The Birmingham age-herald., 1924-10-06
AS TO COTTON CROP FORECASTS

| It IS lnClmaCeQ rom WashnRLOn that the department of agriculture is finally awakened to certain absurdities arising }out of it's crop forecasts, especially the cotton forecasts. One annoying result of these forecasts has been to give the gamblers opportunity to make or lose fortunes. Everybody remembers how often during the summer the cotton mar ket would suddenly spring up or down on the publication of the official esti- mates of the crop condition and outlook. The department does not confine itself to observations as to the general ap- pearance of the crop and the attendant conditions affecting it's growth and de- velopment, but there were also set forth forecasts of the probable yield. It was tk', last policy which did most of the damage.
 Many farm journals took up for the department of agriculture and printed long accounts of how carefully, behind locked doors, the committee in charge of such matters would compile their results from data furnished from every part of the cotton belt. An effort was made te reveal the overlapping and errorles'" manner in which this task was achieved. The impression sought was no doubt the impeccable accuracy of the statiytics finally set forth. What was overlooked by the apologists for the department was that the statisticians at Washington had absolutely no means of controlling the accuracy of the data sent in from the field Some,of the reporters were doubt less trained observers, but larger per- centage were not trained observers. And how could even a trained observer make an accurate measurement of the condi- tion of a crop in the field? It simply cannot be done. Thus the mSticulous care of the scatisticians was incongruous in view of the unlimited opportunity for error to creep into the field reports with which they worked.
 Further proof of the futility ofsseeking in July to predict the yield in September and October is given strikingly each year through comparison of the summer predictions with the actual fall ginning figures Not only do the successive fore casts of July and August contradict one another, butsthese all are disproved by the actual number of bales harvested. Sometimes the disparity is equal to all the difference between surplus and a shortage. Some value is attached by the department to the forecasts, but of what real value are they if they mislead, or are liable to be nullified by the harvest returns? E
 The farmer, reading the reports, finds himself potentially in wealth or poten- tially in poverty on the basis of the re- ports, whereas actually not one lock has been subtraetcd from or added to his ultimate yield. A manufacturer, misled by the forecast in July, may hurry to buy to anticipate higher price, only to dis cover too late that the final size of the crop had exactly the opposite effect upon the market. The gambler, on the other
 
 and never coming actually into possession of any staple, finds abundant opportunity to exercise his sagacity in profiting at the expense of producer or consumer, passing his operations largely on the official esti- mates and forecasts. It makes no diff ference to him whether the forecasts are accurate or not, nor whether they will be borne out finally by the actual yield. He gets his while the getting is good, and the official character of the department forecasts gives him an authoritative basis on which to trade.>
 Clearly, the department should dis cover some more general manner of couching it's estimates, and should also put forth some convincing reason for of ficial expenditure of time and money in this exercise of trying to outguess na- ture The department should concern itself with some policy that will tend to stabilize the cotton market, not upset it. Evidently, the farmer can best be helped by something that will protect his valu- iable crop from fictitiously gaining or losing cash value. A bale of cotton is worth as much in reality in January as in July, in September as in March. On the basis of present fluctuations, one farmer will receive a low price for his cotton, and another farmer, selling later in the year, may receive higher price. Surely some way should be discovered that will protect both from unfounded fluctuations Obviously, the crop fore casts, as at present managed, tend to the opposite effect.