TITLE:

             Farm Enterprise Records AG -CARES, Lamesa, TX 2002

AUTHORS:

             John Farris, County Extension Agent - Agriculture Dawson County

SUMMARY:

Farm Enterprise records were maintained on five center pivot irrigated areas or pies, on the Ag-Cares farm in 2002. Also, records were complied on dryland corners and on adjacent dryland farms on cotton and grain sorghum. The five irrigated pies composed different cropping systems as well as different varieties and irrigation methods and total water applied within each pie. Cropping systems established were Conventional Tillage Peanuts, Solid Row, LEPA Irrigated; Terminated Rye-Cotton-Peanut-Rotation, Solid Row, LEPA Irrigated; Terminated Rye-Cotton Rotation, Solid Row, LEPA Irrigated; Conventional Tillage Cotton, Solid Row, LEPA Irrigated; Conventional Tillage Cotton, Solid Row, Dryland; Conventional Tillage Grain Sorghum, Solid Row, Dryland. Enterprise records were maintained on all production systems, with net returns per ground acre ranging from a high of $181.86 to a low of ($14.77). Enterprise records help to show the disparities between cropping enterprise rather than one overall farm net return of $60.60.

The availability of enterprise records showed a positive advantage between cropping areas. The irrigated cropping areas averaged $108.43 and the dryland cropping areas averaged $10.36 per ground acre in 2002. Table 2 shows AG-CARES Farm Enterprise Records Analysis for 2002.

The maintaining of enterprise farming records may be one of the best tools available to producers to increase profits and sustain their farming operations. But even good records can not compensate for lack of moisture and low commodity prices.

OBJECTIVE:

Cotton producers face increasing economic decisions each year. An accurate set of farm enterprise records is needed to make meaningful decisions.

To maintain farm enterprise records on all cropping system at AG-CARES in a practical manner available to all producers, thereby showing the need to distinguish between cropping systems, farms, etc.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

Actual cost per acre was maintained on Quicken Deluxe 2000 and Lotus 1-2-3^® for windows for all different farm enterprise areas at AG-CARES during 2002.

Cost for fuel, labor and farming equipment were charged out at 75% of the most common custom rate as established by the Texas Agricultural Statistics Service. Cash land lease was charged at $21.40 per acre for dryland and $55.20 per acre for irrigated.

All farming operations were conducted by Texas Cooperative Extension or Texas Agricultural Experiment Station personnel. Some spraying and harvesting operations were performed by custom operators and charged out at their normal rates per acre.

Paymaster HS2326 RR was planted on all areas on May 8, 2002, except field 1 where twelve different varieties were planted.

             Irrigation rates of 50% to 125% of ET were conducted on field 3.

All chemicals or other inputs donated to AG-CARES Farm were charged out at the rate producers would have to pay for that product in Lamesa, Texas.

Cotton lint was sold for $52.00 per cwt and seed for $125 per ton.

Table 1 shows the AG-CARES Farm Enterprise Records By Expense Inputs Per Land Acre For 2002.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION:

Four irrigated cropping areas and conventional tillage dryland cotton and grain sorghum were established in 2002. Circular rows were established for LEPA irrigation, with a 40" solid row pattern. All areas will be evaluated for yield, fiber quality, and net returns per acre.

The cropping areas being evaluated include:

             1)   Conventional Tillage Cotton, Solid Row, LEPA Irrigated, Field 1, 13.62A

             2)   Terminated Rye-Cotton Rotation, Solid Row, LEPA Irrigated, Field 1A, 13.62A

             3)   Terminated Rye-Cotton Rotation, Solid Row, LE)PA Irrigated, Field 2, 54.88A

             4)   Conventional Tillage Peanuts, Solid Row, LEPA Irrigated, Field 2A, 12.95A

             5)   Terminated Rye-Cotton-Peanut Rotation, Solid Row, LEPA Irrigated, Field 3, 12.95A

             6)   Conventional Tillage Cotton, Solid Row, Dryland Corners, Field C1,2,3,4, 30.77A

             7)   Conventional Tillage Cotton, Solid Row, Dryland, Field D1, 59.61A

             8)   Conventional Tillage Grain Sorghum, Solid Row, Dryland, Field D2, 13.42A

These cropping areas attempt to limit tillage operations to reduce input costs while conserving soil moisture and maintaining crop residue on the soil surface as a means to protect young cotton plants.

Farm enterprise records of actual cost were maintained on all the different cropping areas during 2002.

Expense and income for each of the cropping areas varied greatly between enterprise records. Inputs were charged to each enterprise monthly as bills were paid using Quicken Deluxe 2000. Lotus 1-2-3^® for windows was used to analyze records on a per acre and yield basis.