially attributable to the development of a transportation corridor linking Texas with West Coast ports. In the early 1970's, Texas ports handled about 45 percent of the U.S. cotton exports. This share declined to about one-third in the mid-1970's, and during the season declined further to 18 percent (Table 1). Texas ports' cotton export share reached a low of 14 percent in the season. Conversely, California ports' share of total U.S. exports increased from about onethird in the early 1970's to a high of 75 percent in the season. Further insight into the demise of Texas ports as an outlet for U.S. cotton is shown in Table 2. As indicated, much of the growth in cotton exports can be attributed to increasing cotton purchases by Asian buyers and the declining role of Texas ports in serving these buyers. Historically, about 75 percent of U.S. cotton exports have been destined to Asia. About one-half of Asia's imports of U.S. cotton exited by way of Texas ports during the early 1970's. This share decreased to

5 2 o - S F C N r- C 0 V _i - M V 0 S '.o N N C '.0 - C - t- '.0 00 m kn M tfl N - 00 tt tr - rn if t- - N N,- 4-a r - - I-. V C' - 00 V) '.0 '. 0 N '0 N N N c '0 '0 '.0 '.0 '0 in 06 d N C'C'C'C' C I- ld - cn 00 N '.0 C' C' '0 N i.. N N - N to C' C' VVV Q).0 Ln - E E E E U C> -. N - in m VVVQ) 00Or '.0 '0 N qt M N 00 C' It C' d r! Q N N - - Q N L)L)L)L) a I- o C. m cz cz cj N 00 '0 '.0 C'.- r V C' N C '.0 '.0 0 N - N '.0 If) 0 00 F - N N N N - - C 0 S - C V C o oo UQ V < C i- o o LT.LLdJ a- ct '.0 00 C' 0 fn V V N N N N N N N V C) N N N N N N N N C' C' C' C' C' C' C' C' C' C' C' C' < N < Ch 0

6 3 -. Qcz X >.?O LU I oncnn Q o 'r) N 0' N N.0 fl N U 0 00 C' ON N 00 C' V c N V e LU LU N N N Lr) fl - tr) ir 0000 N C' 00 v N 5 tfl 06 5 o LUE- S ir N 00 It N tn N ON 00 N V.E c N m C' tn m N 06 V I vi cz CD 0 cu ct X LU N N N 00 N r C 0 N V N cz N co V V - Q 0 N N 00 N N 't cz C co U cd, - V V V N N QU N N N C C C' C' C' C' C' C'

