Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-29T15:52:52.522Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Runoff impoundment for supplemental irrigation: An economic assessment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 October 2009

F. G. Scrimgeour  and
G. W. Frasier
F. G. Scrimgeour
Affiliation:
Lecturer in Economics, University of Waikato, Private Bag 3105, Hamilton, New Zealand.
G. W. Frasier
Affiliation:
Research Hydraulic Engineer, USDA-ARS, Rangeland Resource Research Unit, 1701 Center, Fort Collins, CO 80526.
Get access

Abstract

Water harvesting technologies capture surface water runoff and recycle it for productive use. Despite the long history of water harvesting and the renewed interest in many places in the world, the technology has not been widely adopted in the United States, in part because of a lack of understanding of its economic benefits. We developed a simulation model for the economic evaluation of water harvesting systems that combines agronomic, engineering, and economic factors and daily meteorological data. The simulation model was used to investigate the economic feasibility of using a water-harvesting, supplemental irrigation system for grain sorghum production over a 44-year period at two locations in Texas. Water harvesting combined with supplemental irrigation was most successful where the precipitation is the highest. However, the net benefits were extremely variable from year to year. The modeled technique could not take advantage of the potential additional water in the wet years and did not harvest sufficient water in dry years to make water harvesting more economically attractive than conventional dryland farming. This does not mean that runoff farming cannot be of economic benefit, depending on local conditions. Widespread adoption of the technology is constrained by the limited profit potential the variability of the profits, and the knowledge required to use the technology successfully. The simulation model was a useful and simple tool for dealing with the complexity of the issues.

Keywords

water-harvestingrunoff-farmingdroughtdryland-farmingmodelsimulation
Type
Articles
Information
American Journal of Alternative Agriculture , Volume 6 , Issue 3 , September 1991 , pp. 139 - 145
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1991

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Anderson, J. R., Dillon, J. L., and Hardaker, J. B.. 1977. Agricultural decision analysis. The Iowa State University Press, Ames, Iowa.Google Scholar
2.Bloodgood, D. W., Patterson, R. E., and Smith, R. L.. 1954. Water evaporation in Texas. Texas Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 787, College Station, Texas.Google Scholar
3.Cooley, K. R. 1975. Evaporation suppression for conserving farm water supplies. In G. W. Frasier (ed.). Proc. Water Harvesting Symposium, Phoenix, Arizona, March 26–28, 1974. ARS-W-22. Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
4.Frasier, G. W. 1975. Water harvesting for livestock, wildlife and domestic use. In G. W. Frasier (ed.). Proc. Water Harvesting Symposium, Phoenix, Arizona, March 26–28, 1974. ARSW-22. Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Krishna, J. H., Arkin, G. F., and Martin, J. R.. 1987. Runoff impoundment for supplemental irrigation in Texas. Water Resources Bulletin 23:1057–1061.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Laing, I. A. F. 1975. Sealing excavated tanks on farms in Western Australia. In Frasier, G. W. (ed.). Proc. Water Harvesting Symposium, Phoenix, Arizona, March 26–28, 1974. ARSW-22.Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture,Washington, DC.Google Scholar
7.Lansford, V. D., Harmon, W. L., and Musick, J. T.. 1986. The Texas high plains: Adjustments to changing economic and resource conditions 1970–1985. Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, College Station, Texas.Google Scholar
8.Ritchie, J. T. 1972. Model for predicting evaporation from a row crop with incomplete cover. Water Resources Research 8:1204–1213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Scrimgeour, F. G. 1989. A model for the economic evaluation of water harvesting. In Unger, P. W., Jordan, W. R., and Sneed, T. V. (eds.). Proc. International Conference on Dryland Farming, Amarillo, Texas, August, 1988.Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture,Washington, DC.Google Scholar
10.Steiner, J. L. 1989. Simulation of evaporation and water use efficiency of fallow based cropping systems. In Unger, P. W., Jordan, W. R., and Sneed, T. V. (eds.). Proc. International Conference on Dryland Farming, Amarillo, Texas, August, 1988.Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture,Washington, DC.Google Scholar
11.Stewart, B. A., Musick, J. T., and Dusek, D. A.. 1983. Yield and water use efficiency of grain sorghum in a limited irrigation-dryland farming system. Agronomy Journal 75:629–634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12.Texas Agricultural Extension Service. 1988. Texas crop enterprise budgets. Texas Panhandle District, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas.Google Scholar
13.Thornton, P. K., and Dent, J. B.. 1987. IBSNAT crop models in a socio-economic whole farm framework. Agrotechnology Transfer 6:1–6.Google Scholar
14.USDA-ARS. (Undated). The USDA conservation and production research laboratory. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Bushland, Texas.Google Scholar
15.Williams, J. R., Jones, C. A., and Dyke, P. T.. 1988. The EPIC model. Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, College Station, Texas.Google Scholar