<%BANNER%>

UFIR IFAS



Crop Yield Increases Required to Recover Irrigation Costs
http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/ ( Publisher's URL )
CITATION PDF VIEWER
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/IR00001891/00001
 Material Information
Title: Crop Yield Increases Required to Recover Irrigation Costs
Physical Description: Fact Sheet
Creator: Zimet, David J.
Publisher: University of Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agriculture Sciences, EDIS
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2000
 Notes
Acquisition: Collected for University of Florida's Institutional Repository by the UFIR Self-Submittal tool. Submitted by Melanie Mercer.
Publication Status: Published
General Note: "Published June 2000."
General Note: "FE 170"
 Record Information
Source Institution: University of Florida Institutional Repository
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the submitter.
System ID: IR00001891:00001

Downloads

This item is only available as the following downloads:

FE17000 ( PDF )


Full Text

PAGE 1

Crop Yield Increases Required to Recover Irrigation Costs1 David J. Zimet and John L. Smith2 1. This is EDIS document FE 170, a publication of the Department of Food and Resource Economics, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL. Published June 2000. Please visit the EDIS Web site at: http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu. 2. David J. Zimit, associate professor, and John L. Smith, senior statistician, Department of Food and Resource Economics, University of Florida, North Florida Research and Education Center, Quincy, FL. The Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences is an equal opportunity/affirmative action employer authorized to provide research, educational information and other services only to individuals and institutions that function without regard to race, color, sex, age, handicap, or national origin. For information on obtaining other extension publications, contact your county Cooperative Extension Service office. Florida Cooperative Extension Service/Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences/University of Florida/Christine Taylor Waddill, Dean. Introduction Producers, especially in times of drought, sometimes think about installing irrigation for their crops. This study is to determine if irrigation of field crops such as corn, soybeans, wheat, cotton, peanuts, and sorghum can be justified in view of recent price levels for field crops and related loss in dollar volume. An analytical process that producers may apply is used to evaluate whether or not the installation of an irrigation system is economically justified in terms of crop yields and related returns. The analysis is based on yields and water requirements of an array of crops in North Florida. Prices used are from the 1997-98 crop-year because those prices seem to be reasonably typical of the current period. Irrigation costs are based on previously published data. Producers who choose to should insert data that they believe will represent their situation better. Selected vegetable crops (bell peppers, broccoli, cabbage, collards, cucumbers, okra, onions, southern peas, sweet corn, and watermelon) were analyzed to determine what percentage of yield increases would be necessary to justify different types of irrigation. The scope of the study was limited to justification of irrigation solely on an economic basis. Other factors such as product quality, reduction in yield variability from year to year, and more consistent growth cycle times were not considered within the scope of this study. Three types of irrigation were chosen for the analysis. The first two are overhead sprinkler systems and the third is drip irrigation. The two overhead irrigation systems are cable tow traveling gun and towable pivot. Fixed and operating costs of each overhead system were calculated for both field crops and vegetables. Traveling gun irrigation was chosen as representative of high-pressure irrigation systems, while towable pivot was the most economical of the pivot type surveyed by Westberry and Harrison (1998). Drip irrigation was chosen due to its use with vegetables such as tomatoes, squash, cucumbers, and watermelon that are typically grown under plastic mulch. Fixed and operating costs of the different irrigation systems were taken from work performed by George Westberry and Kerry Harrison (1998) of the Departments of Agricultural and Applied Economics and Biological and Agricultural