7 4 about 30 percent in the mid-1970's, and in the season, plummeted to 15 percent. The decline continues, and in , only about 4 percent of Asia's imports of U.S. cotton were transshipped via Texas ports. Texas ports are handling an increasing share of cotton exports to Europe; however, Europe's purchases of U.S. cotton have been relatively stable. Consequently, the increase in share going to Europe via Texas ports has not offset the decreased volume exported to Asian countries by way of Texas ports. Development of Transportation Link to the West Coast The development of an active transportation link between Texas and West Coast ports, in particular California ports, is due to actions by ship lines which serve West Coast ports, and the major Asian cotton importers--japan, Taiwan, and South Korea. In an effort to attract cotton to California ports and to their ship lines, a mini-landbridge arrangement was offered in the mid-1970's, and a micro-bridge arrangement was made available to Texas shippers in 198 An imbalance in commodity flow between Asia and the United States prompted the ship lines to offer these arrangements for purposes of improving ship utilization with a cotton backhaul. Both arrangements exploit intermodal transfer efficiencies associated with containerized freight handling. The mini-landbridge involves a long-haul rail service which transfers marine containers from Gulf ports to West Coast ports [2]. The rail carrier receives a division of the joint through rail/water rate which is often published at a level approximating the all-water rate from the Gulf port. That is, the rate from Houston to an Asian destination is about the same whether moved by water or by the mini-landbridge arrangement. The joint rail/water arrangement allows cotton to move under a single ocean bill of lading that is issued by the originating railroad. The bill of lading may be used by the shipper.to collect on the sale before actual delivery is taken by the buyer. This feature allows the cotton shipper faster access to his cotton sale receipts. In addition, with the minilandbridge, transit time is reduced, better control is facilitated, and containers may be directly loaded onto container ships, thus reducing intermodal transfer costs. A drawback to the mini-landbridge is the requirement that the movement originate at a port. Cotton shipments originating in the Texas Plains must first be transported to Houston (or any qualifying Texas port) before qualifying for the mini-landbridge service and rate. Cotton is generally transported to Texas ports by rail or motor carrier where containers are loaded, placed on rail cars, and shipped to California ports for direct loading to container vessels. Container shipments from inland Texas points to Texas ports is uncommon because of the additional cost associated with transporting the empty container from the port to the inland location. Because most of Texas' cotton production is centered in the Plains (over 75 percent), and due to the circuitous routing which resulted from the need to ship inland cotton to Texas ports, the mini-landbridge did not dramatically alter Texas' historic flow pattern. A previous cotton flow study estimated 6 percent of Texas' total shipments were destined to California in 1J75-76, while studies prior to this period showed almost no movement of Texas cotton to California [4, 5, 6]. The micro-bridge arrangement, for shipment of cotton to West Coast ports, was introduced into Texas in 1980 and has steadily gained popularity. As with the mini-landbridge, the microbridge is a joint rail/water arrangement where cotton moves under an ocean bill of lading. With this service, cotton is loaded into railroad boxcars at interior locations (e.g. Lubbock) where it is subsequently shipped to West Coast ports, placed into marine containers, and loaded aboard ocean-going vessels. The micro-bridge service not only has the advantages of the mini-landbridge, it also improves efficiency by reducing circuitous routing and transit time. Further, the micro-bridge improves railroad efficiency by bringing additional balance into East-West commodity flows. Railroads move foodstuffs from California to metropolitan centers in Texas and the South, historically, these boxcars have returned to California empty. The micro-bridge provides the railroad with a cotton backhaul, thus favorably affecting railroad costs and revenues.

