 163Likes
 |
|
11/15/14, 07:16 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,288
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by painterswife
K
Not so simple. Lots more factors than just operating costs and maintenance costs. Drip does not help newly planted crops as much as pivot , buried too deep. Pivots can be moved from field to field so up front cost can be less. Changing over from lines and pivot is a huge capital cost.
Farmers have to be able to absorb the cost of change over before moving on to newer tech.
You also do not lose a crop when pivot goes bad because you do not have to dig up the field to find the bad drip lines
|
So you don't have any data, you're just making this stuff up. Clearly you don't understand drip irrigation and are doing what you accused Crazy of doing.
|
11/15/14, 07:18 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,288
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by painterswife
Just to throw a wrench into things. Did you know that often as a farmer invests in more water conserving tech they still use the same amount of water? They just plant crops that use more water and give higher returns. Crops they could not plant before. They own the right to a certain amount of water and if they do not use it they lose it.
|
That's the product of more bad gov't. I was not aware it applied to water in the west, but I've seen over and over again the waste and idiocy of use it or lose it funding in the gov't.
|
11/15/14, 07:18 PM
|
|
Sock puppet reinstated
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 6,586
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by DEKE01
So you don't have any data, you're just making this stuff up. Clearly you don't understand drip irrigation and are doing what you accused Crazy of doing.
|
I provided as much proof as you did.
__________________
IMO, yes my opinion.
|
11/15/14, 07:30 PM
|
|
Sock puppet reinstated
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 6,586
|
|
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...4E8625N9sEAXgw
This is a good read, have fun.
•Compared to LEPA center pivot, subsurface drip irrigation (SDI) is not economically feasible for any crop water-use scenario because of its relatively high investment and small gain in application efficiency. For most crops, adoption of SDI may be limited to land where pivots cannot physically be installed. •However, producers should closely evaluate using SDI systems for high-value crops. Research suggests that SDI systems may improve the application efficiency and the timing of frequent applications. These improvements may increase acreage and yields enough to justify the additional investment costs of subsurface drip systems. "
Not so cut and dried for the business man.
__________________
IMO, yes my opinion.
|
11/15/14, 08:09 PM
|
|
Sock puppet reinstated
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 6,586
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by DEKE01
|
I don't need to argue those numbers. they are only half the story. Not enough to base a business decision on when farming. They don't take into account location, soil type, crop, capital investment strategy and timing, etc.
Ps you might want to tweak your links.
__________________
IMO, yes my opinion.
|
11/15/14, 08:14 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,288
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by painterswife
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...4E8625N9sEAXgw
This is a good read, have fun.
•Compared to LEPA center pivot, subsurface drip irrigation (SDI) is not economically feasible for any crop water-use scenario because of its relatively high investment and small gain in application efficiency. For most crops, adoption of SDI may be limited to land where pivots cannot physically be installed. • However, producers should closely evaluate using SDI systems for high-value crops. Research suggests that SDI systems may improve the application efficiency and the timing of frequent applications. These improvements may increase acreage and yields enough to justify the additional investment costs of subsurface drip systems. "
Not so cut and dried for the business man.
|
That was a good and informative paper. Note the portion I highlighted. You'll also not that water usage was rated as much more efficient using SDI and the paper did not take into account the effects of a declining water source.
I agree, it is not an easy decision for the business man. And in the scenario of cheap oil and water, I would probably go with pivot. But if I had to worry about the managing the future of the water source, which is the point of this thread, I would have to focus on water efficiency.
|
11/15/14, 08:16 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,288
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by painterswife
I don't need to argue those numbers. they are only half the story. .
|
Yes, duck and weave. The difference is I did my homework and didn't make stuff up.
|
11/15/14, 08:19 PM
|
|
Sock puppet reinstated
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 6,586
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by DEKE01
That was a good and informative paper. Note the portion I highlighted. You'll also not that water usage was rated as much more efficient using SDI and the paper did not take into account the effects of a declining water source.
I agree, it is not an easy decision for the business man. And in the scenario of cheap oil and water, I would probably go with pivot. But if I had to worry about the managing the future of the water source, which is the point of this thread, I would have to focus on water efficiency.
|
That is all I am saying. We would love for everyone to use the most efficient up to date irrigation system. We need to work towards that but it is a journey that is held back by economics and the right choice for the crop being cultivated. You can not grow rice with drip irrigation no way, no how.
__________________
IMO, yes my opinion.
|
11/15/14, 08:20 PM
|
|
Sock puppet reinstated
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 6,586
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by DEKE01
Yes, duck and weave. The difference is I did my homework and didn't make stuff up.
|
What did I make up. Nothing.I only needed one article to back my statements.
__________________
IMO, yes my opinion.
Last edited by painterswife; 11/16/14 at 01:40 PM.
|
11/16/14, 09:42 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 1,728
|
|
|
Deke the irrigation is interesting but in the end how the owners use their water is their business. How would you like them telling you how to use your land. ?
|
11/16/14, 04:01 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,288
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by AmericanStand
Deke the irrigation is interesting but in the end how the owners use their water is their business. How would you like them telling you how to use your land. ?
|
I agree, I wouldn't want someone telling me how to use my land. Wasn't that Crazy's point that some have bad mouthed so much? I only discussed the irrigation thing to show that the claims that Big Ag is doing all it can to help is wrong, that claims that Big Ag has been doing this for hundreds of years is wrong, and that claims that Big Ag is not part of the problem is wrong.
I'm not anti Big Ag in all cases, just trying to lend some perspective since Crazy was getting beat up for having a very legit concern.
|
11/16/14, 09:40 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 1,728
|
|
|
Crazy apparently didn't know her rights, or rather assumed she had more of them than she did. These kinds of learning experiance usually hurt. I'd say that she has got the easy chance to wise up.