PAGE 2

Crop Yield Increases Required to Recover Irrigation Costs 2 Engineering at the University of Georgia-Athens (UGA). It was assumed that the overhead irrigation cases used irrigation ponds as the water source to minimize any differences in the cost of water for each system. The Westberry and Harrison study indicated that a well can add $1-2 per-acre-inch of water to the operating costs over pond irrigation due to the additional horsepower required to raise the water to the surface and up to $20/acre in fixed costs. Crop yield increase, irrigation costs, and ancillary costs associated with the irrigation system were the only determinants considered in the justification of an irrigation system. Irrigation variable costs considered were fuel and oil costs, repairs, and irrigation labor. Fixed costs were comprised of depreciation, interest and taxes, and insurance. Cost data for the three irrigation systems can be found in Tables 1, 2, and 3. Ancillary costs are defined as the additional cash inputs such as additional labor, fertilizer, seed, mulch, and machinery hours that would be required to produce a higher yield product. After discussions with Dr. Dorota Haman of the Department of Agricultural and Biological Engineering at the University of Florida, the drip irrigation operating hours in the Westberry and Harrison study were modified to better reflect Florida irrigation requirements (Table 3). The 1997-98 average annual field crop and vegetable prices reported in the Florida Agricultural and Statistics Summaries (FASS) were used as the basis for calculating crop values for each product. Florida fresh market data on broccoli, collards, okra, and southern peas were unavailable. Price data for these vegetables came from the National Agricultural Statistics and Summaries' (NASS) database. With the exception of peanuts and cotton, the dryland yield data for field crops were taken from median yields as shown in the Florida Enterprise Budgets. The average state yields for 1997-98 for both peanuts and cotton were somewhat lower than the median yields shown in the enterprise budgets. These yields appeared more representative of recent conditions and were substituted in lieu of the median enterprise budget yields. Vegetable yield data were taken from the Florida Enterprise Budgets. Field Crops Overhead Irrigation Systems The variable costs of irrigation for each crop in question were calculated by multiplying the variable cost per-acre-inch (a.i.) by the number of acre-inches required for irrigation of a specific crop. Irrigation requirements are the average acre-inches used by Florida farmers for a specific crop. The requirements were taken from the USDA-NASS database. (See www.nass.usda.gov/census/census97/fris/tbl23.pdf). Variable and fixed costs were added together to calculate the total cost of irrigation for the crop. Table 4 shows the cost increase for field crops associated with traveling gun irrigation. Towable pivot cost increases are shown in Table 5. The data from Tables 4 and 5 indicate that the towable pivot system is the more cost effective system, having both lower operating and fixed costs than the cable tow system. The yield increases of field crops required to cover irrigation costs were calculated by dividing the total irrigation cost/acre, plus the ancillary costs/acre due to the use of irrigation, by the 1997-1998 average market price per unit of the crop in question. This value was then added to the crop yield without irrigation to give the break-even yield for that particular irrigation system. Percent yield increases for each system were also calculated and are shown in their respective tables (Tables 6 and 7). At the FASS price and yield levels used in this study, peanuts would need a 22-27 percent yield increase to justify purchase of a towable pivot or traveling gun irrigation system. In comparison, cotton, soybeans, and sorghum would require a 73-88 percent increase in yield at 1998 prices to recover irrigation costs. Corn and wheat would require yield increases of 143 percent and 121-140 percent, respectively, to recover the total cost of the two irrigation systems. Table 8 gives a direct comparison of yield increases per crop required to recover irrigation costs for each irrigation system. Therefore, depending upon the crop, the incremental cost of a traveling gun irrigation system is 4-12 percent greater than a towable pivot system.