8 The mini-landbridge and micro-bridge rates are established through ship conferences and agreements; however, competitive pressures and larger, more efficient ships have tended to lower these rates since their introduction. Initially, the rates for the more popular micro-bridge arrangement ranged upward to $160 per metric ton. This rate currently ranges between $95 and $97 per metric ton for movements which originate in West Texas. Mini-landbridge rates generally parallel the micro-bridge rates, but are sometimes lower. The all-water rate for moving cotton from Texas Gulf ports to Asian Rim nations is often below the micro-bridge and mini-landbridge rates, but are generally less attractive because of extended transit times (up to 25 days), additional inland transportation costs, increased time for the shipper to receive sale receipts, and additional claims which may be associated with break-bulk shipment by the tramp vessels. The Atchinson, Topeka and Santa Fe (ATSF), and Burlington Northern (BN) railroads serve the Texas Plains, the state's major area of cotton production, and, accordingly, originates most of the Texas cotton moving via the micro-bridge. The ATSF serves the more intensive cotton-producing counties in the South Plains and is directly linked to California ports, the principal outlet for West Coast cotton exports. The Burlington Northern serves the northern portion of the Plains cotton-producing region, and is linked to Pacific Northwest ports. Cotton originating on the Burlington Northern, which must move to California ports, is transferred to the Southern Pacific at Dalhart, Texas. Based on the 1982 and 1983 one percent rail waybill, 6 and 8 percent of the Texas cotton rail transported to the West Coast transited Pacific Northwest ports; the remainder moved to California ports. Most of the Texas cotton moving to the West Coast via railroads does so on a micro-bridge rate, which is a through-rate linking the Texas origin to an Asian destination. Railroads now have published tariff rates which link Texas origins to the West Coast--these rates approximate the rail portion of the micro-bridge rate. This rate is used by shippers who are not moving cotton directly to export, but are accumulating an inventory at a West Coast warehouse for later shipment. Altered transportation arrangements, in particular the micro-bridge, have substantially changed Texas' cotton flow patterns. Much of the Texas cotton previously transiting Texas ports now move to export via the West Coast. Based on the 1982 and 1983 one percent rail waybill and the (TAES) survey of Texas shippers, it is estimated that about 38 percent of Texas' shipments were to the West Coast. This compares to an estimated 7, 6.4, and 18.4 percent of Texas shipments to the West Coast in , , and , respectively [4, 5, 61. As expected, the portion of Texas cotton moving to Texas ports has correspondingly declined. It is estimated that Texas ports handled about half of Texas' cotton shipments in and 47 and 43 percent in and , respectively [4, 5, 6]. This share decreased dramatically in , when based on waybill and survey data, about one-fifth of Texas' total shipments were to Texas ports. The reduction in flow to Texas ports is due to changes in transportation and logistics costs and the continued strong Asian cotton demand. Transportation Mode Share and Rates over Principal Corridors The portion of cotton carried by motor carriers and railroads over each of the three principal transportation corridors are compared and their rates estimated. Several types of transportation equipment are used for hauling baled cotton. The flatbed trailer and covered van are the most popular types of motor carrier equipment. The flatbed trailer carries bales, while vans generally haul bales. Cotton is transported by railroads in boxcars, containers on flatcars (COFC), and van trailers on flat cars (TOFC). Depending on boxcar dimensions, boxcars will carry from 150 bales (40 foot car) to 225 bales (60 foot car). TOFC movement consists of two 40-foot trailer vans placed on an 89-foot flatcar. Containers of cotton are also transported on rail flatcars, each container has a capacity of about 80 bales. Smaller containers capable of containing about 40 bales are occasionally used.

9 Corridor Linking Texas to West Coast Ports The , , and surveys estimated that 22, 95, and 87 percent of the shipments to California were transported by railroads, respectively [4, 5, 6]. Based on the Texas Agricultural Experiment Station (TAES) survey and railroad waybills, it is estimated that over 80 percent of the shipments to the West Coast were rail-carried in A 1985 telephone survey of selected Texas shippers and railroads indicated railroads' share to have increased to about 95 percent. The TAES survey found all cotton moving to Pacific Northwest ports (Portland, Seattle) to be transported by rail. In addition, nearly all rail-transported cotton was moved in boxcars: only 1 percent moved via COFC. The survey showed three-fourths of the truckcarried cotton was moved in vans, the remainder on flatbed trailers. Based on rate data collected from the rail waybill sample and truck brokers, equations representative of truck and rail rate structures were estimated. The graphed equations in Figure 1 are representative of rail and truck rate structures which linked Texas to California in Figure 2 shows the rail structure to Pacific Northwest ports.1 The downward sloping curves relate the estimated rate (cents per ton-mile) associated with truck and rail hauls of varying distances and reflect the economies associated with longer hauls. The graphed rate structures should be viewed as averages; therefore, a particular rate paid by a shipper may not be represented by the graphed curve. Rate equations are given in the Appendix. Rail and truck rates were found to be highly correlated with trip distance. This is particularly true for trucks where over 90 percent of the variation in rates can be explained by length of haul. Other statistically significant factors affecting rail rates were size of rail cars (numbers of bales carried per car) and year. Rates tended to decrease as boxcar size increased and in 1983 the rail rate structure tended to adjust downward. In contrast, truck rates were generally static in The graphed rate structures reinforce the generally held notion that trucks are most competitive for relatively short hauls. Based on the estimated rate structures, trucks were competitive at distances of up to about 1,200 miles in beyond this distance railroads became the least-cost mode. The 1,200 mile zone over which trucks were competitive would limit trucks to the western portion of Texas. This information reinforces the observation that trucks are not the principal carrier on the Texas-West Coast corridor. Trucks are rate competitive at this extended distance (1,200 miles) because the cotton haul, in many cases, is a backhaul for these truck operators. Corridor Linking Texas to Texas Ports Historically, the Texas ports hinterland encompassed the entire state; however, the recent redirection of Texas cotton to West Coast ports has reduced the importance of the Texas-Texas port transportation corridor. As noted earlier, about 50 percent of Texas' cotton shipments previously moved to Texas ports; this share has now declined to about 20 percent. Earlier studies show that until , railroads transported over one-half of the cotton moving to Texas ports. The , , and studies estimate 69, 81, and 51 percent of the carriage by rail, respectively. In , the railroads' share declined to 29 percent and, based on the TAES study, railroads' share declined to about 16 percent in that year [4, 5, 1The following formula converts cents per ton-mile to a per-bale rate: u/ton mile x tons carried/load x trip distance number of bales carried/load

