national cotton council report to members 2000

The National Cotton Council of America s mission is to ensure the ability of

all U.S. cotton industry segments to compete effectively and profitably in the raw

cotton, oilseed and manufactured product markets at home and abroad.

The Council serves as the central forum for consensus-building among

producers, ginners, warehousers, merchants, cottonseed crushers, cooperatives

and textile manufacturers. The organization has been the unifying force in working

with the government to ensure that cotton s interests are considered.

The Council s mission and objectives are carried out with the help of democratically-

developed policy. Annual policymaking is initiated through recommendations

generated by the Council s six program committees Farm Program and

Economic Policy, International Trade Policy, Public Relations and International

Market Development, Research and Education, Packaging

and Distribution and Health, Safety and Environmental Quality. Committee

recommendations are refined and approved by the Council s 35-member

board of directors, acting as a resolutions committee, but must be adopted by the

Council s delegates voting at the annual meeting.

This report describes major activities carried out in 1999 in

support of those resolutions, which were adopted in February 1999. Included

are activities of the Council s export promotions arm, Cotton

Council International, and of The Cotton Foundation.

The Council’s Mission

Table of Contents

Message From the President and the Executive Vice President .............. 2

Program Committees ............................................................................ 4

Farm Program and Economic Policy Committee ................................... 6

International Trade Policy Committee ................................................... 8

Public Relations and International Market Development Committee..... 10

Research and Education Committee ...................................................... 12

Packaging and Distribution Committee ................................................. 14

Health, Safety and Environmental Quality Committee .......................... 16

Cotton Council International ................................................................. 18

The Cotton Foundation ......................................................................... 20

Officers ................................................................................................. 22

.

The U.S. cotton industry faced serious economic problems in

1999. For many, the downturn began in 1998 when a short crop

reduced the volume of cotton many farmers had to sell and

depletion of Step 2 funds exacerbated already low prices. The sit-

uation worsened for many in 1999 with the onslaught of storms

and drought and a flood of inexpensive textile imports.

Congress and the Administration demonstrated leadership in passing a critical $8.7 billionemergency package for agriculture. That assistance, which was included in the FY2000Agricultural Appropriations Bill, contained cotton’s highest priorities as identified by NationalCotton Council delegates: supplemental income assistance for 1999, reinstatement of the Step2 program with certain modifications, relief on payment limits and authorization of negotiablemarketing certificates.

Cotton’s friends in the House and Senate were instrumental. Sen. Thad Cochran (R-MS),chairman of the Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee, played an especially important rolein shaping and guiding the overall assistance package. Sen. Cochran and Sen. BlancheLincoln (D-AR), along with their colleagues, fought to protect other important provisions thatcame under attack as the package moved through the Senate. Rep. Larry Combest (R-TX),chairman of the House Committee on Agriculture, and ranking member Rep. CharlesStenholm (D-TX), played a crucial role in gaining House support for the package. In addition,Rep. Joe Skeen (R-NM), chairman of the House Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee, andhis panel members then helped rally support for passage of the Conference report.

Without the combined leadership and work of all Cotton Belt senators and representatives,the final package surely would have been a lot less attractive for cotton. Not only was therestrong support from Cotton Belt members, but these friends were able to generate solid sup-port for cotton’s priorities among senators and representatives who have not always been sym-pathetic to cotton’s needs. This broad-based support demonstrates again the importance of tak-ing a seven-segment consensus to Congress for action.

Senator Cochran helped again by getting authority in the Omnibus FY2000 spending bill forthe Secretary of Agriculture to use unspent funds from earlier appropriations measures to carryout a cottonseed assistance program and a competitiveness program for American Pima cotton.

Appointment of a special committee to focus on future farm policy acknowledges that U.S.cotton still is not competing on a level playing field in the international marketplace. We willneed government involvement in the next millennium, and we will look to this committee forideas in developing feasible policy options for the Council’s consideration.

Council persistence in 1999 also led to the lowering of federal cotton crop insurance ratesin the Mid South and Far West. Additionally, the Council continued to work on behalf of U.S.

Message From the President and Executive Vice President

2

F. Ronald RaynerPresidentNational Cotton Council of America

Phillip C. BurnettExecutive Vice President/Chief Executive OfficerNational Cotton Council of America

cotton in the trade, regulatory and promotion arenas. Some examples:pressing Congress to approve measures that would grant trade preferences toCaribbean Basin and sub-Saharan African countries for products assembled fromU.S.-made cotton yarn or fabric; coordinating with USDA by Cotton CouncilInternational on a new cotton promotion for the Caribbean Region; preservingthe availability of proven crop protection tools such as malathion and otherorganophosphates; keeping snug-fitting, safe, comfortable cotton sleepwear forchildren available to consumers; working with industry leaders on a study toexplore ways to boost profitability through the best use of existing technology;and developing “talking points” to counter misinformation and consumer con-cern over genetically enhanced crops.

The achievements summarized in this annual report cover a broad front, fromCouncil staff intervention on dust control regulations for gins in Arizona to theCouncil’s Quality Task Force that is working to make sure the marketplace issending the right signals to producers and ginners to promote needed improve-ments in fiber qualities.

Reflecting on the final years of the millennium, we are reminded of how theNational Cotton Council has nurtured cotton’s progress through six decades ofchanges and challenges. That includes the past 18 months when economic pres-sures caused our industry to be severely divided. Yet, the leaders representingindividual segments worked through their particular interests and developedconsensus positions that led to positive changes in national policies. This crucialshort-term assistance will help sustain our industry until more lasting solutionsare developed that will allow the market to provide greater opportunities for theentire industry to grow and prosper. It is through challenges like this that theNational Cotton Council is strengthened and thus better prepared to help shapethe industry’s future.

The Council’s objectives will be to continue its effective analysis of U.S. cot-ton’s business environment, to be persistent in communicating its message andto harness industry unity on both problems and prospects - whether meetingworldwide competition from man-made fibers, capitalizing on a new regionaltrading pact or finding agreement on new agricultural policy.

As we do this, the U.S. cotton industry can continue to coordinate itsresources through the Council to reach forward into the 21st century with confidence, operating with strength and sound strategy to find solutions. Wehave a tradition of success that should be cause for optimism as we advance into a new millennium.

3

4

Farm Program and Economic Policy Committee

Kenneth B. Hood (left)Ginner, Gunnison, MSChairman

James E. Echols (right)Merchant, Cordova, TNVice Chairman

Jeffrey J. Ballentine (Ginner), Phoenix, AZRichard Bransford (Ginner), Lonoke, ARBuddy Burkhead (Ginner), Jay, FLDon Cameron (Producer), Helm, CAW. L. Carter, Jr. (Producer), Scotland Neck, NCWilliam G. Clark (Crusher), Yazoo City, MSBob Collins (Cooperative), Frederick, OKJohn J. Cooper (Cooperative), Raleigh, NCMarshall Y. Cooper, Jr. (Manufacturer), Henderson, NCWilliam C. Covington (Merchant), Richardson, TXTalmage L. Crihfield, Jr. (Producer), Ripley, TNJohn D. Davis, Jr. (Warehouse), Decatur, ALTommy Dollar (Ginner), Bainbridge, GAW. B. Dunavant, III (Merchant), Memphis, TNWoods E. Eastland (Cooperative), Greenwood, MSCarter Edwards (Ginner), Maury City, TNG. Stephen Felker (Manufacturer), Monroe, GALarry M. Fowler (Producer), Newsoms, VAFred Franklin (Ginner), Rayville, LALarry Gallian (Cooperative), Visalia, CARodger C. Glaspey (Merchant), Fresno, CACopeland Griswold (Producer), Pace, FLJohn W. Hane (Ginner), Fort Motte, SCAllen B. Helms, Jr. (Producer), Clarkedale, ARBoyd Holley (Producer), Bastrop, LASamuel B. Hollis (Warehouse), Memphis, TNMichael D. Holt (Manufacturer), Gastonia, NCG. Michael Hughes (Producer), Lamesa, TXArwin Johnson (Crusher), Lubbock, TXJames E. Kainer (Producer), El Campo, TXW. Duke Kimbrell (Manufacturer), Gastonia, NCH. Eugene LeGrand (Warehouse), Shelby, NCRichard J. Lindsey (Ginner), Centre, ALWayne Martin (Crusher), Lubbock, TXVan A. May (Cooperative), Lubbock, TXMyrl D. Mitchell (Ginner), Lenorah, TXWayne Mixon (Ginner), Seminole, TXWalter S. Montgomery (Manufacturer), Spartanburg, SCWiley Murphy (Producer), Tucson, AZRobert W. Norris (Cooperative), Bakersfield, CACharles C. Owen (Ginner), Pima, AZWilliam A. Percy, II (Producer), Arcola, MSLouie Perry, Jr. (Producer), Moultrie, GAJohn E. Pucheu, Jr. (Producer), Tranquillity, CAR. Dan Robbins, V (Producer), Altus, OKWavell Robinson (Producer), Pavo, GAJimmy N. Roppolo (Ginner), El Campo, TXJerry D. Rowland (Manufacturer), Winston-Salem, NCErnst D. Schroeder (Merchant), Bakersfield, CALarry C. Schwendiman (Crusher), Fresno, CAPeyton M. Self, III (Producer), Marks, MSWilliam Shields (Ginner), Gough, GAJohnny A. Squire (Producer), Coalinga, CAD. Harding Stowe (Manufacturer), Belmont, NCGeorge O. Tanner (Warehouse), Frogmore, LAGary Taylor (Merchant), Cordova, TNTimothy L. Taylor (Crusher), Memphis, TNF. A. Underwood (Warehouse), Lubbock, TXJoseph Walker, II (Merchant), Columbia, SCTri Watkins (Warehouse), Lepanto, ARR. L. Webster (Producer), Waynesboro, GAArthur Wiener (Manufacturer), New York, NYWillis H. Willey, III (Warehouse), Memphis, TNMark D. Williams (Producer), Farwell, TXDonna B. Winters (Producer), Lake Providence, LASammy Wright (Crusher), Valdosta, GA