PAGE 3

Crop Yield Increases Required to Recover Irrigation Costs 3 Prices for field crops have generally declined further with the exception of cotton and sorghum. Table 6 shows that the May 2000 spot prices for sorghum and cotton would require less of a yield increase to justify irrigation than the 1997-98 market price. Drip Irrigation Systems Drip irrigation was not considered for use on field crops due to the substantially higher cost of the system versus overhead irrigation. Vegetables Overhead Irrigation Systems For vegetables, variable costs for both overhead systems were calculated in the same manner as for field crops. It was assumed that two vegetable crops could be irrigated per year with either system, and fixed costs were prorated over each crop. These costs are shown in Tables 9 and 10. There is very little reliable yield data for vegetables grown without irrigation. The 1997-1998 data for vegetable yield with irrigation were used instead. To determine the yield increase required to cover irrigation costs, yield increases required to justify irrigation were calculated by determining the per-acre irrigation costs, plus ancillary costs resulting from irrigation for each vegetable, and then dividing by the selling price minus the harvest cost (net unit return to the grower) of each vegetable. Other costs such as land, machinery, pesticides, fungicides, and insecticides were considered constant. The yield increase was then subtracted from the current yield using irrigation to give a threshold yield. The threshold yield without irrigation represents the break-even point at which the higher net returns from increased yields is offset by the additional costs associated with irrigation (Tables 11 and 12). Data from Tables 11 and 12 indicate that yield increases of 2-22 percent would be required to justify the additional cost of an overhead irrigation system at 1998 market prices. Irrigation costs are a small percentage of the revenue stream for vegetable crops such as bell peppers, broccoli, cabbage, okra, sweet corn and cucumbers that have both high yields and moderate to high prices, giving them high revenues. Table 11 indicates that small yield increases in these crops (3-8 percent) would justify an overhead irrigation system. Onions and watermelon require 11-17 percent yield increases to cover irrigation costs due primarily to higher ancillary costs and moderate pricing. The increases still seem to be readily achievable compared to dryland production. Southern peas require a 14 percent increase due to a lower yield (150 bu./acre) relative to other vegetable crops. Collard greens require a 22 percent higher yield to justify irrigation. This is mainly due to moderate price and higher harvest costs. Table 13 shows the effect of using a higher cost irrigation system such as traveling gun versus towable pivot. The data clearly show that the additional yield increase required to cover the higher cost of the traveling gun system is a relatively minor percentage (0.5-3.5 percent) of the overall yield of the vegetables analyzed. Other factors such as more consistent yields, improved crop quality, and consistent growth cycles all contribute to higher and more consistent contribution margins and reduced risk for the vegetable grower. Drip Irrigation Systems Drip irrigation costs were calculated for cucumbers, squash, tomatoes, and watermelon. The cost of drip irrigation depends substantially on the cost of the irrigation tubing, which can be used for more than one crop. This study assumes that variable costs were calculated on the basis that the tubing would be used for two successive vegetable crops and prorated accordingly. It was also assumed that the irrigation system would be operated 1,000 hours/year. Other capital and operating costs for a drip irrigation system were taken from the Westbury and Harrison (1998) study. All variable and fixed costs, as well as assumptions, are shown in Table 14. Yield increases required to justify a drip irrigation system under plastic mulch were calculated in the same manner as overhead irrigation for cucumbers, squash, tomatoes, and watermelon. The data shown in Table 15 indicate that yield increases of 16, 21, 20, and 26 percent, respectively, for the vegetables would be required to justify drip

PAGE 4

Crop Yield Increases Required to Recover Irrigation Costs 4 irrigation. Yield increases of this magnitude should be achievable when comparing vegetables on bare ground to vegetables grown under plastic mulch with drip irrigation. We do not have direct comparisons of dryland vegetables with vegetables grown with drip irrigation under plastic mulch, but Florida enterprise budgets show median yields of 250 bushels per acre for overhead irrigated cucumbers and 500 bushels per acre for drip irrigated cucumbers grown under plastic mulch. A yield increase of this magnitude relative to dryland cucumbers would be sufficient to justify drip irrigation. A review of enterprise budgets from Alabama and South Carolina showed expected yields for non-irrigated watermelon and watermelon grown under plastic mulch with drip irrigation. The budgeted yield increased from 250 cwt for non-irrigated watermelon to 350 cwt (40 percent higher) for the drip-irrigated watermelon, which is somewhat higher than necessary to cover the irrigation cost. For more information, see the following websites: http://cherokee.agecon.clemson.edu/budgets.htm http://www.ag.auburn.edu/dept/aec/pubs/budgets/99/ vege.html Summary Field Crops The combination of crop prices and yield correspond to low revenues (price x yield) from field crop production. Given recent price levels, large yield increases would be necessary to justify the installation of irrigation for the production of most field crops. Such yield increases have been obtained with careful management (Eason and Rhoads, 1982; Eason and Rhoads, 1983), but would be less likely without careful management. Dryland producers who generally obtain yields well above state average are likely to be careful managers. Additionally, since they have already achieved much of the additional increase (compared to average) required to make irrigation pay, dryland producers should consider irrigation for soybean and corn. In comparison, prices for cotton and peanut make irrigation more readily justifiable for these crops. (The finding in the case of peanuts is consistent with Hewitt, Gorbet, and Westberry, 1979.) Vegetables The price levels of vegetables contributes to relatively large revenue streams (price times yield), which diminishes the required yield increase to obtain revenues sufficiently large enough to justify the costs of irrigation. For the producer who can obtain greater than average seasonal prices, such justification is even more plausible. In the spring, plastic mulch is used to promote earliness to obtain better prices. Only seasonal averages were included in this study to magnify the yield increase necessary to justify the use of irrigation. Even so, the required yields are easily obtained. Conclusion The study indicates that the installation of irrigation systems for most field crops is not economically viable at the revenue levels used in the analysis. Because the prices are low, yield increases necessary to obtain sufficient revenue for justification of irrigation are high. However, some of the revenue increase may derive from price increases and not from yield increases alone. This year, unless the early season drought extends into the northern growing season, substantial price increases are unlikely (Kiplinger, 2000). Notice the May 2000 spot prices included in Tables 6 and 7. In some years, it would be impossible to make a crop without irrigation. Those producers who need a guarantee of making a crop for other than purely economic reasons (e.g., must sustain animals) require further analysis than is presented here. [In other words, crops requiring the lowest revenue to justify irrigation are grown in the South (e.g. peanuts, cotton, vegetables, and watermelon)]. References Florida Agricultural Statistics Summaries: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Florida Agricultural Statistics Service 1997-1998 Crop Reports. http://www.nass.usda.gov/fl/rtoc0cr.htm. National Agricultural Statistics Summaries: U.S. Department of Agriculture. National Agricultural