10 7 Figure 1. Estimated Truck and Rail Rates Linking Texas to California Ports, I '& o an 0 on00000aoo MILES RAIL = SflLlfl LINE TRUCK = 6Ba(CN LINE

11 Figure 2. Estimated Rail Rates Linking Texas to Pacific Northwest Ports, I 11 I & B MILES HAIL = SOLID LIME

12 I!] 8]. Trucks have become the most important transportation link between inland locations and Texas ports. Figure 3 relates the estimated truck and rail rate structures for movements between inland Texas locations and Texas ports. The downward sloping rate functions intersect and define zones over which competing modes are most efficient. Based on these estimates, trucks had a rate advantage on hauls of about 500 miles and less. This would give trucks a rate advantage in all major cotton-producing regions in Texas except a portion of the Texas High Plains. For this reason, trucks are the principal carrier on this transportation corridor. Figure 3 shows only a modest rate advantage or disadvantage for each mode near the 500-mile distance zone. (The estimated curves are averages and may not be representative of a rate from a particular location.) Corridor Linking Texas to Southeast U.S. Mills Historically, railroads were the principal carrier on this important corridor. In and , flow studies showed 98 percent of this cotton to be transported by rail [4, 8]. In a modest decline in rail carriage was observed when 91 percent was estimated to be carried by this mode [5]. In each mode shared equally, thus a dramatic decline in railroads' share. Further declines in railroads' market share was observed in when their estimated share was reduced to 39 percent. Figure 4 shows truck and rail rate structures for cotton haulage over the Texas-Southeast United States corridor. For all distance zones, railroads are the lowest cost mode. This appears to be in conflict with the above information that shows motor carriers' transportation share to be increasing. Obviously, factors other than rates must affect mode choice. The many small mills in the Southeast carry little raw cotton inventory; therefore, transit time and reliability become important for these cotton buyers. Since motor carriage generally involves less transit time and has greater reliability regarding time of arrival, small mills prefer trucks. In contrast, large milling firms often operate centrally located warehouses where raw cotton is accumulated. As a result of their substantial inventories, transit time and reliability of the carrier is less important to the large mill and railroads become a feasible alternative. FACTORS AFFECTING TRANSPORTATION MODE CHOICE AND CARRIER PERFORMANCE The TAES survey of Texas cotton shippers and warehouse operators inquired into the importance of rates and various transportation service characteristics [10]. Shippers were asked to evaluate six criteria and rank them in order of importance with one being the most important and six the least important. Mean rankings of criteria were computed; the larger the mean value of a particular criterion, the less important it is to the cotton shipper. The final ranking of criteria was as follows: 1) Rate (1.92), 2) Transit time to destination (2.35), 3) Reliability of carrier (2.78), 4) Availability of carrier (3.35), 5) Flexibility of service (4.57), 6) Loss and damage in transit (5.00). These findings are consistent with other studies which have found rate, transit time, and reliability to be important carrier characteristics.