International Trade Policy Committee

Robert S. Weil, II (left)Merchant, Montgomery, ALChairman

Larry W. Jarnagin (right)Producer, Phoenix, AZVice Chairman

Michael M. Adams (Cooperative), Greenwood, MSParrish Akins (Producer), Nashville, GALouis Baioni (Warehouse), Memphis, TNMark M. Borba (Producer), Riverdale, CADavid L. Burns (Producer), Laurel Hill, NCDean Calvani (Producer), Carlsbad, NMJohn T. Carroll (Warehouse), Gilbert, LADean Church (Warehouse), Sweetwater, TXJ. Walker Clarke (Merchant), Columbia, SCMichael J. Collins (Ginner), Oklahoma City, OKLouie Colombini (Ginner), Buttonwillow, CAR. Shep Crigler (Producer), St. Joseph, LABuchanan C. Dunavant (Merchant), Memphis, TNDavid C. Dunaway (Producer), Unadilla, GAPeter Egli (Merchant), Phoenix, AZRobert Englert (Producer), Norton, TXH. Malloy Evans (Manufacturer), Cheraw, SCFrank J. Garnier (Manufacturer), Kannapolis, NCCharles F. Hamrick, II (Manufacturer), Gaffney, SCDavid L. Hand (Cooperative), El Paso, TXW. P. Harty (Warehouse), Las Cruces, NMLela M. Harvey (Ginner), Las Cruces, NMWilliam I. Henry (Manufacturer), Columbus, GARichard A. Holder (Ginner), Kinston, NCBarry L. Hooks (Manufacturer), Geneva, ALRoger Hooper (Producer), Casa Grande, AZJerry D. Hunter (Producer), Delhi, LAWhit James (Ginner), Dalzell, SCGlen N. Janzen (Cooperative), Fresno, CAJerry W. Johnson (Crusher), Little Rock, ARFrank B. Jones, Jr. (Producer), Lubbock, TXRobert Joseph (Merchant), Lubbock, TXAllen G. King (Cooperative), Brownsville, TNDavid Lingle (Ginner), Frederick, OKCliett A. Lowman, III (Producer), Kingsville, TXJack L. Lowry (Crusher), Montgomery, ALDavid B. McMahan (Producer), Princeton, TXGerald C. Marshall (Merchant), Memphis, TNSteve Marshall (Cooperative), Lyford, TXCharles Mitchell (Producer), Shafter, CAYoshio Otomo (Crusher), Chandler, AZW. Coalter Paxton, Jr. (Warehouse), Wilson, NCGeorge Perrow (Ginner), Cameron, SCSam E. Pope, Jr. (Producer), Drewryville, VAJ. Michael Quinn (Cooperative), Raleigh, NCFrank B. Rogers, III (Producer), Bennettsville, SCHolt Shoaf (Ginner), Medina, TNRobert Snodgrass (Warehouse), Taylor, TXE. Ramey Stiles, Jr. (Producer), West Helena, ARJohn Stuckey (Ginner), Trumann, ARMike P. Sturdivant, Jr. (Producer), Glendora, MSK. Michael Tate (Producer), Huntsville, ALRonald K. Tatum (Warehouse), Vicksburg, MSArchie T. Thompson, Jr. (Cooperative), Whitakers, NCJ. W. Thompson (Ginner), Rector, ARBobby Todd (Ginner), Tallulah, LARoss G. Via (Producer), Bells, TNRobert R. Waters, Jr. (Ginner), Scotland Neck, NCDavid R. Winters (Crusher), Richmond, TX

Public Relations and InternationalMarket Development Committee

Craig D. Shook (left)Producer, Corpus Christi, TXChairman

Paul A. Ruh (right)Merchant, Richardson, TXVice Chairman

G. Thomas Alphin, Jr. (Ginner), Windsor, VAKenneth W. Bickley (Producer), Elloree, SCBill Brackett (Ginner), Buckeye, AZBill Brooks (Ginner), Samson, ALDanny E. Brown (Crusher), Pine Bluff, ARWilliam Carender (Crusher), Kingsburg, CARobert A. Carson, Jr. (Producer), Marks, MSJames P. Cassidy (Ginner), Marks, MSThomas A. Chapman (Ginner), Wall, TXRichard L. Clarke, III (Merchant), Cordova, TNGloria Griggs Conner (Warehouse), Pinehurst, GAW. L. Corcoran (Producer), Eufaula, ALBilly Cox (Ginner), Trenton, NCJeff Curti (Producer), Waukena, CAJerry H. Davis (Warehouse), Dumas, ARA. C. Dominick, Jr. (Cooperative), Mira, LAJohn L. Edmonston (Ginner), Hornersville, MORex A. Ford (Ginner), Stamford, TXJ. Sollie Foy (Manufacturer), Alexander City, ALRobert Glassman (Ginner), Fresno, CAMarshall W. Grant (Cooperative), Garysburg, NCBruce Groefsema (Cooperative), Bakersfield, CARichard Haire (Ginner), Fresno, CAJerry L. Hamill (Producer), Enfield, NCJ. C. Hannah, Jr. (Merchant), Dallas, TXJames B. Hansen (Producer), Corcoran, CAJohn T. Hill (Manufacturer), Lancaster, SCLennie Hinton (Producer), Hobbsville, NCRonnie Hopper (Producer), Petersburg, TXE. Kirk Hull (Crusher), Memphis, TNTom Ingram (Producer), Opelika, ALKennett C. Jabbour (Merchant), Memphis, TNMichael L. Johnson (Crusher), Decatur. ILDavid T. Koon (Manufacturer), Columbus, GAHans Georg Kretschmer (Cooperative), El Paso, TXKathleen R. Lambert (Ginner), Buckeye, AZJohn Langston (Warehouse), Caruthersville, MOT. Jordan Lea (Merchant), Greenville, SCCurt Leake (Producer), Newellton, LAH. H. Lindemann, III (Warehouse), Waco, TXHarry Lott, Jr. (Ginner), Greenwood, MSDavid K. Lynch (Ginner), Bennettsville, SCEd McClanahan (Producer), Somerville, TNLarry R. McClendon (Ginner), Marianna, ARBruce McMullian (Ginner), Marianna, FLBob Mayberry (Producer), Lake Arthur, NMSam T. Murff (Warehouse), Tulia, TXLarry Nelson (Ginner), Edmonson, TXGary Osborn (Ginner), Elk City, OKGeorge Perkins (Manufacturer), Sanford, NCJohn R. Phillips (Producer), Cochran, GADale W. Player (Cooperative), Bishopville, SCRonald Rayner (Producer), Goodyear, AZClyde Sharp (Producer), Roll, AZCecil D. Smart (Manufacturer), Opp, ALBoyce L. Smith (Manufacturer), Greenville, SCDavid Stanford (Cooperative), Lubbock, TXHugh H. Summerville (Producer), Aliceville, ALWilliam C. Tharp (Merchant), Las Cruces, NMAdolph Weil, III (Merchant), Montgomery, ALC. Barry Whitney, Jr. (Warehouse), Augusta, GACliff Wilkerson (Producer), Newellton, LAJohn Willis (Producer), Brownsville, TNJerry Wilson (Crusher), Whiteville, TN

5

Research and Education Commitee

Woody Anderson (left)Producer, Colorado City, TX Chairman

Anderson D. Warlick (right)Manufacturer, Gastonia, NCVice Chairman

Meredith B. Allen (Cooperative), Greenwood, MSAlvin W. Blaha (Producer), Petersburg, VADavid Blakemore (Ginner), Campbell, MOPhilip R. Bogel, II (Merchant), Lubbock, TXSteve Brunson (Merchant), Memphis, TNSteve Cantu (Producer), Tranquillity, CARobert A. Clair (Crusher), Tifton, GAEd Coker (Ginner), Hartsville, SCLeslie H. Cunningham (Ginner), Atmore, ALB.E. “Sonny” Davis (Producer), Cottondale, FLS. LeRoy Deavenport (Warehouse), Leland, MSLarry Dennis (Ginner), Valdosta, GAGeorge H. Dunklin (Crusher), Pine Bluff, ARMark Dutra (Merchant), Fresno, CACharles R. Earnest (Ginner), Steele, MODan Ellis (Ginner), Eufaula, ALAllen Espey (Ginner), Huntingdon, TNMichael R. Farrish (Merchant), Memphis, TNR. Bowen Flowers, Jr. (Producer), Tunica, MSThomas H. Fowler (Warehouse), Somerville, TNThad R. Freeland (Producer), Tillar, ARCharles B. Griffin, Jr. (Cooperative), Lewiston, NCC. LaDell Harrison (Warehouse), Memphis, TXNeil H. Hightower (Manufacturer), Thomaston, GAClifford Hoelscher (Producer), Garden City, TXMichael B. Hooper (Cooperative), Buttonwillow, CAJack P. Hoover (Ginner), Fresno, CARobert T. Houlding, Jr. (Producer), Madera, CARaymond A. Kadlecek (Warehouse), Corpus Christi, TXRandy Kennedy (Ginner), Shallowater, TXGeorge LaCour (Producer), Morganza, LABob Lange (Ginner), Fresno, CAH. L. Lewis (Producer), Dell, ARClayton Lowder, Jr. (Producer), Oswego, SCT. Eugene McBride (Manufacturer), Dyersburg, TNH. Allen McLaurin (Producer), Laurel Hill, NCRobert E. McLendon (Producer), Leary, GACeleste Malatesta (Ginner), Shaw, MSJames C. Massey (Cooperative), Kingsville, TXDennis M. Miller (Producer), Erick, OKJohn D. Mitchell (Merchant), Selma, ALJim Ed Miller (Producer), Ft. Hancock, TXRobert E. Moore, Jr. (Producer), Hartsville, SCJohn P. Noland (Warehouse), McFarland, CACharles H. Parker (Producer), Senath, MODrake Perrow (Warehouse), Cameron, SCTed A. Pierce (Producer), Buckeye, AZJohnny L. Reid (Ginner), Loving, NMRonald Riley (Ginner), Roscoe, TXDoyle Ritchie (Producer), Visalia, CATed Schneider (Producer), Lake Providence, LAJames C. Self, III (Manufacturer), Greenwood, SCJohn D. Stewart, III (Crusher), Greenwood, MSHenry Stratton, Jr. (Merchant), Memphis, TNJerry Stutts (Cooperative), Bonita, LAJohn H. Swayze (Ginner), Benton, MSMike Tomlinson (Crusher), Levelland, TXHeather Walker (Crusher), Chandler, AZBill Webb (Merchant), Dallas, TXDonald V. Weston, Jr. (Ginner), New Market, ALJesse D. Williams (Producer), Suffolk, VAWilliam H. Wilson (Cooperative), Dos Palos, CALonnie D. Winters (Cooperative), Lubbock, TXCharles K. “Chuck” Youngker (Producer), Buckeye, AZ