PAGE 5

Crop Yield Increases Required to Recover Irrigation Costs 5 Statistics Service. 1997-1998 Crop Reports. http://www.nass.usda.gov/fl/rtoc0cr.htm. National Agricultural Statistics Summaries: U.S. Department of Agriculture. National Agricultural Statistics Service Florida. Water Applied. http://www.nass.usda.gov/census/census97/ fris.tb123.pdf. Westberry, George O. and Harrison, Kerry A. 1988. 2/98 Irrigation Templates. Cooperative Extension Service. College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences. University of Georgia, Athens, GA. http://www.ces.uga.edu/Agricultural/Agecon/ templates/IRRIG.html. South Carolina Enterprise Budgets: http://cherokee.agecon.clemson.edu/budgets.htm Alabama Enterprise Budgets: http://www.ag.auburn.edu/dept/aec/pubs/budgets/99/ vege.html Maynard, Donald M. and Hochmuth, George J. 1999. Vegetable Production Guide for Florida. Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences. (Revised August 1999) Publication SP170, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL. Florida Enterprise Budgets. Various years. Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences. North Florida Research and Education Center. University of Florida, Gainesville FL. http://nfrec.ifas.ufl.edu/Thewitt/entbud/index.htm Eason, M.A. and F.M. Rhoads. 1982. Production and Marketing of Irrigated Corn. Quincy AREC Research Report NF-82-2. Florida Agricultural Experiment Station, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville. Eason, M.A. and F.M. Rhoads. 1983. Economics of Irrigation Scheduling Field Corn in North Florida. Quincy AREC Research Report NF-83-1. Florida Agricultural Experiment Station, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville. Hewitt, Timothy D., Daniel W. Gorbet, and George O. Westberry. 1979. Economics of Irrigating Peanuts. Proceedings of the Soil and Crop Science Society of Florida, Volume 39, October 2-4, 1979, pp.135-140. ________. 2000. Kiplinger Agricultural Letter. Kiplinger Washington Editors, Inc., Washington, DC. May 19, 2000, p. 1.

PAGE 6

Crop Yield Increases Required to Recover Irrigation Costs 6 Table 1. Fixed and operating costs cable tow traveling gun irrigation system. Acres in System 75.00 Interest Rate (%) 10.00 Fixed Costs InvestmentYearsDepreciationInterestTaxes & Insurance Sprinkler System 14,000.00101,400.00 700.00 175.00 Pump & Power Unit 12,500.00121,041.67 625.00 156.25 Pond 13,500.0020 675.00 675.00 168.75 Installation 11,000.0020 550.00 550.00 137.50 Total Investment 51,000.00 3,666.672,550.00 637.50 Total Annual Fixed Costs 6,854.17 Total Annual Fixed Costs Per Acre 91.39 Operating Costs Engine Horsepower 100.00 Fuel Per Gallon 0.75 Fuel Cost Per Hour 5.00 Hours Per Acre 0.83 Fuel costs Per Acre 4.15 Oil Cost Per Acre-Inch 0.62 Repairs Per Acre-Inch 0.52 Labor 0.15 hours @ $6.00/hour 0.90 Total Operating Costs Per Acre-Inch 6.19 Water source location and cost may differ substantially (affects investment, motor size, and operating costs).