13 10 Figure 3. Estimated Truck and Rail Rates Linking Texas Inland Locations to Texas Ports, I N MILES RAIL = SOLID LINE TRUCK = BROKEN LINE

14 11 In addition, the TAES survey asked shippers to evaluate the performance of the rail and truck modes. Eight criteria were selected and shippers were asked to identify the modes as excellent, good, fair, or poor with respect to each criterion. Results regarding rail and truck performance as perceived by shippers are summarized in Tables 3 and 4. Shippers are divided in the perception of truck and rail carriers' rates. About one-half of the shippers judged truck and rail unfavorably (fair to poor), and the other one-half judged them favorably (excellent or good). As for carriers' willingness to negotiate rates, 92 percent of the shippers criticized railroads' inflexible rates, while truck rates were judged more flexible (46 percent of shippers judged truck willingness to negotiate rates good, although none found it excellent). Motor carriers are more willing to negotiate rates than railroads since the rate setting process of the owneroperated truck is less involved. Ninety-three percent judged trucks' transit time to be good or excellent, while 77 percent ranked railroads' transit time as fair to poor. Overall, carriers' availability appears good; over 60 percent of the shippers were satisfied with rail and truck availability. The pickup and delivery service of both modes appeared generally satisfactory as did shippers experience with loss and damage in transit. There is a major difference between rail and truck performance regarding the flexibility of services. Nearly all shippers believed truck flexibility of service to be excellent or good, whereas few believed similarly regarding railroads' performance. About one-half of the respondents (52 percent) judged the overall performance of rail unfavorably (fair to poor), whereas 33 percent judged it to be good, and 14 percent judged it excellent. In contrast, about 70 percent of shippers judged truck performance favorably (good to excellent), and 7 percent judged it poor. Overall, rail carriers' unwillingness to negotiate rates, slower transit times, and their lack of flexibility unfavorably impressed the cotton shipper. In contrast, shippers appear to be generally satisfied with motor carriers' shorter transit times and relatively attractive rates. SUMMARY Historically, two major transportation corridors linked Texas cotton production to domestic and foriegn markets--one link connected Texas with southeastern U.S. mills, while the second corridor linked Texas to foreign markets by way of Texas Gulf ports. Introduction of the mini-landbridge, and more importantly, the micro-bridge, by ship lines serving the U.S. West Coast ports and Asia, has yielded a Texas-West Coast transportation corridor. This third corridor links Texas with California and Pacific Northwest ports, and based on a survey, an estimated 38 percent of Texas' total cotton shipments were to these West Coast transshipment points. California ports are estimated to have received about 95 percent of Texas shipments to the West Coast. The mini-landbridge and micro-bridge is a joint rail/water transportation arrangement where cotton moves under an ocean bill of lading. The mini-landbridge is a rail service which transfers marine containers of cotton from Texas ports to West Coast ports. Because the cotton shipments must originate at Gulf ports, all cotton must be transported to these ports before qualifying for the mini-landbridge. For much of the state's cotton. particularly the Plains, a circuitous routing is involved. The micro-bridge removed this drawback by allowing the rail-transported cotton to move directly from inland origination points to West Coast ports. This arrangement reduces transit time, 2The Staggers Rail Act of 1980 allows individual shippers to negotiate and contract rates with railroads.