I expect it hurts to see plans dashed and because of that I would certainly research my on personnel rights on that particular property.
Even if it is the worst case that has been set out here it's good to know ahead of time. She can take steps to mitigate the damage.
For instance if those Swales are to give well pumped water a Area to water new tree roots it would seem they would be fine as long as she's not selling fruit. IF at some time in the future those trees root deep enough to sustain them selves without pumped well water it would seem ok for her to sell fruit at that time.
Lol but of course as convoluted as things are Id check that out Too!
|
11/17/14, 09:22 AM
|
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 1,185
|
|
|
Actually it has nothing to do with anything AmericanStand. They are saying we are going to run out of water. OUT. I think that has a larger impact than fruit trees, don't you? I've been fighting for my water for awhile. To keep poisons out of it. Now this. And yeah, I'm going to get regulated and that makes me angry because in the end, I'm not the problem and regulating me will make no difference to the end result.
|
11/17/14, 04:56 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 1,728
|
|
|
Crazy farm I'm sure you don't think you are the problem but I bet the farmers that have been there. 100 years think you are.
Think of it this way if everyone that had moved there in the last. 100 years left would there be a problem. ?
The sad thing is the entire country is this way it's just harder to see.
|
11/17/14, 06:00 PM
|
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 1,185
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by AmericanStand
Crazy farm I'm sure you don't think you are the problem but I bet the farmers that have been there. 100 years think you are.
Think of it this way if everyone that had moved there in the last. 100 years left would there be a problem. ?
The sad thing is the entire country is this way it's just harder to see.
|
That's because we are desertifying the world with unsustainable agricultural practices and consumerism. Wyoming will never be a rain forest but it doesn't have to die. We are doing that.
|
11/18/14, 07:49 AM
|
 |
Miniature Horse lover
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: West Central WI.
Posts: 21,255
|
|
Oh ya and I suppose that Gannett Peak at 13,785 feet,which is part of the Wind River Range in ... Part of this area is often referred to as the Red Desert
Red Desert Hmmmm.
has NO effect on the amount of rain the rest of the state gets. OK I get it. Mountain ranges are just for looks not stopping the moisture from reaching many areas of the state. And man is the reason for it. Cool. And this has nothing to do with it either. Some areas are even called The High Desert for a reason it is Dry. The state is unlike other states in the US. and must be farmed and treated differently that other places around this great country.
Quote:
|
AGRICULTURE – Most of the State has been subjected to erosion for tens of thousands of years and less than 10 percent is covered with a mantle of recent (geologically speaking) water-transported soil. The lack of such soil and adequate moisture limits the natural vegetation to hardy plants, such as sagebrush, greasewood, and short grass. Low relative humidity and the high rate of evaporation add to the problem. A number of abandoned homesteads of onetime enthusiastic settlers bear silent testimony to the lack of moisture. Even so, dryland farming is carried on successfully in some areas. Approximately 42 percent of the State’s total area is privately-owned land, the majority of which is used for grazing, although some is timberland. The fact that most of the State is still Government-owned attests to the semiarid climate which has make the land less attractive to homesteaders. Nearly 4 percent of the State is cultivated cropland, including both irrigated and nonirrigated. Another 13 percent is covered with forests, while parks and recreational areas take up about 4 percent.
|
I think a few folks that move to WYOMING from other places and think they can transform a state into something it has never been better take a serious look at Why such things are hard to do in that state. and man is Not One Of Them that makes it hard to do many types of farming in said state.
http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/narratives/WYOMING.htm
|
11/18/14, 09:24 AM
|
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 1,185
|
|
I was born here. Why does everyone keep thinking I'm from out of state. Sheesh.
Quote:
Originally Posted by arabian knight
Oh ya and I suppose that Gannett Peak at 13,785 feet,which is part of the Wind River Range in ... Part of this area is often referred to as the Red Desert
Red Desert Hmmmm.
has NO effect on the amount of rain the rest of the state gets. OK I get it. Mountain ranges are just for looks not stopping the moisture from reaching many areas of the state. And man is the reason for it. Cool. And this has nothing to do with it either. Some areas are even called The High Desert for a reason it is Dry. The state is unlike other states in the US. and must be farmed and treated differently that other places around this great country.
I think a few folks that move to WYOMING from other places and think they can transform a state into something it has never been better take a serious look at Why such things are hard to do in that state. and man is Not One Of Them that makes it hard to do many types of farming in said state.
http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/narratives/WYOMING.htm |
|
11/18/14, 09:26 AM
|
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 1,185
|
|
|
I find the argument that farmers were here first amusing because they were. Absolutely all this land used to belong to them. However, it doesn't now because THEY subdivided and sold it. My land used to be a wheat field. I didn't steal it, it was sold. They profited from it and now suddenly it's those dirty rotten small time folks who are ruining it for them? Oy!
|
11/18/14, 09:29 AM
|
|
Sock puppet reinstated
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 6,586
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazyfarm
I find the argument that farmers were here first amusing because they were. Absolutely all this land used to belong to them. However, it doesn't now because THEY subdivided and sold it. My land used to be a wheat field. I didn't steal it, it was sold. They profited from it and now suddenly it's those dirty rotten small time folks who are ruining it for them? Oy!
|
They own the water rights. Does not matter if they were there first or last. Who ever bought land with water rights owns them. The US is based on capitalism after all.
The farmer knows his water rights. Don't blame them because you did not. The reason people assumed you were from out of state is because even though you were born and live here you still did not have a clue about water rights.
__________________
IMO, yes my opinion.
Last edited by painterswife; 11/18/14 at 02:02 PM.
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Rate This Thread |
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:34 PM.
|
|
