WSP01593 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

~ o 00 - 33 - I t should be bome in mind that these budgets have been constructed with the moderate levels of productivity and efficiency, whereas some other budgets which may have been rather favorable were based upon either high ~roductivity or high efficien- cy, or both. New Farm Units, Summary and Conclusions.--Based upon comparison of budgets prepared, it seems safe to conclude that a beef-cow operation on irrigated pasture would not be a feasible type of operation. j'lith average rnanap:ement, it could not provide a sufficient return to operator's labor for a family livinp after allrn~ing for a pay- ment on water and fully covering costs of depreciation and interest on investment. This statement holds true even allowing for the possibility of higher levels of pro- ductivity or efficiency in crop and livestock production than was initially thought to be attainable by average managers. The addition of a calf-fattening operation to a beef breeding-cow operation increases the possibilities of obtaining a satis- factory return at high levels of efficiency and moderate or high levels of produc- tivity. This alternative, however, requires almost a full section of cropland at the moderate productivity level. A beef-cow operation of 150 head of cows and heifers coming two years old to- gether with replacement heifer calves and bulls, and utilizing a calf fattening- operation, is rather marginal, even at high levels of productivity and efficiency. Cash-crop operations, or combinations of cash cronping with cattle fattening, or beef-breeding herds on outside ranre appear to be more feasible. Feeder cattle are produced locally or in a relatively short distance from the project in numbers sufficient for a substantial number of cattle-fattening enterprises on farms. The possibilities for findin,g markets for cash crops of hay are not as certain. If markets were available, cash cropping would be one of the more attractive alterna- tives.