U.S. Department of Agriculture National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) Oregon Field Office

U.S. Department of Agriculture

National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS)

Oregon Field Office

Oregon Hazelnut Production Forecast

September 12, 2008

Quick Facts about the 2008

Hazelnut Objective Yield (HOY) Survey

Total sample size = 180 samples1 sample = 1 orchard 2 trees per orchard 90 samples carried from last year90 samples painted this year Of the 180 samples, 177 were usable

Total nuts picked = 68,999 Of those, 15,373 were sub-sampled 88.7% of sub-sampled nuts were good (13,636 nuts)

Oregon Hazelnut Production

-Released September 9, 2008-

2004 2005 2006 20072008

forecast

Pct.

Chg.

Tons Tons Tons Tons Tons Pct.

37,500 27,600 43,000 37,000 34,000 -8

Hazelnut ProductionForecast vs. Final

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

'90 '91 '92 '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08

Tho

usan

ds o

f ton

s

August Forecast Final

Picked July 28, 2008

Picked July 28, 2008

Picked July 28, 2008

Put on the brakes!

• It was determined that the crop was under-developed. By the time we were able to get in touch with the picking crews, 31 out of 180 samples had been picked.

• Procedures were modified for the return to the orchards. We swapped picking colors. Blue had been scheduled to be picked this year and orange next year.

Nuts Picked Per TreeHazelnut Objective Yield Lab

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

'88 '90 '92 '94 '96 '98 '00 '02 '04 '06 '08

Num

ber

of N

uts

2008 Good Nut Production 2008 Good Nut Production Percentage by Industry GroupingsPercentage by Industry Groupings

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Small Medium Large Jumbo

11.9% 10.4%

47.9%

29.8%

13,636 good nuts sampled in 2008

Percentage of Good Nuts by Size Group, 2004-2008

Small Medium Large Jumbo0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

20042005200620072008

Percentage of Good Nuts by Size Group, 1998-2008

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

'98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08

Per

cen

t of

Goo

d N

uts

Small Medium Jumbo Large

1/ The average number of nuts per tree is a calculation. It is the number of good nuts sampled per tree expanded by the number of terminal and primary limbs recorded from each tree. There were 252 Barcelona trees sampled in 2008.

Average number of expanded nuts per tree (for all sizes) by county, Barcelona 2007 - 2008

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

Nu

mb

er

of

nu

ts, e

xp

an

de

d

2007 2008

1/ The average number of nuts per tree is a calculation. It is the number of good nuts sampled per tree expanded by the number of terminal and primary limbs recorded from each tree. There were 62 Ennis trees sampled in 2008.

Average number of expanded nuts per tree (for all sizes) by county, Ennis 2007 - 2008

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

Nu

mb

er

of

nu

ts, e

xp

an

de

d

2007 2008

Percent of good nuts sampled by size group, Barcelona

52%

32%

18%

44%

19%

51%

30%

16%

38%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Small/Med Large Jumbo

2006 2007 2008

Percent of good nuts sampled by size group, Ennis

6%

30%

64%

6%

30%

64%

6%

39%

55%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Small/Med Large Jumbo

2006 2007 2008

1/ The average number of nuts per tree is a calculation. It is the number of good nuts sampled per tree expanded by the number of terminal and primary limbs recorded from each tree. There were 354 trees sampled in 2008.

Average number of expanded nuts per tree, by county and year planted, 2008

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

Nu

mb

er

of

nu

ts, e

xp

an

de

d

1984 and earlier Post 1984

1/ The average number of nuts per tree is a calculation. It is the number of good nuts sampled per tree expanded by the number of terminal and primary limbs recorded from each tree. There were 252 Barcelona trees sampled in 2008.

Average number of expanded nuts per tree,by county and year planted, Barcelona only, 2008

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

Clackamas Lane Marion Yamhill

Nu

mb

er

of

nu

ts, e

xp

an

de

d

1984 and earlier Post 1984

Percentage of Good NutsHazelnut Objective Yield Lab

75%

77%

79%

81%

83%

85%

87%

89%

'88 '90 '92 '94 '96 '98 '00 '02 '04 '06 '08

Per

cent

Goo

d

Percent Brown StainHazelnut Objective Yield Lab

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

'88 '90 '92 '94 '96 '98 '00 '02 '04 '06 '08

Per

cent

Results of 2008 Lab Sampled Nuts

Lab Size Group

Good Nuts Sampled

Defective Nuts

Sampled

Brown Stain Nuts

Percent

Defective

Industry Size Groups

Size 1 161 110 0 40.5 % Small

Size 2 1,460 208 2 12.5 % Small

Size 3 1,416 261 3 15.6 % Medium

Size 4 1,876 247 3 11.7 % Large

Size 5 2,895 331 6 7.4 % Large

Size 6 1,768 238 7 11.9 % Large

Size 7 2,372 212 6 8.2 % Jumbo

Size 8 1,688 158 1 8.6 % Jumbo

Totals 13,636 1,765 28 11.3 %

Brown stain count is included in defective nuts

Total nuts sampled = 15,373

Dry Weight per Good NutHazelnut Objective Yield Lab

2.7

2.9

3.1

3.3

3.5

3.7

3.9

'88 '90 '92 '94 '96 '98 '00 '02 '04 '06 '08

Gra

ms

Average Nut SizeHazelnut Objective Yield Lab

4

4.5

5

5.5

6

6.5

7

7.5

'88 '90 '92 '94 '96 '98 '00 '02 '04 '06 '08

Siz

e (R

ang

e: 1

to

8)

19.5

20

20.5

21

21.5

22

22.5

23

23.5

Siz

e (m

m)

Nuts per Tree vs. Nut Size

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

'88 '90 '92 '94 '96 '98 '00 '02 '04 '06 '08

Nu

mb

er

of

Nu

ts

4.5

5

5.5

6

6.5

7

7.5

Nu

t S

ize

Nuts per Tree Avg Size per Good Nut

Nuts per Tree vs. Average Good Nut Dry Weight

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

'88 '90 '92 '94 '96 '98 '00 '02 '04 '06 '08

Nu

mb

er

of

Nu

ts

2.5

2.7

2.9

3.1

3.3

3.5

3.7

3.9

Gra

ms

Nuts per Tree Grams per Good Nut

Thank You