PAGE 7

Crop Yield Increases Required to Recover Irrigation Costs 7 Table 2. Fixed and operating costs towable pivot irrigation system. Acres in System 60.00 Number of Pivot Points 02.00 Interest Rate (%) 10.00 Fixed Costs InvestmentYearsDepreciationInterestTaxes & Insurance Sprinkler System 34,500.00152,300.001,725.00431.25 Pump & Power Unit 9,000.0012750.00450.00112.50 Pond 15,000.0020750.00750.00187.50 Installation 21,000.00201,050.001,050.00262.50 Total Investment 79,500.00 4,850.003,975.00993.75 Total Annual Fixed Costs 9,818.75 Total Annual Fixed Costs Per Acre 81.82 Operating Costs Engine Horsepower 75.00 Fuel Per Gallon 0.75 Fuel Costs Per Hour 3.75 Hourse Per Circle 30.00 Fuel Costs Per Acre-Inch 1.88 Oil Costs Per Acre-Inch 0.28 Repairs Per Acre-Inch 0.66 Labor 0.03 hours @ $6.00/hour 0.18 Total Operating Costs Per Acre-Inch 3.00 Water source location and cost may differ substantially (affects investment, motor size, and operating costs).

PAGE 8

Crop Yield Increases Required to Recover Irrigation Costs 8 Table 3. Fixed and operating costs drip irrigation system. Acres in System 40.00 Interest Rate (%) 0.10 Row Width (Feet) 6.00 Price of Tubing ($/foot) 0.02 Tubing Life (Years) 1.00 Fixed Costs InvestmentYearsDepreciationInterestTaxes & Insurance Pipe & Fittings 6,000.00 20 300.00300.00 45.00 Well 6,500.00 25 260.00325.00 48.75 Pump & Motor 3,500.00 12 291.67175.00 26.25 Filter & Auto 200.00 10 20.0010.00 1.50 Miscellaneous 486.00 20 400.00400.00 60.00 Installation 8,000.00 20 400.00400.00 60.00 Total Investment 24,686.00 1,295.971,234.30185.15 Total Annual Fixed Costs 2,715.41 Total Annual Fixed Costs Per Acre 67.89 Operating Costs $/Acre Motor Size (HP) 15.00 Repairs 106.00 2.65 Annual Pumping Hours 1,000.00 Electricity Demand (standby charge) per year 180.00 Rate $ Per KWH 0.08 Annual Energy Cost 1,075.20 Annual Energy Cost Per Acre 26.88 Tubing 145.20 Annual Operating Cost Per Acre 174.73

PAGE 9

Crop Yield Increases Required to Recover Irrigation Costs 9 Table 4. Crop irrigation costs cable tow traveling gun system. Variable Cost/Acre-Inch 6.19 Fixed Cost/Acre 91.39 Crop Irrigation Costs for Selected Field Crops Water A.I.1 Variable CostFixed Cost2 Total Cost Corn 11 68.09 91.39 159.48 Soybeans 6 37.14 91.39 128.53 Wheat 5 30.95 91.39 122.34 Cotton 9 55.71 91.39 147.10 Peanuts 7 43.33 91.39 134.72 Sorghum 5 30.95 91.39 122.34 1 Acre-inches of water taken from USDA NASS database for average farm use per crop. See http://www.nass.usda.gov/census/census97/fris/tb123.pdf. 2 Assumes irrigation system will be used for one field crop/year. Table 5. Crop irrigation costs towable pivot irrigation system. Variable Cost/Acre-Inch 3.00 Fixed Cost/Acre 81.82 Crop Irrigation Costs for Selected North Florida Field Crops Water A.I.1 Variable CostFixed Cost2 Total Cost Corn 11 33.00 81.82 114.82 Soybeans 6 18.00 81.82 99.82 Wheat 5 15.00 81.82 96.82 Cotton 9 27.00 81.82 108.82 Peanuts 7 21.00 81.82 102.82 Sorghum 5 15.00 81.82 96.82 1 Acre-inches of water taken from USDA NASS database for average farm use per crop. See http://wwwnass.usda.gov/census/census97/fris/tb123.pdf. 2 Assumes irrigation system will be used for one field crop/year.

