[gal/elm 2.22 Mud, I956 ' Changes in Investment and Irrigation Water Costs, Texas High Plains, 1950 - 54 OKLAHOMA 4 DALLAM _ SHERMAN ‘IHANSFORD IOCHILTREE LIPSCOMB ' << HARTLEY _ MOORE HUTCH|N- ROBERTS ,HEMPHILL E sou Q <> cu E3 - . - ._____| (Q >4 Q pa OLDHAM POTTER cmsoa - GRAY 'WHEELER M 2 Q a oi-i-l: g DEAF sum: _RANDALL “RM . DONLEY _°°"~L'"°$' RESS ‘ l sraous l wonrn PARMER CASTRO _ swasnsa BRISCOEI HALL WW- 7 O O O O O O I O O I 0 O I O I O O O I O O O O I I 0O ........... *ja=»¢¢=»:ac+2§c+:z.,.. " ' HAR@E~A~ Q ¢ . - . . . . - ¢ . Q . . - . - . - . . - . - . . - ¢ OI 9 ->;:""=>;<<'=="§<~;"="< MOTLEY COTTLEI ‘\--, :.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.: .:.:.f.:.:.:.:.:.: .:.:.:.:.' ' FOARD Q O O Q I O O I I O O U I Q I I I O O O O I‘ O O O I O I 0 O O O O O C C O O O I O O OI 0 I 0 o Q Q u Q Q O J I O O O O O Q O O OI - av mcKEus_ KING _ KNOX Q Q I . . I . . I . ‘ ‘ . . . . ‘ . . . .. C . . . I I C . . Q . . . . . . ' . . ‘I ~ Q - » - - Q Q a - o o o Q o 0 0 o no ; o o o - ~ o Q o n n o o Q 0 0 0 0o ¢ Q Q Q - - - ¢ - u u o o 0 0 c 0o ._ O I O I O I I I O O C O O O O IO YOAKUM. . GARZA . KENT . STONE-I HASKELL It l . Limit iw-ir The principal irrigated cotton production area of the High Plains is the shaded portion of the map. in cooperation with the UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION R. D. LEWIS, DIRECTOR, COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS I SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Substantial changes have occurred ‘in conditions affecting irrigated farming on the Texas High Plains during drouth and near-drouth conditions of 1950-54. The number of irrigated farms, wells, acres irrigated and the amo-unt j water used, both total and per acre, have increased materially. The numbe-r of acres irrigated per farm in 1954 was i 11 percent from 1949; how-ever, it declined 4 percent from 1953 to 1954. The acreage irrigated per well was down percent from 1949, with almost a third of it occurring between the 1953 and 1954 crop year. Wa.ter levels decli an average of 18 feet during 1950-54. Pumping lifts increased 16 percent and well yie-Ids declined about 18 percel between 1938 and 1951. Expanded development and heavier pumping accelerated these trends. In the surveyed area, one or more wells were added on 55 percent of the old farms; approximately 40 percent V} the old farms installed underground concrete tile or surface pipe distribution systems and 49 percent lowered pum A higher proportion of old sandy-land farms added wells and distribution systems, and a higher proportion of y heavy-land farms have lowered pumps. Approximately 9 percent of the irrigated farms developed since 1950 installed additional wells and 24 percent of t pumps on these farms were lo-wered. Approximately 85 percent of all farms developed before 1950 made one or more of these improvements. On fa I making improvements, the average net gain was 28.9 acres irrigated per farm. An average net gain of 3 irrigated a I occurred on the farms making no improvement in irrigation facilities during 1950-54. i‘ Additional capital investment on farms making improvements in irrigation facilities averaged $7,600 in the sandy-l area, $5,664 in the heavy-land area and $6,642 for all farms surveyed. The average cost of irrigation facilities on fa g , developed during 1950-54 ranged from $7,702 in the sandy-land area to $11,450 in the heavy-land are-a, with an a, average "of $9,810 per farm. On a per-acre basis, additional capita.l outlays increase-d the per-acre investment on s farms by $36.27, $19.15 and $25.25 for sandy land, heavy land and for the area, respectively. Shallower wells and the increasing number of smaller 4, 5 and 6-inch pump installations in the sandy-land area _' reflected in an average well cost of $4,730, compared with an average of $6,112 per well in the heavy-land area. For area, wells on new farms averaged $800 more in cost than those developed during the same period on old farms. By the end of the 1954 crop season, 41 percent of the farms containing 45 percent of the irrigated acreage wholly or partly equipped with closed distribution systems, usually underground concrete tile. On the sandy-land at, where transmission losses are heavier, 46 percent of the farms containing 54 percent of the irrigated acreage -:_ equipped with close-d distribution systems. The per-acre cost of distribution systems ranged from 86 cents to $84 with an average of $19.18, $11.44 and $14.96 per acre on the sandy land, heavy land and for the area, respectively. Th1; average costs are not necessarily the cost of a complete underground system. In the heavy-land area, 54 percent o-f the pumps installed before 1950 were lowered one or more times and. 30 perc, of those installed since 1950 were lowered. Exclusive of pump repairs, the average cost of lowering a pump rang, from $445 in the heavy-land area to $587 in the sandy-land area. Approximately 15 percent of the farms studied used pumping plants fueled with natural gas. Most of these ‘l changed from butane during 1950-54. The natural gas line cost averaged $1,864 per farm, or slightly under $1,000 well. The 1954 ave-rage water cost per acre more than doubled the 1947-49 average. Increased hours of pump o-perati? increased investment and a decrease in the acres irrigated per well combined to raise water costs. Pumps operated an average of. 2,207 hours in 1954, or slightly under 2.5 time-s longer than the 1947-49 averaged The per-acre cost of water increases sharply as the acreage irrigated per well drops below 71 to 90 acres. 