Packaging and Distribution Committee

Robert W. Greene (left)Ginner, Courtland, ALChairman

Larry G. Lively (right)Warehouseman, Memphis, TNVice Chairman

David A. Alderete (Cooperative), Bakersfield, CALeonard B. Alphin (Ginner), Zuni, VAKenneth L. Berry, Jr. (Ginner), Holland, MOJohn C. Blair (Producer), Buttonwillow, CAAndy Borem (Crusher), Tifton, GAKelley Bowen (Producer), Mangum, OKDaniel T. Branton (Producer), Inverness, MSSid Brough (Ginner), Edroy, TXDolan E. Brown, III (Producer), Garfield, GAJ. Clark Burnett (Merchant), Memphis, TNRobert H. Chapman, III (Manufacturer), Inman, SCGary Conkling (Crusher), Oklahoma City, OKLamar Deloach (Cooperative), Statesboro, GAEdward E. Dement (Producer), Sikeston, MOJohn D. Dunavant (Merchant), Memphis, TNDenny East (Merchant), Marion, ARHarry D. East, Jr., (Manufacturer), Mayodan, NCCraig Farmer (Producer), Chowchilla, CARonald C. Fleming (Producer) Scotland Neck, NCKirk Gilkey (Ginner), Corcoran, CAR. Brent Green (Warehouse), Bakersfield, CAFrank E. Greer (Producer), Rayville, LADavid Brooks Griffin (Producer), Elaine, ARRon Harkey (Warehouse), Lubbock, TXGeorge R. Herron (Manufacturer), Danville, VAPhil Hickman (Ginner), Tornillo, TXHollis O. Isbell (Producer), Tuscumbia, ALC. B. King (Cooperative), Pelehatchie, MSSam O. Leake (Warehouse), Newellton, LADarryl Lindsey (Cooperative), Lubbock, TXJoel C. Litton (Warehouse), Clarksdale, MSRege Luckey (Producer), Humboldt, TNRick Ludwig (Ginner), Suffolk, VAMurry G. McClintock (Ginner), Tunica, MSW. Reece Makamson (Producer), Morgan City, MSScott Middleton (Crusher), Jonestown, MSSteve C. Moore (Producer), Roscoe, TXVan F. Murphy (Ginner), Quitman, GAWilliam N. Newsom (Manufacturer), Toccoa, GAGary J. Nichols (Warehouse), Memphis, TNJohn L. Noble (Producer), Vienna, GAKeith Paul (Merchant), Fresno, CAKeith Pendergrass (Ginner), Donalsonville, GAMoss H. Perrow (Producer), Cameron, SCBud Reding (Producer), Littlefield, TXLaurel K. Rohloff (Crusher), Phoenix, AZJohn F. Shackelford, III (Ginner), Bonita, LAVance Shoaf (Warehouse), Milan, TNRobert Sloan (Producer), La Mesa, NMCharles L. Spradling (Merchant), Lubbock, TXLennis F. Springs (Warehouse), McKinney, TXShane Stephens (Warehouse), Greenwood, MSTom Teixeira (Producer), Dos Palos, CAJames E. Thomas (Manufacturer), Gastonia, NCJeffrey A. Thompson (Cooperative), Prattville, ALWendell Tucker (Warehouse), Quanah, TXJoe D. Vierra (Cooperative), Stratford, CAJohn F. Visic (Ginner), Casa Grande, AZJ. Austin Wade (Merchant), Montgomery, ALBob Weatherford (Warehouse), Corpus Christi, TXGeorge R. Wheeler (Manufacturer), Eden, NCAllen Whitehead (Producer), Ashburn, GA

Health, Safety and EnvironmentalQuality Committee

Roy Baxley (left)Producer, Minturn, SCChairman

Hollis G. Sullivan (right)Crusher, Harlingen, TXVice Chairman

William C. Ahrens (Ginner), Malaga, NMMerle R. Atkins (Producer), Davidson, OKRobert K. Barkley (Producer), Somerton, AZBill Beaver (Manufacturer), Ramseur, NCSteven G. Bennett (Ginner), Rich Square, NCDuane E. Berger (Producer), Blythe, CAGlen W. Boenig (Producer), Woodsboro, TXCharles H. Dante (Ginner), Dumas, ARDaniel M. Davis (Producer), Elk City, OKLarry C. Dennis (Manufacturer), Greensboro, NCJames F. Dodson (Cooperative), Robstown, TXSteven C. Droke (Producer), Hornersville, MOLance V. Everett (Cooperative), Stony Creek, VACarla Fuller (Ginner), Eclectic, ALJames Garner (Merchant), Lubbock, TXJay W. Hardwick (Producer), Newellton, LAAllen Herzer (Crusher), Lamesa, TXWilliam R. Hill (Manufacturer), Clinton, SCA. Illges, Jr. (Manufacturer), Columbus, GARussell Kuhnhenn (Ginner), Laveen, AZRobert L. Lacy, Jr. (Crusher), Lubbock, TXDennis Lard (Crusher), Chandler, AZJohn J. Leary (Merchant), Memphis, TNKenneth Lewis (Producer), Dunn, NCDonald L. Linn, Jr. (Cooperative), Indianola, MSJames L. Loeb, Jr. (Merchant), Montgomery, ALGene Lundquist (Cooperative), Bakersfield, CAF. H. Lyons, Jr. (Warehouse), Altheimer, ARHamill McNair (Producer), Camilla, GAMalcolm Magar (Warehouse), Altus, OKBill Mikeska (Ginner), Eola, TXD. Keith Mixon (Ginner), Seminole, TXJerry Newby (Producer), Athens, ALJohn N. Newcomb (Cooperative), Osceola, AREdward K. Nicolls (Merchant), Fresno, CAJames C. Nunn, Jr. (Merchant), Brownsville, TNJohn F. Phillips, III (Producer), Yazoo City, MSTom R. Pitts (Merchant), Greenwood, MSKirby O. Powell (Ginner), Brownsville, TNDonald M. Raley (Ginner), Epps, LAFrederick Richard (Cooperative), Roll, AZMarvin Ruark (Producer), Bishop, GAMax J. Shaw (Producer), Sidon, MST. S. Shuler (Crusher), Greenwood, MSNeill M. Sloan (Warehouse), Portland, ARDan B. Smith (Producer), Lockney, TXE. Bragg Smith, III (Warehouse), Dallas, TXStephen J. Sossaman (Producer), Queen Creek, AZThomas W. Stallings (Producer), Funston, GAKeith Streety (Cooperative), Levelland, TXSam Stuckey (Producer), Clarkedale, ARMartin K. Sweetser (Producer), Deming, NMMark K. Tapp (Manufacturer), Danville, VALee Tiller (Ginner), Odem, TXLarry R. Turnbough (Producer), Balmorhea, TXG. Fred Wallace (Crusher), Germantown, TNR. Gerald Warren (Producer), Newton Grove, NCGene S. West (Ginner), Dunn, NCMarty E. White (Cooperative), Jonesboro, ARDavid Wildy (Producer), Manila, ARJim Wilkerson (Ginner), Newellton, LAJohn Woolf (Ginner), Huron, CA

Farm Policy With current farm law expiring in 2002, anindustrywide leadership group was appointedby Council President Ron Rayner. This com-mittee reviewed options and began devel-oping recommendations with the goal ofproviding the Council with a platform whenserious farm policy discussion heats up.

The group focused on how to fashion amore cost-effective safety net and how pro-duction and price risk can be managed moreeffectively. There was consensus on preservingflexibility provisions and agreement that themarketing loan and Step 2 continue to havestrong appeal. The leaders agreed that someform of payments would almost certainly beneeded and that provisions should be consid-ered for higher payment rates when pricesare low. The group will continue to meet in2000 to refine Council objectives in the cru-cially important farm policy arena.

Rayner and other Council leaders alsoshared some of U.S. cotton’s views on theF.A.I.R. Act and on future farm policy in testimony before the Commission on 21st

Century Agriculture. Rayner noted thevolatility now existing in the agriculturaleconomy makes federal involvement in thissector essential.

Council actions in this arena were timelyas Congress indicated in late 1999 that itwould conduct farm policy hearings in 2000.

Cottonseed AssistanceThe Council, with the help of Sen. Cochran,was able to get law enabling the Secretary ofAgriculture to use unspent funds from earlierappropriations measures — between $95-$100 million — to carry out a cottonseedassistance program.

The legislation specifically authorized theSecretary to provide assistance to producersor first-handlers for the 1999 cottonseed crop.The Council recommended a direct paymentbe made to first-handlers using a paymentrate based on the difference between 85percent of the five-year Olympic average ofcottonseed prices and the August - October1999 prices as reported by the NationalAgriculture Statistical Service. Council staffworked closely with USDA to work out anequitable and efficient delivery mechanism.

6

Farm Program and Economic Policy Committee

Council President Ron Rayner pressed lawmakers and the Administration for a cottonseed assistance program.

Bruce Brumfield, a Mississippi cotton producer who serves on the Commission

on 21st Century Agriculture, makes a point dur-ing a Council industrywide leadership group

discussion of future farm policy.

When reinstatement of Step 2 funding began on October 1,1999, net U.S. cotton sales and exports surged.

The Farm Program and Economic Policy Committee establishes the Council’s position on such issues as farm legislation and administration, federal tax laws, employment and wages and water law.

Step 2 Funding Reinstatement: A Success Story

National Cotton Council delegates started the ball rolling

at the 1999 annual meeting by reaching a unified position

supporting replenishment of Step 2 funding, along with

several technical amendments relating to administration of

the program. That position came as a result of several

meetings prior to the 1999 annual meeting and hours of

intense negotiation during the meeting.

Council staff immediately engaged the staff of Rep.

Larry Combest (D-TX), chairman of the House Agriculture

Committee and the staff of the Senate Agriculture Committee

to find opportunities to get the Step 2 program in place

by August 1, 1999— the beginning of the 1999-2000

marketing year.

Momentum was generated at the St. Louis Ag Summit

where virtually all major farm and commodity organiza-

tions expressed support for the Council’s effort to reinstate

Step 2. During the spring and early summer months, the

Council intensified its search for a legislative vehicle for

Step 2 restoration. Agriculture Secretary Glickman endorsed

an agriculture assistance package that included Step 2. The

importance of Step 2 was also acknowledged by House and

Senate leadership as well as the White House.

Critical to Congressional and Administration accept-

ance was a cost-effective “score” of the Step 2 provision

by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). In its initial

response to Senator Cochran’s inquiry about cost, CBO

estimated that Step 2 would add more than $1 billion dol-

lars to baseline spending. Council economists put the cost

estimate much lower, at $376 million. Subsequently, CBO

revised its estimate to just over $400 million, agreeing in

principle with the Council’s view that much of the cost of

Step 2 would be offset by Commodity Credit Corporation

(CCC) savings in loan outlays. CBO concluded that Step 2

would facilitate the movement of cotton from the ware-

house to the marketplace, thereby reducing costs to CCC

for interest, storage and the resale of forfeited cotton.

Indeed, when reinstatement of Step 2 funding began

on October 1, 1999, net sales and exports picked up

considerably. Moreover, Council economists note that

reinstatement of Step 2 has helped New York Cotton

Exchange prices maintain more than a 5-cent margin over

the world price since October 1. A more normal relation-

ship would be for New York prices to be 2 to 4 cents lower

than the world price. The result is about an 8-cent wider

spread between New York and world prices as well as a

wider spread between the adjusted world price and the

loan rate. The presence of Step 2 permits these price

spreads to exist and is putting 8 cents more in the U.S.

growers’ pockets than would otherwise be the case.

Crop InsuranceThe Council and the American Cotton Producers (ACP) have given high priorityto reforming the federal crop insurance program.

The fiscal year 2001 through 2004 budgets include an additional $1.5 bil-lion per year earmarked for reform, and Congress continues to look to theCouncil for ideas.The Council retained a consultant to study the program,and, along with the ACP, developed a list of recommendations. Most ofthese were incorporated into a Senate bill authored by Sens. Thad Cochran(R-MS) and Blanche Lincoln (D-AR).

On the House side, the Council continues to work with House AgricultureCommittee Chairman Larry Combest (R-TX) and Ranking Member CharlieStenholm (D-TX) on reform and incorporation of Council recommendations.

The industry long has asserted that cotton crop insurance rates, especially forsome regions, were excessive. At the Council’s request, Sens. Cochran andLincoln authored legislation that directed the USDA Risk ManagementAgency (RMA) to study the problem. The study found that for the Mid-Southand West, rates were excessive and did not reflect actual risk. As a result, theagency has lowered rates by up to 50 percent for some counties. The Councilis working with the RMA to study the Southwest and Southeast rates to see ifthere are ways to reduce those premiums as well.