PAGE 10

Crop Yield Increases Required to Recover Irrigation Costs 10 Table 6. Traveling gun cost justification. Field crop yield increase required to justify traveling gun irrigation Row Crops Irrigation Cost/Acre1 Ancillary Cost/Acre2 Unit 2000 May Spot Price3 1997-98 Avg. Market Price4 Yield w/o Irrigation5 Yield w/ irrigation6 % Yield Increase for B-E Corn 159 108bu.2.352.60 60 163171 Soybeans129 33bu.5.106.20 30 56 87 Wheat 122 64bu.2.322.95 45 108140 Cotton 147 134lb.0.660.60 5331,002 88 Peanuts135 51lb.N/A0.262,6503,364 27 Sorghum 122 38 bu. 3.70 3.67 60 104 73 1 See Table 4 for calculation of travel gun irrigation cost for field crops. B-E is abbreviation for break-even. 2 Ancillary cost is estimates of additional see, fertilizer, labor, interest, and harvest costs. 3 2000 May spot price is taken from USDA NASS field crop reports. 4 1997-1998 average market prices are taken from USDA NASS historical field crop reports. 5 Expectd crop yield based on Florida Enterprise Budget. 6 B-E yield = yield without irrigation plus (irrigation cost + ancilliary cost)/1998 average market price. Table 7. Towable pivot cost justification. Field crop yield increase required to justify towable pivot irrigation. Row Crops Irrigation Cost/Acre1 Ancillary Cost/Acre2 Unit 2000 May Spot Price3 1997-98 Avg. Market Price4 Yield w/o irrigation5 Yield w/ Irrigation6 % Yield Increase for B-E Corn 115108bu.2.062.60 60 146143 Soybeans100 33bu.5.156.20 30 51 71 Wheat 97 64bu.2.392.95 45 100121 Cotton109134lb.0.460.60 533 938 76 Peanuts103 51lb.N/A0.262,6503,242 22 Sorghum 97 38 bu. 3.23 3.67 60 97 61 1 See Table 5 for calculation of travel gun irrigation cost for field crops. B-E is abbreviation for break-even. 2 Ancillary cost is estimates of additional seed, fertilizer, labor, interest, and harvest costs. 3 2000 May spot price is taken from USDA NASS field crop reports. 4 1997-1998 average market prices are taken from USDA NASS historical field crop reports. 5 Expected crop yield based on Florida Enterprise Budget. 6 B-E yield = yield without irrigation plus (irrigation cost + ancilliary cost)/1998 average market price.

PAGE 11

Crop Yield Increases Required to Recover Irrigation Costs 11 Table 8. Field crop comparison of break-even yields using different overhead irrigatgion systems. Field Crop Unit Traveling Gun Irrigation Break-even Yield1 Towable Pivot Break-even Yield2 Break-even Yield Difference3 % Difference in Break-even Yields4 Corn bu. 163 146 17 12 Soybeansbu. 56 51 5 9 Wheat bu. 108 100 9 9 Cotton lb. 1,002 938 64 7 Peanuts lb. 3,364 3,242 123 4 Sorghum bu. 104 97 7 7 1 Break-even yields taken from Table 6 break-even yield with irrigation. 2 Break-even yields taken from Table 7 break-even yield with irrigation. 3 Break-even yield difference = towable privot break-even yield minus travel gun break-even yield. 4 Percent difference in break-even yields = 100* break-even yield difference/towable privot irrigation break-even yield. Table 9. Vegetable irrigation costs cable tow irrigation. Irrigation costs for selected vegetables grown in North Florida using cable tow irrigation. Variable Cost/Acre-Inch (A.I.) 6.19 Fixed Cost 91.39 Crop Water A.I.1 Variable Cost $/Acre Fixed Cost2 $/Acre Total Cost $/Acre Bell Pepper 3 18.57 45.70 64.27 Broccoli 5 30.95 45.70 76.25 Cabbage 3 18.57 45.70 64.27 Collards 4 24.76 45.70 70.46 Cucumbers 3 18.57 45.70 64.27 Okra 3 18.57 45.70 64.27 Onions 3 18.57 45.70 64.27 Snap Beans 3 18.57 45.70 64.27 Southern Peas 3 18.57 45.70 64.27 Sweet Corn 5 30.95 45.70 76.65 Watermelon 5 30.95 45.70 76.65 1 Irrigation requirements were taken from the Florida Enterprise Budget. 2 Assumes travel gun irrigation system will irrigate two vegetable crops/year.

