optimal usage of water taia lubbock regional meeting
DESCRIPTION
Optimal Usage of Water TAIA Lubbock Regional Meeting. Jay Yates Extension Program Specialist III Risk Management Lubbock, TX. Texas Southern High Plains Irrigation Situation. Declining capacity Increased efficiency Increasing energy costs Varieties with higher potential yields. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Optimal Usage of WaterTAIA Lubbock Regional Meeting
Jay YatesExtension Program Specialist IIIRisk ManagementLubbock, TX
• Declining capacity• Increased efficiency• Increasing energy costs• Varieties with higher potential yields
Texas Southern High Plains Irrigation Situation
• Looked at the following cotton alternatives:– Fully irrigate 120 acre pivots with 300 gpm each– Irrigate 1/2 pivots, treat the rest as dryland– Irrigate 2/3 pivots, treat the rest as dryland– Drill new wells to irrigate entire pivots on owned land with
600 GPM• Drilling 4 new wells for the 4 pivots on owned land at a cost of
$40,000 each• Water ½ pivots on rented ground
* None of the alternatives included DCP Program Direct Payments
FARM Assistance Analysis
2012-2021 2013-2022Baseline – Water whole pivots with 300 gpm per pivot 299.19 % 213.77%
Alternative 1 – Water half pivots, plant the rest to dryland cotton 345.47% 255.93%
Alternative 2 – Water two-thirds pivots, plant the rest to dryland cotton 327.73% 239.18%
Alternative 3 – Drill new wells to irrigate entire pivots with 600 gpm 507.44% 440.38%
Updated Results% Change in Real Net Worth
2012-2021 2013-2022Baseline – Water whole pivots with 300 gpm per pivot 187,730 132,680
Alternative 1 – Water half pivots, plant the rest to dryland cotton 216,480 157,930
Alternative 2 – Water two-thirds pivots, plant the rest to dryland cotton 205,580 147,890
Alternative 3 – Drill new wells to irrigate entire pivots with 600 gpm 301,380 256,810
Updated ResultsAverage Net Farm Profit
Updated ResultsAverage Probability of a Cash Shortfall
2012-2021 2013-2022Baseline – Water whole pivots with 300 gpm per pivot 10.6% 23.1%
Alternative 1 – Water half pivots, plant the rest to dryland cotton 8.2% 18.3%
Alternative 2 – Water two-thirds pivots, plant the rest to dryland cotton 9.5% 20.5%
Alternative 3 – Drill new wells to irrigate entire pivots with 600 gpm 8.4% 10.9%
Updated ResultsEnding Cash Reserves
2012-2021 2013-2022Baseline – Water whole pivots with 300 gpm per pivot 1,081,630 697,960
Alternative 1 – Water half pivots, plant the rest to dryland cotton 1,277,590 875,970
Alternative 2 – Water two-thirds pivots, plant the rest to dryland cotton 1,202,500 805,260
Alternative 3 – Drill new wells to irrigate entire pivots with 600 gpm 1,859,920 1,551,340
Projected Variability in Net Farm Income
“Whiskey is for drinkin’, water is for fightin’ over” Mark Twain
• TTU Lubbock Mesonet Site– 45.75” Cumulative Reference ET from 4/15 – 9/15– 2.36” Rainfall during the same period– 98 days of 95 degrees or more– 58 days of 100 degrees or more
• Official Lubbock record of 48 breaks old record from 1934 of 29
• 3 bale cotton in 2011 took from 21-35 ac/in with 4-5 gpm per acre capacity
• Well irrigated pivots and drip had significantly higher net returns
Observations From 2011
Petersburg, TexasDryland planted May 4 – Picture taken August 25, 2011
Shallowater, TexasPre-watered Only Planted May 4 – Picture taken August 25, 2011
North of Petersburg, Texas Yield .9 BPASub-Surface Drip, 1.5 GPM per acre – Picture taken August 25, 2011
Petersburg, Texas Yield 1.5 BPASub-Surface Drip, 2.5 GPM per acre – Picture taken August 25, 2011
Lubbock, Texas Yield 3.3 BPASub-Surface Drip, 4.1 GPM per acre – Picture taken August 25, 2011
Sandhill, Texas Yield 3.5 BPASub-Surface Drip, 4.5 GPM per acre – Picture taken August 25, 2011
South of Shallowater, Texas Yield 3.95 BPASub-Surface Drip, 6 GPM per acre – Picture taken August 25, 2011
• TTU Lubbock Mesonet Site– 41.13” Cumulative Reference ET from 4/15 – 9/15– 6.24” Rainfall during the same period– 69 days of 95 degrees or more– 25 days of 100 degrees or more
• Official Lubbock record prior to 2011 was 29 from 1934• Official Lubbock record of 24 tied for 5th most with 1924
• 3 bale cotton in 2012 took only slightly less irrigation than 2011
• Well irrigated pivots and drip had significantly higher net returns
Not Much Better in 2012
• TTU Lubbock/Reese Mesonet Site– 42.09” Cumulative Reference ET from 4/15 – 9/3
• Would expect another 2.5” over next 2 weeks based on forecasts, making 2013 as high of ET as 2011
– 7.82” Rainfall during the same period• Normal rainfall is 11.24” for this period• 33 of top 36 driest periods on record for Lubbock come between 9/15 and 4/15.
(That’s why winter wheat is not as successful here)
– 48 days of 95 degrees or more– 13 days of 100 degrees or more
• Still warmer than average (~10 days/year), but closer to average temperature compared to the past 2 years.