As Congress adjourned for the year, action was pending in the Senate forcrop insurance reform. It will be a high priority in 2000.

Other key developments involving farm programs and economic policyincluded Council leadership meetings with senior management of cotton’smajor input suppliers to emphasize the thin margins confronting U.S. cottonproducers. As a result, a joint industry-supplier strategic initiative was under-taken in 1999 to identify ways to reduce costs and improve industry prof-itability. Senate passage of a new farm worker program was designed to easeagricultural employers’ access to temporary foreign farm labor.

7

Council economists note that reinstatement of Step2 has helped New York Cotton Exchange prices tomaintain more than a 5-cent margin over the worldprice since October 1.

Cents/Pound

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May Jun Jul

Aug Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Cents/Pound

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May Jun Jul

Aug Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

NYCE A Index USNENYCE A Index USNE

tile goods from Asia through the Africacountries — countries the bill was supposedlydesigned to help.

Meanwhile, the Senate passed a broadtrade package containing CBI parity, Africatrade preferences, trade adjustment assistancefor agriculture and negotiating objectives formultilateral agricultural trade negotiations.The Senate version of CBI parity and Africatrade preferences contained a strong U.S. ruleof origin. The Council supported the Senate’saction and urged a House/Senate conferenceto quickly reach agreement on legislation that would provide trade preferences only toapparel made from U.S. textile components,including U.S. yarn.

World Trade OrganizationThe U.S. hosted a meeting in Seattle intend-ed to kick off a new round of multilateral trade negotiations. The session focused pri-marily on agriculture, market access, reviewof, and improvement in, implementation ofthe Uruguay Round Agreement and otherissues, including trade in services and elec-tronic commerce and environmental andlabor concerns. Council officials participatedin the negotiations both as members of theU.S. delegation and as special advisers tothe U.S. negotiators.

Council President Ron Rayner stated that a Caribbean Basinparity bill could add 1 million bales to consumption of U.S.cotton over three years and would help the U.S. textile industry compete with imported Asian apparel products.

The International Trade Policy Committee directs the Council’s stance on trade policyand negotiations.

World cotton markets continued their downward spiral during 1999 as significant worldwideproduction levels did little to spur increased mill use. Asian countries continued to increase theirsynthetic fiber production, helping to dampen cotton’s effort to rebound from the Asian financialcrisis. The size of China’s cotton stocks continued to be a major force in the world cotton marketas China continued to resort to export subsidies and import restrictions to work off its excess capacity.Throughout the year, the Council pursued a trade policy agenda that focused on: 1) obtainingregional trading arrangements that would help U.S. cotton textiles better compete with Asianapparel products; 2) ensuring that China made appropriate concessions in its quest to become amember of the World Trade Organization; 3) preventing other countries from erecting unreason-able trade barriers to genetically enhanced agricultural products; and 4) ensuring cotton played asignificant role in the upcoming round of multilateral trade negotiations.

8

Caribbean Basin Parity and Africa Trade LegislationCouncil efforts to secure passage of CaribbeanBasin parity legislation continued in earnestthroughout 1999. In testimony before theTrade Subcommittee of the House Ways andMeans Committee, Council President RonRayner stated that a Caribbean Basin paritybill could add 1 million bales to consumptionof U.S. cotton over three years and wouldhelp the U.S. textile industry compete withimported Asian apparel products.

Disagreement continued within the U.S.cotton and textile community on whetherfabric formed in the Caribbean of U.S. yarnshould receive trade benefits, but there wasa strong consensus that a Caribbean Basin(CBI) parity bill was needed. The Councilworked with yarn spinners, textile manufac-turers, apparel manufacturers and apparelretailers, stressing the importance of anacceptable compromise.

The House of Representatives failed topass its wide-open version of CBI parity, butdid pass a potentially harmful bill grantingtextile trade preferences to African countries.Although well-intentioned, the House-passedsub-Saharan Africa Trade Bill contained nosafeguards to prevent transshipment of tex-

International Trade Policy Committee

North Carolina cotton producer Billy Carter,who chairs the American Cotton ProducersPolicy Committee and co-chairs USDA sAgriculture Trade Advisory Committee forCotton, Tobacco and Peanuts, was an officialmember of the U.S. delegation to the SeattleRound of Multilateral Trade Negotiations.

U.S. raw cotton export penetration into China should improve significantly as a result of an agreement regarding China s request to

join the World Trade Organization.

9

Throughout 1999, the Council relayedcotton’s priorities to U.S. officials, including:1) increases in market access for raw cottonand textiles; 2) an end to non-tariff trade bar-riers against agricultural biotechnology prod-ucts; 3) resisting efforts to reduce significant-ly tariffs on textile imports into the U.S.; 4)opposing any effort to speed up the elimina-tion of textile quotas by the U.S.; and 5)making developing countries fully conformto World Trade Organization trade disci-plines. The Council reiterated its support forrestrictions on trade distorting agriculturalsubsidies, but stressed that the U.S. mustpreserve important domestic and export pro-grams as long as necessary to compete withinternational competitors’ treasuries.Ultimately, the countries involved in theSeattle meeting of trade ministers (held inearly December) failed to set a firm agendafor the next round of Multilateral TradeNegotiations. These countries will continuetheir efforts to start a new round of tradenegotiations during 2000.

ChinaThe Council played an active role in negotiations between the U.S. and Chinaconcerning China’s request to become amember of the WTO. In November 1999the U.S. and China reached an agreement

that has positive elements for the U.S. rawcotton industry but will create the greatestchallenge yet to the U.S. textile sector.The agreement with China responded todemands from the U.S. raw cotton sectorthat China open its markets and reduce itstrade distorting export subsidies. Chinaagreed to implement a tariff rate quotascheme that will allow raw cotton importsat an annual level that is close to the high-est level of cotton imports ever purchasedby China. As a result, access for raw cot-ton should improve significantly over theimport restrictions imposed by China dur-ing 1998 and 1999. In addition, Chinaagreed to end export subsidies for agricul-tural products and agreed to a low numberfor its allowed level of domestic agricul-tural support. These aspects of the agree-ment should benefit U.S. cotton. DespiteCouncil efforts to secure a 10-year phaseout of textile quotas for China, the agree-ment will end those quotas in five years— essentially catching China up to othertextile exporting countries that began par-ticipating in a 10-year phase out processin 1994.

However, a special textile safeguard will be in place for an additional fouryears after quotas are phased out. This will allow the U.S. to impose temporary

import restrictions on categories of importsfrom China that threaten to harm the U.S. textile industry.

BiotechnologyThroughout 1999, the Council worked with agricultural companies and employed aconsultant in a diligent effort to improve theacceptability of biotech products worldwide.The Council, Cotton Council Internationaland Cotton Incorporated embarked on acoordinated effort to respond to inquiriesabout genetically enhanced cotton.

In addition, the Council has been activelyinvolved with other commodity groups, tech-nology companies and the Administration indeveloping a strategy to include discussionson rules governing trade in biotech productsin the next round of the WTO. Although existing WTO rules require trade restrictions tobe based on sound science, there is strongevidence that several countries, particularlythe European Union, are failing to live up tothose requirements. U.S. efforts to create aworking group on implementation of existingWTO rules governing phytosanitary standards(rules applicable to genetically enhancedorganisms) were blocked by the EuropeanUnion throughout 1999.

10

Public Relations and International Market Development Committee

The Council s urging of federal lawmakers to quickly approve an agricultural relief package was reinforced at every step with visibility in the national media.

The Public Relations and International Market Development Committee guides an extensive program to expand U.S. cotton exports while building a greater understanding of the U.S. cotton industry through effective communications and information services.

The redesigned Council World Wide Web siteincludes a home page featuring quick access to the latest Council activities and news.

Public AttitudesThe National Cotton Council expanded itsreliance on the World Wide Web in its effortto shape favorable public attitudes toward theU.S. cotton industry. Specifically, the Council’sWeb site, www.cotton.org, was made morenavigable and contains more information,such as the industry’s contributions to theU.S. economy, to make it more attractive tojournalists and other opinion leaders. TheCouncil increased its use of Internet email todistribute news to the trade and consumernews media.

In 1999, the Council heightened its communications on two issues in particu-lar: 1) the federal agricultural relief packageand 2) preservation of the Consumer ProductsSafety Commission’s (CPSC) amendedChildren’s Sleepwear Flammability Standards.

The Council’s urging of federal lawmakersto quickly approve an agricultural reliefpackage was reinforced at every step withvisibility in the national media. CouncilPresident Ron Rayner and others werequoted in news releases, radio newslinesand AgDay Television spots. Producer leadersalso submitted Council-generated commen-taries to newspapers in key lawmakers’ districts across the Cotton Belt.

A similarly aggressive information campaignwas carried out to counter misinformationfrom the fire community and Congressionalmembers who wanted CPSC to rescind the 1996 amendments to the Children’sSleepwear Flammability Standards.

Some of the tactics included: national dis-tribution of a news release through PR

Newswire; an appearance by the Council’s Dr.Phil Wakelyn on “Good Morning America,”where he defended CPSC’s decision toamend the standards and refuted notions thatthis was an industry profits-driven effort;National Cotton Women’s Committee officerJoan Balfour’s testimony at the CPSC hearingas an industry member and grandmother; anda commentary by Council Health, Safety &Environmental Quality Chairman Roy Baxleydistributed to several large daily newspapersvia a major business wire.

On other issues, the Council was able to utilize additional industry leaders whohave received communications trainingfrom various Cotton Foundation programs.For example, the Council arranged forAlabama cotton producer Larkin Martin todescribe the benefits of transgenic cottontechnology with the Wall Street Journal sagriculture writer.

David Wildy of Arkansas and other pro-ducers submitted commentaries to targetednewspapers as part of a campaign to ensuresound science is used in 1996 Food QualityProtection Act implementation. That effortincreased awareness among lawmakers andothers of cotton producers’ environmentallyresponsible use of plant protection productsand production techniques.

Grown and Made in the U.S.A. — It MattersAdditional support was given to the NationalCotton Women’s Committee (NCWC), thevolunteers who conduct Grown and Made in the U.S.A. — It Matters. The goal of that

educational awareness campaign is gettingconsumers to increase their purchases ofU.S.-cotton products.

The campaign’s “Common Threads”newsletter was enhanced and “Grown and Made” campaign materials were updated. The “Grown and Made” fashionshow and rally at the 2000 Beltwide CottonConferences included presentation of thefirst annual “U.S. Cotton Champion.” Thisaward was established to recognize a U.S.clothing designer or retailer for the use ofU.S. cotton in its retail products.

Information ServicesThe Council broadened its reach to membership through the Council’s AgDayTelevision Cotton s Week program andradio newslines, which featured greatlyexpanded coverage of major issues andnews of interest. These broadcasts wereposted on the Council’s Web site homepage, joining Cotton s Week, news releases, the daily Cotton Update, ActionRequests and other newsletters.

Also posted were numerous detailedinformation sheets on subjects ranging frompayment limit problems to upland cottonmarketing and loan issues. These also weredistributed to producer and other Councilmembers via the Field Services staff.

Along with Council Executive VicePresident Phil Burnett’s “Cotton’s Agenda”column in Cotton Farming magazine, the Council reinforced its information reach tomembers through increased columns inother trade publications.