PAGE 12

Crop Yield Increases Required to Recover Irrigation Costs 12 Table 10. Vegetable irrigation costs towable pivot irrigation. Irrigation costs for selected vegetables grown in North Florida using towable pivot irrigation. Variable Cost/Acre-Inch (A.I.) 3.00 Fixed Cost 81.82 Crop Water A.I.1 Variable Cost $/Acre Fixed Cost2 $/Acre $/Acre Bell Pepper 3 9.00 40.91 49.91 Broccoli 5 15.00 40.91 55.91 Cabbage 3 9.00 40.91 49.91 Collards 4 12.00 40.91 52.91 Cucumbers 3 9.00 40.91 49.91 Okra 3 9.00 40.91 49.91 Onions 3 9.00 40.91 49.91 Snap Beans 3 9.00 40.91 49.91 Southern Peas 3 9.00 40.91 49.91 Sweet Corn 5 15.00 40.91 55.91 Watermelon 5 15.00 40.91 55.91 1 Irrigation requirements were taken from the Florida Enterprise Budget. 2 Assumes towable pivot irrigation system will irrigate two vegetable crops/year.

PAGE 13

Crop Yield Increases Required to Recover Irrigation Costs 13 Table 11. Break-even yield increases using traveling gun irrigation. Caculation of break-even yields without irrigation from vegetable yields with traveling gun irrigation. Vegetable Irrigation Cost per Acre1 Ancillary Cost per Acre2 Unit Market Price $/Unit3 2000 May Spot Price Yield w/ Irrigation3 Harvest Cost B-E Yield Increase4 Yield w/o Irrigation5 % Yield Increase6 Bell Pepper 6416828-lb. bushel 13.638.254003.75243766.2 Broccoli773625-lb. crate 7.257.005003.71324686.8 Cabbage646850-lb. crate 6.494.505002.58344667.3 Collards703820-count box 6.007.255004.829240822.4 Cucumbers642355-lb. bushel 10.997.002505.25152356.5 Okra 6420carton14.0012.704005.25103902.5 Onions 6412750-lb. bag 7.257.504002.664235811.6 Southern Peas 6422bushel8.00N/A1503.351913114.1 Sweet Corn 773342-lb. crate 7.515.003252.73233027.6 Watermelon77285cwt.8.4010.003501.435229817.4 1 See Table 9 for calculations of traveling gun irrigatgion costs of vegetables. 2 Ancillary cost includes incremental fertilizer inputs, seed/transplant inputs, interest on cash, and labor. 3 Market price and yields represent 1997-98 average price and yield. Data from USDA NASS database. 4 Break-even (B-E) yield increase = (irrigation cost + ancilliary cost) / (market price harvest cost). 5 Yield without irrigation = yield with irrigation minus break-even yield increase. 6 Percent yield increase required to pay for traveling gun irrigation.