15 Figure 4. Estimated Truck and Rail Rates Linking Texas to Southeast U.S. Mills, C C N T S / 1 S N L E S III MILES RIL = SOLIO LINE TRUCK = BROKEN LINE

16 13 facilitates better control, exhibits efficiencies associated with containerized freight, and allows the cotton shipper to access cotton sale receipts with the railroad-issued bill of lading. Based on a TAES survey, and the one percent rail waybill sample, the portion of cotton carried by truck and rail modes over each corridor was estimated. In addition, rate equations were estimated for each mode. The analysis shows the least-cost mode is generally chosen on the Texas-West Coast and Texas-Texas port corridors. The corridor linking Texas to southeastern U.S. mills was primarily served by truck, even though the estimated rail rate structure tended to be lower. This is due to the many small mills that are no longer served by rail, and because their inventories are very small, they require the shorter transit time associated with the truck. Texas cotton shippers were asked to evaluate the quality of transportation services offered by trucks and rail carriers. In general, shippers appeared to prefer the motor carrier because of its reduced transit time and competitive rate. Railroads were perceived as unwilling to negotiate rates, lacking in service flexibility, and to have slow transit times.

17 14 TABLE 3. PERCENT OF TEXAS COTTON SHIPPERS WHICH RANK MOTOR SERVICES AS EXCELLENT, GOOD, FAIR, OR POOR, Performance Criteria Evalution Criteria Excellent Good Fair Poor percent percent percent percent Rates Willingness to negotiate rates Transit time to destination Availability of carrier Pick up and delivery Loss and damage in transit Reliability of carrier Flexibility of service Percent of total

18 15 TABLE 4. PERCENT OF TEXAS COTTON SHIPPERS WHICH RANK RAIL CARRIER SERVICE AS EXCELLENT, GOOD, FAIR, OR POOR, Performance Criteria Evalution Criteria Excellent Good Fair Poor percent percent percent percent Rates Willingness to negotiate rates Transit time to destination Availability of carrier Pick up and delivery Loss and damage in transit Reliability of carrier Flexibility of service Percent of total

19 16 REFERENCES 1. Boehm, Richard G., Exporting Cotton in Texas: Relationships of Ports and inland Supply Points, Bureau of Business Research, University of Texas, Lamkin, Jack T., and Hascall, William T., Use of the Minibridge Concept in the Export of Baled Cotton: An Opportunity for Improvement, Texas Transportation Institute, Texas A&M University, April United States Department of Agriculture, Cotton Situation, Economic Research Service, Washington, D.C., various issues United States Department of Agriculture, Domestic Shipments of U.S. Cotton, Season, Statistical Bulletin 483, Washington, D.C., United States Department of Agriculture, Domestic Shipments of U.S. Cotton, Season, Statistical Bulletin 885, Washington, D.C., United States Department of Agriculture, Domestic Shipments of U.S. Cotton, Season, Statistical Bulletin 696, Washington, D.C., United States Department of Agriculture, Foreign Agriculture Circular--Cotton, Foreign Agricultural Service, Washington, D.C., Various issues United States Department of Agriculture, The Traffic Pattern of Raw Cotton Shipped from Warehouses in the United States, Economic Research Service, MTS-153, Washington, D.C., United States Department of Commerce, Consumption of the Cotton System and Stocks, Bureau of Census, Washington, D.C., various issues Vulcain, Ronald J., Texas Cotton Distribution Patterns and Utilized Transportation Modes, M.S. Thesis, Texas A&M University, 1984.

20 17 C' C) N C' tn 00 f) N ro C r-c' Ni t) *tn00 ç1 4 O0i en In tp - - m s N cn. o'' c \0 cc h 0-1 I 4l 00 C' N 00 C' C' p 00 5r-' v 00R00 OccC\ 0 II. e. N N N N rn I C' 'c1 ç 00 q= CN ) O 00 S C S N c - ) O N S ciii C' - o: C' 00 - II It) 'C' ) CO CO CO CO C- - 0 C.) E cd.0 0 cz V CO V 0 V cz cz CZ cz I 0 Zt 0 cz CO L) C') N

21 Mention of a trademark or a proprietary product does not constitute a guarantee or a warranty of the product by the Texas Agricultural Experiment Station and does not imply its approval to the exclusion of other products that also may be suitable. All programs and information of The Texas Agricultural Experiment Station are available to everyone without regard to race, color, religion, sex, age, handicap, or national origin M