International Market DevelopmentPositioning U.S. cotton as the fabric of choiceto consumers around the world ensures futuredemand for U.S. cotton fiber and U.S.-manu-factured cotton products.

The successful, coordinated export effortbetween the U.S. Department of Agriculture(USDA) and the U.S. cotton industry, throughthe Market Access Program (MAP), ForeignMarket Development (FMD) program, GSM-102 program and other export promotion ini-tiatives, is recognized as a critical componentto the long-term economic health of the U.S.cotton/ textile industry, the U.S. farm sectorand the overall U.S. economy.

As competition from man-made fibersintensifies and world cotton stocks build, theU.S. industry has taken the lead throughCotton Council International’s COTTON USAprograms in keeping cotton as the fiber ofchoice for the global consumer. CCI utilizesan integrated Supply-Push/Demand-Pull strat-egy that instills a preference for products con-taining U.S. cotton at virtually every pointalong the marketing chain, from the initialmill buyer to the final consumer. This strategycreates incentives for textile mills and manu-facturers to choose U.S. cotton over cottonfrom other sources. Through effective tradeservicing and consumer promotion programs,and through extensive leveraging of industryand public funds, CCI continues to fulfill itsrole as the export promotion division of theU.S. cotton industry.

For 1998-99, CCI carefully crafted retailpromotions built around special events,purchase incentives and even top musiciansand other personalities who link U.S. cot-ton to popular lifestyle choices. Some $93million of U.S. cotton-rich products

labeled with the COTTON USA Mark weresold during CCI’s 1998-99 sales promotions.

The GSM 102-program continues to be a positive force for increasing U.S. cottonexports. Buyers in Mexico, Turkey, Korea,the Andean Region, Central America andIndonesia purchased nearly 829,000 balesof U.S. cotton from October 1998 toSeptember 1999.

CCI’s international program efforts got an extra boost when CCI received anadditional $1.1 million grant from USDA’sMarket Access Program. USDA’s ForeignAgricultural Service provided the funding in recognition of CCI’s efficient managementof past funds and the overall success of theCOTTON USA program.

In addition, USDA also approved three-year Section 108 funding for CCI initiativesin the Caribbean. CCI received notice thatUSDA approved its request for Section 108local currency funding to support a three-year initiative in Costa Rica, Jamaica andthe Dominican Republic. The initial level offunding for year one totals nearly $500,000for the three countries. If successful, similarlevels of funding in local currencies wouldbe available for the remaining two years ofthe project.

2%

National Cotton Council of America$807,500

98%

Industry and Government Grants$48.989 Million

11

Council Communications Services Director Fred Middleton, left, interviews Sen. Paul

Coverdell (R-GA) about farm policy for a storyon the Council s issues-oriented

AgDay television show.

The National Cotton Council, through CCI, leveraged NCC investments of $807,500 to nearly$50 million during the 1999-2000 budget year.

Cotton gained ground in the fight against the boll weevil byadding 3.5 million acres to the eradication program.

The Research and Education Committee seeks to attain larger and more effective cottonresearch and education programs to reduce production and processing costs and to improvecotton fiber and oilseed products.

Profitability InitiativeThe focus of The Cotton Foundation research and education programs is to improve industryprofitability. The Foundation contributed better than $1.75 million to cotton research and education— in an effort to boost profitability. The Foundation recognized, however, that evenwith new technology, widely anticipated production efficiencies at the farm level were not off-setting the low world price for cotton. A special “Profitability Initiative” was undertaken to identify additional efficiencies for producing and ginning U.S. cotton.

Senior executives from key Foundation member firms and university and federal scientistsmet with industry leaders to explore ways to boost profitability through the best use of existingand future technologies. The goal is to increase profitability for the production and ginningsectors by 10 cents a pound over the next five years. Another goal is establishing a longerterm course for research and development.

New Technology AdvancementOne such long-term effort is the promise of site-specific farming. Council producer leadersand staff met with USDA and NASA to review progress being made on remote sensing tech-nology and precision agriculture research. The industry also pressed for continued cooperationamong NASA, USDA and the universities for advancing practical applications of additionalfederal research monies for this key technology.

Aflatoxin research has demonstrated the potential for preventing or significantly reducinggrowth of the fungus-produced toxins in cottonseed. Additional federal funds were obtained toaccelerate field testing and demonstration in Arizona cotton fields of a biological controlagent for reducing growth of Aspergillus flavus, the fungal organism that causes aflatoxin.

The Council sought to make the 2000 Beltwide Cotton Conferences “the” place for producersto uncover ways to minimize per pound production costs and take advantage of emerging tech-nologies. Under a theme of “Strategies for Solutions,” producer-oriented panels explored topicsranging from at-planting treatments to pest management. In-depth workshops and seminarsfocused on biotechnology, precision agriculture, cottonseed futures, soil management, mar-keting, Internet access and other key areas. Special emphasis was made on finding the rightbalance of the economies and expectations for payback.

To expedite the transfer of proven online technology, Proceedings, the Beltwide CottonConferences’ compilation, was made available both on CD-ROM and online in the membersonly section of the Council’s Web site, www.cotton.org. Full papers are available online begin-ning with the 1996 conferences while abstracts are available for the 1984-1995 conferences.

Cross-discipline cotton research that addresses specific needs is important for identifyingproven tools and practices that will help industry trim production and processing costs.Reporting of work being carried out across the Cotton Belt is growing as the Councilincreases awareness of it’s on-line Journal of Cotton Science among scientists, industrymembers and others.

12

Research and Education Committee

A leaflet and brochure were key elements of anaggressive sticky cotton prevention educationprogram aimed at producers and ginners.

American Cotton Producers Chairman Allen Helms voiced the need for more refugia options during a USDA/EPA-sponsored Bt cotton resistance management workshop.

The Council also continued its emphasison helping producers understand the cottonplant and the interaction of its physiologywith weather and cultural practices rangingfrom row spacing to defoliation. This infor-mation is disseminated to more than 20,000producers and others through the CottonPhysiology Today newsletter. Back issues are available on CD-ROM.

Pest Management/BiotechnologyThe Council continues to work closely withregistrants, USDA, university scientists andEPA to ensure any changes in resistance man-agement requirements for Bt cotton are coor-dinated with grower groups and are based onsound science. Council producer leaders,including American Cotton ProducersChairman Allen Helms Jr., and Health, Safetyand Environmental Quality CommitteeChairman Roy Baxley, provided valuableinput to a USDA/EPA-sponsored Bt cottonresistance management workshop. Clearlyvoiced was the need for more refugia optionsin order to provide flexibility and practicalityfor producers and to discourage unreason-able and unworkable restrictions to cottonproduction. Among other key Council effortsin the biotechnology arena: 1) develop-

ment of “talking points” for use in counteringmisinformation and consumer concern inEurope over genetically enhanced crops, and2) joining the American Crop ProtectionAssociation and others in combating a law-suit filed by Greenpeace calling for EPA tocancel registrations of all Bt technologies.

Cotton gained ground in the fight againstthe boll weevil by adding more than 3.5million acres to the eradication program.New programs are underway in Mississippi,Louisiana, Arkansas and Texas. Texasaccounts for the majority of the increase,adding nearly 2 million acres to the program.Total acres under active eradication exceeds6.5 million.

Congress increased the direct federalappropriation for the national program byabout $1 million to its current $17 millionplus. In addition, the $100 million FarmServices Agency loan program wasapproved for another year.

Quality AssuranceThe Council made numerous attempts toreach consensus on changes in fiber qualityissues throughout the year. A Quality Task

Force developed recommendations forchanges in key quality measurementsthrough changes in the loan schedule ofpremiums and discounts.

Late in 1999, a proposal which attemptsto provide seed breeding and processingincentives to improve key cotton fiber meas-urements was being discussed by the TaskForce. That panel approved and forwardedfor Board consideration a set of wide rangingrecommendations, including the adoptionof HVI as the official color determination,the addition of length uniformity to the premium and discount schedule in theCommodity Credit Corporation loan andmodifications to loan values for preparation,strength and micronaire.

The Council, working with the Foundation,Cooperative Extension Service specialistsand grower organizations, implemented anaggressive sticky cotton education programto producers and ginners. They wereadvised of practical ways of monitoring andmanaging pests and other measures to pre-vent occurrence of high levels of insect sugars in cotton.

13

Council staff and key scientists from across the Cotton Belt participated on an American Cotton Producers-appointed panel that is looking at ways to boost U.S. cotton yields, which have been stagnant for the past two decades.

PackagingThe Joint Cotton Industry Bale PackagingCommittee (JCIBPC) made contaminationprevention a high priority for 1999.

The Committee monitored experimentalbagging and tie test programs with an eyetoward providing greater protection of lintfrom potential contaminants as bales arehandled and shipped. New polyethyleneand polypropylene bagging constructionswere evaluated, as were six-wire tie config-urations and automatic wire tie and plastictie systems. Also, a survey of gin experienceswith recessed ties was reported to the gin-ning industry.

All of these activities help the committeeand the National Cotton Council determinewhether new products or practices would bebeneficial or detrimental to the U.S. cotton industry.

The Bale Tag Subcommittee of the JCIBPCwas formed and set specific goals: 1) identifi-cation of tag materials, attachment methods,recyclability and color and 2) monitoring thePermanent Bale Identification (PBI) tag layoutand barcode format to ensure that they con-tinue to meet the industry’s needs.Discussions with tag manufacturers and visitsto tag manufacturing plants have helped indrafting recommendations for achieving thesubcommittee’s goals.

Permanent Bale IdentificationThe Permanent Bale Identification Task Forceoversaw the successful implementation of thePBI system. This system of uniquely identify-ing every bale of U.S. cotton will not only improve handling efficiencies andreduce costs but will facilitate the industry’smove toward more electronic processing of information.

With its initial work completed, the origi-nal PBI Task Force was disbanded in 1999.To continue further development of the PBIsystem, a new working group, the ElectronicDocument Task Force, was appointed toinvestigate implementation of PBI into sys-tems for electronic warehouse receipts, elec-tronic shipping documents and related items.

The new task force will monitor how suc-cessfully each handler is utilizing PBI andfocus on areas where improvement is need-ed, such as mill rejects and re-concentratedcotton. Areas of industry activity where PBI

14

Packaging and Distribution Committee

The Joint Cotton Industry Bale Packaging Committee monitored recessed tie test programs with a goal of decreasing the potential of lint contamination.

This system of uniquely identifying every bale of U.S. cotton not only will improve handling efficiencies and reduce costs but facilitate the industry s move towardmore electronic processing of information.

The Packaging and Distribution Committee works to enhance bale packaging, handling,storage and movement, through the use of improved materials, procedures and policy andelectronic technology.

appears to be needed, such as EDI documents, electronic receipts and Commodity CreditCorporation transmissions, will be addressed. The task force also will develop additional elec-tronic documents such as bill of lading.

Cotton FlowThe Council submitted comments approved by the Cotton Flow Committee to USDA’s FarmService Agency in response to a proposed rule on cotton flow. The comments generally sup-ported USDA’s proposal to move forward with a uniform national cotton flow standard, whichadopts a minimal regulatory approach. The comments focused on a Council resolution, whichsupports adherence to a national cotton flow standard being established, with compliancebeing a condition of eligibility to enter into a Cotton Storage Agreement with the CommodityCredit Corporation (CCC) rather than the U.S. Warehouse Act as stated in the proposed rule.