Not as Hot and Dry in 2013But still above average
• Interviewed area farmers• Collected data from AgriLife Research &
Extension Projects
Comparative Profit Analysis 2011
• 31 Cotton Farm Sites– 17 Sub-Surface Drip (all on 80” centers)– 13 Center Pivots• 2 MESA• 1 LESA• 10 LEPA
– 1 Furrow– GPM/Acre ranging from 1.5 to 6.0
The Study Group
2011 Cotton Yields vs. Water Applied
Cotton Yield lbs/acre
Inches of Water Applied per Acre
2011 Returns Above Direct Costs at $0.90/lb vs. Water Applied at $9/in
Returns AboveDirect Costs
Inches of Water Applied per Acre
> 4 gpm/ac
2011 Cotton Net Profit at $0.90/lb vs. Water Applied at $9/in
Returns AboveDirect Costs
Inches of Water Applied per Acre
> 4 gpm/ac
2011 Returns Above Direct Costs at $0.52/lb vs. Water Applied at $9/in
Returns AboveDirect Costs
Inches of Water Applied per Acre
2011 Cotton Net Profit at $0.52/lb vs. Water Applied at $9/inReturns Above
Direct Costs
Inches of Water Applied per Acre
2011 Returns Above Direct Costs at $0.90/lb vs. Water Applied at $15/in
Returns AboveDirect Costs
Inches of Water Applied per Acre
2011 Cotton Net Profit at $0.90/lb vs. Water Applied at $15/in
Returns AboveDirect Costs
Inches of Water Applied per Acre
GPM*
GPM/Acre Inches/Acre/Day Inches/Acre/Season (24/7)*
187.5 1.5 0.0795 12.25250 2 0.1061 16.33
312.5 2.5 0.1326 20.42375 3 0.1591 24.50
437.5 3.5 0.1856 28.58500 4 0.2121 32.67
562.5 4.5 0.2386 36.75625 5 0.2652 40.83
687.5 5.5 0.2917 44.92750 6 0.3182 49.00
What Does It Take To Apply 20-25 Inches of Irrigation?
* Assumes 125 acre pivot and irrigating season from April 15 to September 15
• In 2011 with virtually no sub-soil moisture or rainfall during the growing season, it took at least 4 gpm/acre to make a profitable cotton crop.
• Long term analysis shows that systems with the ability to deliver less than 3 gpm/acre would be more profitable cutting irrigated acreage back to that level.
• Irrigation profitability is more sensitive to lower cotton prices than higher energy prices.
• Expected price level for 2013 would indicate that profitable irrigated yields are still attainable.
Conclusions
1. Personal Preference2. Risk Avoidance3. Potential Profitability4. Long Term Sustainability
Factors Affecting Planting Decisions
• Irrigated Acres – 125• Total Cropland Acres – 160• Irrigation Capacity – 350 GPM• Number Days to Irrigate – 120• Acre-inches per Irrigated Acre - 18
Comparative Farm Scenarios 2013
• Scenario 1– Cotton – Irrigated (950 lb APH, 65%) – 125 ac.– Cotton – Dryland (250 lb APH, 65%) – 35 ac.– Percent Irrigation Capacity Used – 67%– Return Over Direct Expenses - $61,852– Insurance Coverage Ratio – 109%
Comparative Farm Scenarios 2013
• Scenario 2– Corn – Irrigated (185 bu APH, 65%) – 62.5 ac.– Sorghum – Irrigated (75 bu APH, 65%) – 62.5 ac.– Sorghum – Dryland (30 bu APH, 65%) – 35 ac.– Percent Irrigation Capacity Used – 93%– Return Over Direct Expenses - $26,015– Insurance Coverage Ratio – 89%
Comparative Farm Scenarios 2013
• Scenario 3– Sesame – Irrigated (675 lb APH, 65%) – 125 ac.– Sesame – Dryland (450 lb APH, 65%) – 35 ac.– Percent Irrigation Capacity Used – 62%– Return Over Direct Expenses - $79,040– Insurance Coverage Ratio – 80%
Comparative Farm Scenarios 2013
• Scenario 4– Corn – Irrigated (185 bu APH, 65%) – 80 ac.– Sunflowers – Dryland (556 lb APH, 65%) – 80 ac.– Percent Irrigation Capacity Used – 86%– Return Over Direct Expenses - $32,036– Insurance Coverage Ratio – 86%
Comparative Farm Scenarios 2013
• Scenario 5– Corn – Irrigated (185 bu APH, 65%) – 80 ac.– Cotton – Dryland (250 lb APH, 65%) – 80 ac.– Percent Irrigation Capacity Used – 86%– Return Over Direct Expenses - $26,910– Insurance Coverage Ratio – 85%
Comparative Farm Scenarios 2013
• Scenario 6– Corn – Irrigated (185 bu APH, 65%) – 80 ac.– Sesame – Dryland (450 lb APH, 65%) – 80 ac.– Percent Irrigation Capacity Used – 86%– Return Over Direct Expenses - $34,900– Insurance Coverage Ratio – 91%
Comparative Farm Scenarios 2013
Comparative Farm Scenarios 2013
55% 60% 65% 70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95%70%
75%
80%
85%
90%
95%
100%
105%
110%
115%
1
2
3
45
6
InsuranceCoverage Ratio
Irrigation Capacity Usage
Contact Information:Texas A&M AgriLife Research and Extension Center1102 East FM 1294Lubbock, TX 79403
(806) 746-6101
http://lubbock.tamu.edu http://agrilife.org/southplainsprofit http://agrilife.org/southplainscottonhttps://www.facebook.com/FARMAssistance
Jay YatesExtension Program Specialist IIIRisk Management
FARM Assistance Analyst
South Plains Cotton Update every Thursday at 1:00 – 2:30 p.m. during West Texas Ag Life on