PAGE 14

Crop Yield Increases Required to Recover Irrigation Costs 14 Table 12. Break-even yield increases using towable pivot irrigation. Calculation of break-even yields without irrigation from vegetable yields with towable pivot irrigation. Vegetable Irrigation Cost per Acre1 Ancillary Cost per Acre2 Unit Market Price $/ Unit3 2000 May Spot Price Yield w/ Irrigation3 Harvest Cost B-E Yield Increase4 B-E Yield w/o Irrigation5 % B-E Yield Increase6 Bell Pepper 5016828-lb. bushel 13.638.254003.75223785.8 Broccoli563625-lb. crate 7.257.005003.71264745.5 Cabbage506850-lb. crate 6.494.505002.58304706.4 Collards533820-count box 6.007.255004.827742318.2 Cucumbers502355-lb. bushel 10.997.002505.25132375.4 Okra 5020carton14.0012.704005.2583922.0 Onions5012750-lb. bag 7.257.504002.663936110.7 Southern Peas 5022bushel8.00N/A1503.351513511.5 Sweet Corn 563342-lb. crate 7.515.003252.73193066.1 Watermelon 56 285 cwt. 8.40 10.00 350 1.43 49 301 16.2 1 See Table 10 for calculation of towable pivot irrigation costs of vegetables. 2 Ancillary cost includes incremental fertilizer inputs, seed/transplant inputs, interest on cash, and labor. 3 Market price and yields represent 1997-1998 average price and yield. Data from USDA NASS database. 4 Break-even (B-E) yield increase = (irrigation cost + ancilliary cost) / (market price harvest cost) 5 Yield without irrigation = yield with irrigation minus break-even yield increase. 6 Percent yield increase required to pay for towable pivot irrigation.

PAGE 15

Crop Yield Increases Required to Recover Irrigation Costs 15 Table 13. Vegetable crop comparison of break-even yields using different overhead irrigation systems. Vegetable Unit Travel Gun Irrigation Break-even Yield1 Tow Pivot Irrigation Break-even Yield2 Break-even Yield Difference3 % Difference in Break-even Yield4 Bell Pepper28-lb. bushel 376 378 2 0.5 Broccoli 25-lb. crate 468 474 6 1.3 Cabbage 50-lb. crate 466 470 4 0.9 Collards 20-count box 408 423 15 3.5 Cucumbers55-lb. bushel 235 237 2 0.8 Okra carton 390 392 2 0.5 Onions 50-lb. bag 358 361 3 0.8 Southern Peasbushel 131 135 4 3.0 Sweet Corn42-lb. crate 302 306 4 1.3 Watermelon cwt. 298 301 3 1.0 1 Break-even yields taken from Table 11 break-even yield without irrigation. 2 Break-even yields taken from Tabe 12 break-even yield without irrigation. 3 Break-even yield difference = tow pivot break-even yield minus travel gun break-even yield. 4 Percent different in break-even yields = 100* break-even yield difference/tow pivot irrigation break-even yield. Table 14. Vegetable irrigation costs using drip irrigation. Cost/Acre/Crop Vegetable Tubing Cost1 Other Variable Cost2 Fixed Cost3 Total Cost Cucumbers 72.60 14.77 33.95121.32 Squash 72.60 14.77 33.95121.32 Tomato 72.60 14.77 33.95121.32 Watermelon 72.60 14.77 33.95 121.32 1 Assumes plastic tubing life cycle will cover two vegetable crops. 2 Assumes drip irrigation system is operating 1,000 hours/year. 3 Fixed costs are prorated over two crops/year.

PAGE 16

Crop Yield Increases Required to Recover Irrigation Costs 16 Table 15. Break-even yield increases using drip irrigation. Calculation of break-even yields without irrigation from vegetable yields with drip irrigation. Vegetable Irrigation Cost per Acre1 Ancillary Cost per Acre2 Unit Market Price $/Unit3 2000 May Spot Price Yield w/ Irrigation Harvest Cost B-E Yield Increase4 B-E Yield w/o Irrigation5 B-E Yield Increase6 Cucumbers121464carton10.99 7.00 5002.60 70 43016.2 Squash121452bushel17.10 9.00 2503.64 43 20720.5 Tomato121622carton 8.57 7.001,3505.202201,13019.5 Watermelon 121 353 cwt. 8.40 10.00 350 1.75 71 279 25.6 1 See Table 14 for calculations of drip irrigation cost. 2 Ancillary cost includes incremental fertilizer inputs, seed/transplant inputs, interest on cash, and labor. 3 Market price and yields represent 1997-1998 average price and yield. Data from USDA NASS database. 4 Break-even (B-E) yield increase = (irrigation cost + ancillary cost) / (Market price harvest cost) 5 Yield without irrigation = yield with irrigation minus break-even yield increase. 6 Percent yield increase required to pay for drip irrigation system.