In addition, the comments called for a clarification of the 4.5 percent shipping standardincluded in the proposed rule. Comments also emphasized the Council resolution, whichstates that the standard should “be enforced by voluntary warehouse industry arbitration proce-dures or the U.S. judicial courts systems with minimum government involvement and no asso-ciated user fees.”

Computer/Electronic TechnologyA redesigned Council Web site, www.cotton.org, provides users with improved navigation to an expanding variety of information. Visitors get a quick look at the latest cotton industryactivity and easy access to in-depth information such as weather, economic data and news.The addition of AgDay and Cotton Newslines using RealVideo and RealAudio bring live cottonnews to the site. Another enhancement featured online registration for the 2000 BeltwideCotton Conferences along with general information and program details.

The Conference Proceedings are now on-line, too, allowing Council members and confer-ence attendees to perform historical topic searches. An enhanced Web site also enabled theCouncil to begin redevelopment of its Cotton Risk Management Network (CRMN) as a Webapplication. CRMN’s second phase was scheduled to be available on-line in early 2000.

15

Huge strides were made at tagging every U.S. cotton bale with a permanent bale identifier.

The Council generally supported USDA’sproposal to move forward with a uniform,national cotton flow standard.

Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA)The Council worked closely with other commodity groups, the EPA, USDA andCongress to promote a reasonable and scientifically sound implementation of theFQPA. Producer Bill Lovelady served on theTolerance Reassessment Advisory Committee(TRAC), which completed its tenure inOctober. TRAC successfully encouraged EPA to develop a six-phase pilot program fortolerance reassessment of organophosphatesand to solicit public comment on scienceissues necessary for FQPA implementation.

Other activities involved with FQPAincluded:

•Work with a coalition of commodity groups and others involved in agricultural production to achieve TRAC objectives;•Bill Lovelady’s testimony to the House Agriculture sub-committee responsible for FQPA oversight;•Support of legislation in both the House and Senate which requires EPA to use sound science in FQPA implementation; •Close coordination with companies to preserve the uses of important crop pro-tection products;•A tour for EPA staff to observe cotton harvest and ginning.

BiotechnologyBiotechnology came to the forefront as oneof the most promising tools ever introducedto agriculture. The Council worked closelywith the Agriculture Biotechnology Forum,

a food chain coalition, and the Corn,Soybean and Cotton Biotech Committeethat was involved in trade issues. Assistancewas given to increasing House Members’and staff awareness of biotechnology’simportance. Testimony was provided at aHouse Agriculture subcommittee hearing.

Clean Water ActThe Clean Water Act requires states to

identify and list water bodies that fail to meetwater quality standards. For each body, statesare then required to establish a cap or TotalMaximum Daily Load (TMDL) for each pol-lutant involved at a level that should ensurethat applicable water quality standards willbe met. These TMDLs will encompass non-point source pollutants, which include farmrunoff. The Council is working with othercommodity groups to address concerns overEPA’s interpretation of this law and its impacton production agriculture.

Clean AirThe Council helped respond to: 1) the newozone and particulate matter (PM) standards,which the DC Appeals Court remandedback to EPA for further justification, and 2) EPA’s new review of these standards dueto be completed in 2002.

Dr. Phil Wakelyn, the Council’s senior scientist, environmental health and safety,serves on the USDA Agricultural Air QualityResearch Task Force. In 1999, that panelapproved a voluntary agriculture air quality

16

Health, Safety and Environmental Quality Committee

Dr. Phil Wakelyn, left, Council senior scientist, defended the Consumer Product Safety Commission s decision on Children sSleepwear Flammability Standards during a Good Morning America segment.

The Council, through extensive comments, testimony and media relations efforts, helped prevent revocation of the new amendments to the Children s SleepwearFlammability Standards.

The Health, Safety and Enviromental Quality Committee seeks to achieve reasonablelegislation and scientifically based government regulations for pesticides, textilechemicals, worker safety/health and other matters, and assists in appropriateenforcement within the industry.

Numerous regulatory proposals have the potential to threaten U.S. cotton’s viability. Someof these would remove certain plant protection and harvest aid products from the marketplace.The National Cotton Council’s Environmental Task Force actively communicated industry con-cerns on a number of these proposals, including those associated with implementation of theFood Quality Protection Act (FQPA).

compliance program that will be used byEPA to provide policy guidance to states forimplementation plans for PM and other agri-cultural pollutants. This should be helpful tocotton areas which are non-attainment forPM and should prevent “permit to farm” regulations for PM.

The Council and the National CottonGinners Association (NCGA), working withother groups, were successful in gettingunnecessary hazardous chemical risk man-agement plan requirements for propaneremoved. The Council and NCGA continueto work against unnecessary permit require-ments as states implement their federaloperating permit programs.

FlammabilityJoint efforts with the textile, apparel, fur-niture and mattress industries are helpingto prevent unnecessary regulations forupholstered furniture, mattresses and bedclothing and apparel. Such regulationscould affect 2 million to 3 million bales of cotton. The Council, through extensivecomments, testimony and media relationsefforts, helped prevent revocation of thenew amendments to the Children’s Sleep-wear Flammability Standards. Revocationcould have affected sleepwear, playwearand underwear markets for children.

OSHAThe Council, as part of several coalitions,continued to provide input into potential

rulemakings by the Occupational Safety andHealth Administration (OSHA) on a compre-hensive safety and health program rule,ergonomics, crystalline silica and permissibleexposure limits. Nevertheless, OSHA proposeda rule for ergonomics in November, whichwill result in much activity in 2000.

The Council and the American TextileManufacturers Instiute continued develop-ing information on the effects of extendedworkshifts and exposure to cotton dust toprevent unnecessary enforcement of the cot-ton dust standard and respirator use for tex-tile workers on 2-hour shifts.

Assistance was given in legal cases onworkplace health and safety that preventedlarge judgments and fines for textile millsand cottonseed oil mills.

Respirable FibersInformation was developed regarding levelsof respirable cotton fibers in cotton operationsand the health effects of these fibers. Thisshould be helpful in removing cotton fromthe list of fibers under consideration by EPAas “respirable fibers” that can cause healthproblems similar to those caused by asbestos.

Ecolabeling and StandardsAs part of the U.S. Allied-Textile IndustryStandards Coalition, the Council is par-ticipating in national and internationalstandards development activities to promote cotton interests.

Cottonseed ContaminantsWork with the Multi-Crop Aflatoxin Task Force and USDA, coupled with Congressional efforts, kept research effortsstrong to eliminate aflatoxin. The Council isassisting Dr. Peter Cotty, USDA, with federal EPA permit requirements for the aflatoxinbiocontrol agent which was used in field trials on 10,000 cotton acres in Arizona in1999 and 20,000 acres in 2000. The CottonFoundation is helping to fund this study.

Collateral efforts with the NationalCottonseed Products Association are aimedat potential Federal Drug Administration regulation for other contaminants (e.g.,Salmonella/E. coli, dioxin, lead) and onlabeling for trans fats.

On other issues, the Council: •Continued efforts with Cotton Cares, a voluntary environmental excellence program, and communicated to EPA, indus-try and others its leadership role in envi-ronmentally responsible production of cotton through the Integrated Pest Management Initiative and High Cotton Awards;•Published a Worker Protection Standards (WPS) newsletter that specif-ically addresses cotton production situa-tions and covers tips for saving money and time;•Developed data for control technology standards for cottonseed oil mills for hexane emissions, which resulted in separate standards in the draft proposal for large and small (0.5 and 0.7 gallons per ton) oil mills; •Assisted cottonseed oil mills with Toxic Release Inventory reporting and with three EPA Toxic Substances Control Act rulemakings potentially affecting cottonseed oil mills. (the High Production Volume chemical testing program, the reporting level for lead and the proposal on the Inventory Update Rule);•Gained cotton bale removal from the International Maritime Organization and Department of Transportation hazardous designations as a flammable solid, effec-tive January, 1999; •Assisted the industry in legal cases involving bale fires.

17

The Council is assisting on USDA aflatoxin control research, which is utilizing a cyclone air sampler to monitor aflatoxin producing fungi.

18

Cotton Council International

Kenneth Hood, left, a Mississippi producer,explains aspects of cotton physiology to keyoverseas cotton buyers who participated in the CCI-sponsored Sourcing USA Summit in Arizona.

CCI s international program efforts got an extra boost in 1999 with an additional $1.1 million grant from USDA s ForeignAgriculture Service under the Market Access Program.

Cotton Council International (CCI) is the export promotion division of the NationalCotton Council. CCI’s activities are guided by its Board of Directors and stemfrom resolutions of the Council’s PublicRelations and International MarketDevelopment Committee.

The COTTON USA Advantage In overseas markets, CCI represents theinterests of all seven cotton industry seg-ments. This role has never been moreimportant. With the agricultural economystruggling at home, increasing exports and foreign market demand for U.S. cot-ton and cotton products is key to theindustry’s health.

The international program efforts got an extra boost during the year when CCIreceived an additional $1.1 million to itsbase funding of $10.1 million from USDA’sForeign Agriculture Service under the MarketAccess Program for 1998-99. CCI received the funding in recognition of the organization’s efficient management ofprogram funds and activities. Thus, CCI wasable to better leverage its COTTON USAAdvantage program throughout the world.

Cotton Fiber Trade ServicingThe GSM-102 program continued as a

reliable mechanism to move U.S. cotton intothe global marketplace. Buyers in Mexico,Turkey, the Andean Region, Central America,Korea and Indonesia purchased nearly829,000 bales of U.S. cotton from October1998 to September 1999.

CCI’s trade servicing program brings buyersand sellers together to help the industry

build lasting relationships with its customers.CCI took an industry delegation to El Salvador,Guatemala and Mexico in April and broughtSpecial Trade Missions to the U.S. fromTurkey and Japan. U.S. quality fiber also was showcased when CCI guided textile man-ufacturers from 11 key Latin American millson a tour of U.S. cotton production and pro-cessing. The COTTON USA Orientation Tourenabled these key customers to become morefamiliar with the types and qualities of U.S.cotton, gain a better understanding of U.S.marketing practices and initiate and/or buildon relationships with U.S. cotton exporters.

The Sourcing USA Summit in Novemberbrought decision-makers from 150 of theworld’s leading cotton-consuming mills to the U.S to meet with cotton exporters andindustry leaders. The Summit, sponsored byCCI and Cotton Incorporated, was especiallyimportant to U.S. merchandisers and exportersas the U.S. tries to recover export marketshare after last year’s short crop.

U.S.-Manufactured Cotton Product Trade ServicingTrade fairs, such as Heimtextil in Germany and the Sourcing USA Trade Fair inDusseldorf attracted buyers from classic fash-

Paul A. RuhMerchant, Richardson, TXPresident

ion houses. In Latin America, nine U.S. mills exhibited their productsat the COTTON USA Pavilion at Colombiatex and U.S. mills exhibit-ed their cotton goods before buyers from all over the world inOctober at Interstoff Asia, that region’s premier fashion trade show.

CCI also reached beyond Europe in its quest to expand its pres-ence in the international home furnishings market. Executives repre-senting 10 retailers from eight countries in Asia, Europe and LatinAmerica participated in the 1999 COTTON USA International HomeFurnishing Retailers Tour. The retailers followed cotton’s value chainfrom a cotton farm in Tennessee, to textile mills in the Carolinas, tothe showrooms of New York.

In addition, USDA also approved a three-year Section 108 fundingrequest for CCI initiatives in the Caribbean. Programs would be deliv-ered in Costa Rica, Jamaica and the Dominican Republic. The initiallevel of funding for the first year totals nearly $500,000 for the threecountries. If successful, similar levels of funding in local currencieswould be available for the remaining two years of the project.

Consumer PromotionsPositioning U.S. cotton as the fabric of choice to consumers aroundthe world ensures future demand for U.S. cotton fiber and U.S.-manu-factured cotton products. For 1998-99, CCI carefully crafted retail pro-motions built around special events, purchase incentives and even topmusicians, who link U.S. cotton to lifestyle choices. CCI’s retail promotions generated $93 million in sales of U.S. cotton-rich prod-ucts labeled with the COTTON USA Mark.

Tying U.S. cotton into lifestyle and musical tastes has worked par-ticularly well, and CCI continued the effort in Colombia. CCI andSony Entertainment’s spring retail promotion with Latin pop sensationRicky Martin was a huge success. More than 30,000 customers infive Colombian cities purchased $1.3 million of Mark-labeled prod-ucts for a chance to win a pair of airline tickets to see Martin’s concert in Miami.

CCI’s “Like Cotton” sales promotion in Taiwan generated $17 million in sales, a 7.8 percent sales increase for participatinglicensees. The month-long proof-of-purchase promotion starringAsian superstar Leo Ku featured 83 licensee brands of cottonapparel and home fashions. CCI’s COTTON USA Music Tour ‘99promotions in Germany and Italy served to increase retail demandfor U.S. cotton-rich products. German consumers won tickets to con-certs by artists Backstreet Boys and Alanis Morrisette when they pur-chased products labeled with the COTTON USA Mark.

Strategic partnerships are another way that CCI stretches the pro-motional dollar. Kao, the largest laundry detergent manufacturer inJapan, has been licensed to add the COTTON USA Mark to its“Attack” brand, and two new Procter & Gamble laundry products inJapan also joined the licensee program. The most positive contributionCCI can make to the industry’s overall success is to bring the world’sfinest quality cottons and cotton products into the hands of satisfiedcustomers. CCI will continue to fine tune its strategic program of tradeservicing for both raw and finished cotton products, along with cre-ative consumer promotions, to make U.S. cotton the most sought-afterproduct in the textile world.

As competition from man-made fibers intensifies and world cotton stocks build, the U.S. industry has taken the lead throughCCI’s COTTON USA programs in keeping cotton as the fiber ofchoice for the global consumer. Through effective trade servicing and consumer promotion programs, and through extensive leverag-ing of industry and public funds, CCI continues to fulfill its role asthe export promotion division of the U.S. cotton industry.

19

CCI President Paul Ruh, second from right, along with CCI Executive Director

Allen Terhaar, far left, and WillBettendorf, director of CCI s Seoul,

Korea office, talk with an Asian textilemill representative at the

COTTON USA Pavilion at the TITAStextiles show in Taiwan.

The Cotton Foundation continued to targetits growing resources, valued at nearly $1.75 million in dues and special grants, toresearch and education that supports NationalCotton Council objectives. At the end of1999, Foundation membership stood at 69.This high participation level was maintaineddespite the continuation of mergers betweensome of the larger member corporate firms.

A record dues income coupled with rentalincome from the Foundation-ownedWashington, DC, office building was available to fund 33 general projects for the 1999-2000 Foundation year.

The current research initiatives range from a study of the effectiveness of advancedremote sensing for early detection of cropdamage to determining if a mixture of cot-tonseed meal and hulls can improve thehealth of beef cattle stressed with BovineRespiratory Disease. The additional resources,in fact, enabled the Foundation to support

numerous other projects focusing on suchareas as seed quality, ultra narrow rowresearch, lint contamination elimination andnutrient variability of cottonseed meal.

Healthy Foundation support makes it pos-sible to expand ongoing Council initiatives,from Worker Protection Standard educationto Web site enhancements and cotton’s sci-entific publication, Journal of Cotton Science.

The projects also address regional and segmental profitability constraints such asaflatoxin, air quality, boll weevil eradicationand cottonseed quality improvement.

All Foundation projects aim at improvinglong-term or short-term industry profitability.

A good example of a short-term initiativeis the study of row spacing in the Far West tohelp growers’ reduce production costs in theface of stagnant yields.

The “Cotton Profitability Initiative” is a good example of a longer-term effort toreduce unit production costs. This work

20

David BurnsProducer, Laurel Hill, NCPresident

A record level in membership dues was available to fund 33 general projects for the 1999-2000 Foundation year.

The Cotton Foundation is a not-for-profit, 501(c)(3) organization that permits individuals and organizations not eligible for National Cotton Council membership to support the cotton industry’s goals and objectives. The institution’s mission is to providevision and leadership to the U.S. cotton industry through research and education in support of the Council and allied industries.

The Cotton Foundation

Council Executive Vice President Phil Burnett briefs new Council delegates as part of the Policy Education Program,the newest Foundation special project that was launched at the 1999 Council annual meeting.

21

No-till cotton production is but one focus of cross-disciplineresearch being carried in the Council s quarterly, online Journalof Cotton Science.

began as a special project funded by multiple Foundation members. Strategy was developedregarding the appropriate use of production and processing technology to achieve enhancedprofitability. A strategy implementation plan is being developed for the year 2000 and beyond.Special projects — those supported by grants over and above regular dues — continue at astrong level despite consolidation of some Foundation member firms. The Council’s programson leadership, physiology education, producer information exchange and other long-standingefforts are receiving solid funding.

Other grants are used to extend the Council’s efforts in areas such as member education incomputer skills. For example, the Internet Center at the Beltwide Cotton Conferences providesattendees with training in basic skills for using the Internet as an online information and researchtool. At the 2000 forum, conferees were given the opportunity to participate in an Internet marketing workshop.

The Foundation’s existence makes it possible for the U.S. cotton industry to benefitfrom endowments. The Robert and Lois Coker Trustees Chair in Molecular Geneticsmakes it possible to discover novel genes to increase yield and fiber quality. The C. Everette Salyer Cotton Research Fellowship supports graduate students working inareas ranging from ultra narrow row production to biological controls.

22

National Cotton Council of AmericaOFFICERSCHAIRMAN OF THE BOARDJack HamiltonLake Providence, Louisiana PRESIDENTF. Ronald RaynerGoodyear, ArizonaVICE PRESIDENTJames E. EcholsMemphis, TennesseeVICE PRESIDENTRobert W. GreeneCourtland, AlabamaVICE PRESIDENTW. Duke KimbrellGastonia, North CarolinaVICE PRESIDENTVan A. MayLubbock, TexasVICE PRESIDENTTimothy L. TaylorMemphis, TennesseeVICE PRESIDENTWillis H. Willey, IIIMemphis, TennesseeTREASURERRobert E. McLendonLeary, GeorgiaEXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENTPhillip C. BurnettMemphis, TennesseeSENIOR VICE PRESIDENTGaylon B. BookerMemphis, TennesseeVICE PRESIDENT, PRODUCER AFFAIRSCraig BrownMemphis, TennesseeVICE PRESIDENT, WASHINGTON OPERATIONSA. John MaguireWashington, DCVICE PRESIDENT, INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRSAllen A. TerhaarWashington, DC

BOARD OF DIRECTORSPRODUCERSAllen B. Helms, Jr.

Clarkedale, ArkansasBoyd Holley

Bastrop, LouisianaHollis O. Isbell

Muscle Shoals, AlabamaTed A. Pierce

Buckeye, ArizonaMark Williams

Farwell, Texas

GINNERSMurry McClintock

Tunica, MississippiDavid K. Lynch

Bennettsville, South CarolinaBill Mikeska

Eola, TexasVan Murphy

Quitman, GeorgiaCharles C. Owen

Pima, Arizona

WAREHOUSEMENRon Harkey

Lubbock, TexasLarry G. Lively

Memphis, TennesseeCarl W. Nelson

Selma, AlabamaGary J. Nichols

Memphis, TennesseeNeill M. Sloan

Portland, Arkansas

MERCHANTSRodger Glaspey

Fresno, CaliforniaErnst Shroeder

Bakersfield, CaliforniaGary Taylor

Cordova, TennesseeJoseph Walker, II

Columbia, South CarolinaRobert S. Weil, II

Montgomery, Alabama

CRUSHERSGeorge H. Dunklin

Pine Bluff, ArkansasMichael L. Johnson

Decatur, IllinoisScott Middleton

Jonestown, MississppiHollis G. Sullivan

Harlingen, TexasLaurel K. Rohloff

Chandler, Arizona

COOPERATIVESJohn J. Cooper

Raleigh, North CarolinaWoods E. Eastland

Greenwood, MississippiMarshall W. Grant

Garysburg, North CarolinaRobert W. Norris

Bakersfield, CaliforniaW. David Stanford

Lubbock, Texas

MANUFACTURERSG. Stephen Felker

Monroe, GeorgiaCharles F. Hamrick, II

Gaffney, South CarolinaNeil H. Hightower

Thomaston, GeorgiaJerry D. Rowland

Winston-Salem, North CarolinaD. Harding Stowe

Belmont, North Carolina

ADVISORS TO THE BOARDRaymond E. Blair

Bakersfield, CaliforniaEdward Breihan

Lubbock, TexasBruce Brumfield

Inverness, MississippiJerry Calvani

Carlsbad, New MexicoLloyd E. Cline

Lamesa, TexasW. B. Dunavant, Jr.

Memphis, Tennessee

Tommy R. FunkSebastian, Texas

W. Bruce HeidenBuckeye, Arizona

Samuel B. HollisMemphis, Tennessee

Frank B. Jones, Jr.Lubbock, Texas

W. D. Lawson, IIIGastonia, North Carolina

William T. LoveladyTornillo, Texas

Bruce N. LynnGilliam, Louisiana

W. Neely MalloryMemphis, Tennessee

Lon MannMarianna, Arkansas

Jack McDonaldDecatur, Illinois

Frank M. Mitchener, Jr.Sumner, Mississippi

Herman A. PropstAnson, Texas

James H. SanfordPrattville, Alabama

C. R. SayreGreenwood, Mississippi

Tom W. SmithBakersfield, California

Jack G. StoneStratford, California

Aven WhittingtonGreenwood, Mississippi

Charles F. YoungkerBuckeye, Arizona

American Cotton ProducersOFFICERSAllen B. Helms, Jr., Clarkedale, ArkansasChairmanWoody Anderson, Colorado City, Texas Vice ChairmanJohn E. Pucheu, Jr., Tranquillity, California Vice ChairmanR. L. Webster, Waynesboro, Georgia Vice Chairman

STATE CHAIRMENAlabama: Sam Spruell, Mt. HopeArizona: Larry W. Jarnagin, PhoenixArkansas: H. L. Lewis, DoddridgeCalifornia: Tom Teixeira, Dos PalosFlorida: B. E. “Sonny” Davis, Jr., CottondaleGeorgia: Farris L. “Buddy” Wren, MagruderLouisiana: Jay Hardwick, NewelltonMississippi: Mike P. Sturdivant, Jr., GlendoraMissouri-Illinois: Charles H. Parker,

Senath, MissouriNew Mexico: Bob Mayberry, Lake ArthurNorth Carolina: Lennie Hinton, HobbsvilleOklahoma-Kansas: Daniel M. Davis,

Elk City, OklahomaSouth Carolina: Roy Baxley, DillonTennessee-Kentucky: Ross Via,

Bells, TennesseeTexas: Jim Ed Miller, Ft. HancockVirginia: Larry M. Fowler, Newsoms

23

PRODUCER DIRECTORSSoutheast: Hollis O. Isbell,

Muscle Shoals, AlabamaMid-South: Boyd Holley,

Bastrop, LouisianaSouthwest: Mark Williams,

Farwell, TexasWest: Ted A. Pierce,

Buckeye, ArizonaAt Large: Allen B. Helms, Jr.,

Clarkedale, Arkansas

Cotton Council International OFFICERSPaul A. Ruh (Merchant)Richardson, TexasPresident

Bruce Groefsema (Cooperative)Bakersfield, CaliforniaChairman

J. Larry Nelson (Producer)Edmonson, TexasFirst Vice President

Hans G. Kretschmer (Cooperative)El Paso, TexasSecond Vice President

William B. Dunavant, III (Merchant)Memphis, TennesseeTreasurer

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Michael M. Adams (Cooperative), Greenwood, Mississippi

Robert A. Carson, Jr. (Producer)Marks, Mississippi

Peter Egli (Merchant), Phoenix, Arizona

G. Stephen Felker (Manufacturer)Monroe, Georgia

Robert Glassman (Ginner)Courtland, Alabama

Robert W. Greene (Ginner)Courtland, Alabama

James B. Hansen (Producer)Corcoran, California

Cliett A. Lowman, III (Producer)Kingsville, Texas

Wayne Martin (Crusher), Lubbock, Texas

Van A. May (Cooperative), Lubbock, Texas

John E. Pucheu, Jr. (Producer)Tranquillity, California

Jerry D. Rowland (Manufacturer), Winston-Salem, North Carolina

Vance C. Shoaf (Warehouseman)Milan, Tennessee

David Stanford (Cooperative)Lubbock, Texas

Gary Taylor (Merchant),Cordova, Tennessee

Timothy L. Taylor (Crusher)Memphis, Tennessee

William C. Tharp (Merchant)Montgomery, Alabama

Joseph Walker, II (Merchant), Columbia, South Carolina

Adolph Weil, III (Merchant)Montgomery, Alabama

Willis H. Willey, III (Warehouseman)Memphis, Tennessee

Charles K. “Chuck” Youngker (Producer)Buckeye, Arizona

Cotton Foundation OFFICERSTed A. Pierce (Producer)Buckeye, ArizonaChairman

David Burns (Producer)Laurel Hill, North CarolinaPresident

Lovick P. Corn (Warehouseman)Columbus, GeorgiaTreasurer

Phillip C. BurnettMemphis, TennesseeExecutive Vice President

Andrew G. JordanMemphis, TennesseeExecutive Director & Secretary

R.E. ShellabargerMemphis, TennesseeAssistant Treasurer

TRUSTEES

Neil Strong (completing John Barnett’sterm) Novartis, Downers Grove, Illinois

Don Cameron (Producer), Helm,California

Ed Cherry, FMC CorporationWashington, D.C.

Talmage Crihfield (Producer)Ripley, Tennessee

Jimmy Dodson (Producer), Robstown,Texas

Tony Durham, Zeneca Ag Products,Memphis, Tennessee

Scott Gibson, BASF Corporation, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina

Thomas F. Hughes, Stoneville PedigreedSeed Company, Memphis, Tennessee

Allan J. Luke, Aventis CropScienceResearch Triangle Park, North Carolina

George Montgomery, (completing JohnPoulter’s term) DuPont Ag Products,Memphis, Tennessee

Barry Schaffter, John Deere CompanyDes Moines, Iowa

Harry Strang, Bayer CorporationKansas City, Missouri

Jim Thrift, American CyanamidCompany, Wayne, New Jersey

Cotton FoundationMembership

Ag Chem EquipmentAg Leader Technology

AgdiaAgriplan

Agripro SeedsAmerican Cyanamid Company

AMVACAtochem North America

Aventis Crop ScienceBASF CorporationBayer CorporationCase Corporation

CheminovaConsolidated Cotton Gin Company

Continental Eagle CorporationData Transmission Network

Delta & Pine Land CompanyDirectAg.com

Dow AgrosciencesDuPont Ag Products

EcogenEDEN Bioscience

EnviroLogixFarm Journal

Farm Press PublicationsFarm Progress Publications

FMC CorporationGriffin Agricultural Chemicals

GustafsonHelena Chemical Company

Industrial Laboratory EquipmentInternational Fiber Packaging

John Deere Des Moines WorksKBH Corporation

Keith Sales CompanyLummus Corporation

Jack R. Mauney Meister Publishing Company

Micro Flo CompanyMississippi Chemical Corporation

Monsanto Agricultural GroupNational Alliance of

Independent Crop ConsultantsNational Bank of Commerce

Netafim USANew York Board of TradeNovartis Crop Protection

OmnistarPhytogen Corporation

Plato IndustriesProctor & GambleProgressive Farmer

Rain and Hail Insurance ServiceRohm and Haas Company

Signode CorporationSoutheast AgNet

Southern Cotton Ginners FoundationStockhausen

Stoneville Pedigreed Seed CompanyStover Equipment Company

Terra InternationalUniroyal Chemical Company

United Ag ProductsU. S. BoraxValent USA

Vance Publications Wilbur Ellis Company

XSZellweger Uster

Zeneca Ag Products

National Cotton CouncilEXECUTIVE STAFF

Phillip C. Burnett, Executive Vice President

Gaylon B. Booker, Senior Vice President

A. John Maguire, Vice President, Washington Operations

Craig Brown, Vice President, Producer Affairs

Allen A. Terhaar, Vice President, International Affairs

Harrison Ashley, Assistant Director, Field Services

David B. Collins, Assistant Director, Foreign Operations

John Gibson, Director, Field Services

William A. Gillon, General Counsel/Assistant to the Executive Vice President

Fred Johnson, Ginner Representative

Andrew G. Jordan, Director, Technical Services

Mark D. Lange, Director, Economic and Information Services

Tammie Martin, Assistant Director, Information Services

Fred W. Middleton, Director, Communications Services

R. E. Shellabarger, Director, Finance Services

Marjory L. Walker, Assistant Director, Communications Services

Charles E. Wood, Director, Production/AV Services

National Cotton Council

Field Services StaffIf you would like to know more about theNational Cotton Council, including member-ship benefits, please contact the field repre-sentative in your area

William Harrison Ashley2007 Cranbrook DriveGermantown, TN 38138(901) 754-7685 FAX: (901) 759-7934E-MAIL: harrison@cotton.orgAssistant Director

Julie BartosP.O. Box 53908Lubbock, TX 79453(806) 698-8195 FAX: (806) 698-8195E-MAIL: jbartos@cotton.orgTexas High Plains

Brett Cypert P.O Box 844Sweetwater, TX 79556(915) 235-3872 FAX (915) 235-0108E-MAIL: bcypert@cotton.orgTexas: Blacklands, High PlainsRolling Plains, St. Lawrence

Jim Davis 630 Davis RoadNew Market, AL 35761(256) 379-4856 FAX: (256) 379-5156E-MAIL jdavis@cotton.orgAlabama, Georgia,& Florida

Mike Johnson601 N. 18thFrederick, OK 73542(580) 335-5718 FAX: (580) 335-5719E-MAIL: mjohnson@cotton.orgOklahoma & Texas Rolling Plains

Ricky Don (Rick) KingRoute 1, Box 308-ASlaton, TX 79364(806) 828-5101 FAX: (806) 828-5410 E-MAIL: rking@cotton.orgTexas High Plains

Kevin LongP.O. Box 1204Madera, CA 93639-1204(559) 661-8414 FAX (559) 661-8414E-MAIL: klong@cotton.orgCalifornia

Becky McClanahan2821 Edridge Ct., Unit #202Raleigh, NC 27613(919) 571-2579 FAX: (919) 571-1537E-MAIL: bmcclana@cotton.orgNorth Carolina, South Carolina,& Virginia

Hayne Matthews313 Garner StreetOxford, MS 38606(662) 513-3655 FAX: (662) 513-5658E-MAIL: hmatthew@cotton.orgMississippi

Brent Murphree17285 North Highlonesome Dr.Maricopa, AZ 85239(602) 810-1171 FAX (520) 568-2367E-MAIL: bmurphre@cotton.orgArizona, New Mexico & El Paso Texas

Jonathan Rowe3202 CentralMemphis, TN 38111(901) 458-7135 FAX (901) 454-9622E-MAIL: jrowe@cotton.orgNE Arkansas, Missouri & Tennessee

Dale Thompson2008 OriolePO Box 720374McAllen, TX 78504(956) 631-1268 FAX: (956) 631-1592E-MAIL: dthompson@cotton.orgSo. Texas & Lower Rio Grande Valley

Michael G. (Mike) Turner140 Hendricks LaneWest Monroe, LA 71292(318) 397-9205 FAX: (318) 397-9207E-MAIL: mturner@cotton.orgSo. Arkansas & Louisiana

If you would like additional copies of thisreport, please contact:

Communications ServicesNational Cotton CouncilP.O. Box 820285Memphis, TN 38182Email: cnelson@cotton.org

24

NATIONAL COTTON COUNCIL/COTTON COUNCIL INTERNATIONAL/THE COTTON FOUNDATION OFFICES

MEMPHIS

P.O. Box 820285Memphis, TN 38182

or1918 North ParkwayMemphis, TN 38112

Telephone: (901) 274-9030Fax: (901) 725-0510

Email: info@cotton.org

WASHINGTON

1521 New Hampshire Ave., NWWashington, DC 20036

Telephone: (202) 745-7805Fax: (202)483-4040

Email: NCC - info@cotton.orgCCI - cottonusa@cotton.org

LONDON

5th Floor, Empire House175 Piccadilly

London W1V 9DB, United KingdomTelephone: 44(0)20 7355 1313

Fax: 44(0)20 7355 1919Email: cci-london@cotton.org

SEOUL

Suite 303, Leema Building146-1, Soosong-Dong, Chongro-Ku

Seoul 110-140, KoreaTelephone: 011-82-2-722-3681/3

Fax: 011-82-2-722-3684Email: cci-seoul@cotton.org

HONG KONG

20th Floor, Zoroastrian Building101 Leighton Road

Causeway Bay, Hong KongTelephone: 011-852-2890-2755

Fax: 011-852-2882-5463Email: cci-hongkong@cotton.org

NCC World Wide Web Home Page - www.cotton.orgCCI World Wide Web Home Page - www.cottonusa.org

26