1950-54 decrease o-f 26 percent in acres irrigated per well suggests that a continued increase in water costs can expected, particularly in the sandy-land are-a where the decrease has been heaviest. Irrigated crop yields in 1954 were the highest on record. Because the weather in 1954 was particularly favora for irrigated cotton, subsequent crop-yield data will be required to determine whether the increase in yield refl ~ the effects of improved practices and increasing irrigation skills or only 1954 weather conditions. Results of this study suggest that future efforts should be centered on water conservation, possibly including a s to less intensive water-use practices. The problem of allocating these diminishing resources through time is complica v I by the farm debt structure, increased land values, increasing production costs, declining farm prices and prospective i duction in cotton acreage. This study also indicates the need for a re-examination of overall farm irrigation t; with emphasis on the “break-even” point under modified water-use practices at present and future pricelevels. . TION DEVELOPMENT ON THE HIGH PLAINS ded rapidly during the drouth and near- i conditions of 1950-54. During this period, j mber of irrigation wells increased from ~t0 27,500 and irrigated acreage increased 1,860,000 to 3,500,000. Ground water with- also rose sharply from 1,600,000 acre- * 1950 to 5,200,000 acre-feet in 1954.1,” his rapid and substantial expansion has af- fi the overall situation in several respects. ded development and water use have caus- ‘ecline in regional water levels. In 11 coun- here more than 80 percent of the irrigated he is located, the regional decline in water approximately 18 feet from 1950 through hanges in pumping lift and well perform- ._are other effects of expanded development increased water use. From 1938 through pumping lifts increased 16 percent and well ” ‘declined approximately 18 percentfi‘ Sim- formation regarding pumping lift and well Imance during the years of heaviest water p. not available. The growing shift to smaller ', together with reports from farmers, sug- that well performance has deteriorated con- bly in some parts of the High Plains. additional effect, not touched on in the f, previously cited, results from the changes h investment and operating costs that have ‘EU-required to keep abreast of the changing supply situation. A farm survey designed : ertain these changes and their effect on 1 irrigated and farm operating costs was con- g in June 1955. he survey covered the irrigated portions of ‘f, Terry, Crosby, Lubbock, Hockley, Bailey, , Hale and Floyd counties and the southern p‘ of Swisher, Castrofland Parmer counties. i ions in this area areificomparable with those by farm management, studies conducted 1948 and 1,949.“»¢;,.F,or comparison with ~:rlier findingsgffthe ldounties covered in the rsurvey are groupedifaccording to predomi- soil textures. Data. for Lubbock, Hockley, F: Bailey and the surveyed portion of Parmer are designated “sandy land”; those for tively, agricultural economist, Production Econom- _.earc_h Branch, Agricultural Research Service, U. S. ; ment of Agriculture; and associate professor, De- of Agricultural Economics and Sociology, Texas f ltural Experiment Station. p anges in Investment and Irrigation Water Costs, , Texas High Plains, 1950 - 54 WILLIAM F. HUGHES and A. C. MAGEE* Crosby, Floyd, Hale, Swisher and Castro counties are designated “heavy land.” Data for Lynn and Terry counties are reported separately without comparison. - This bulletin presents the results of this sur- vey. The data and comparisons pertain to the surveyed farms. These farms were selected at random so that the results would be representa- tive of conditions in the area surveyed. Wide differences occur from farm to farm for most of the items included in the survey. Com- parisons are based on averages for the items, types or measures involved. Farms on which ir- rigation was developed before 1950 are designa- ted “old farms.” Farms on which irrigation was developed during the 1950-54 period are designa- ted “new farms.” Precipitation during the time covered by this survey is shown in Figure 1. Many of the com- parisons contrast 1954 conditions with those that existed from 1947 to 1949. There is considerable difference in the amount of precipitation between the 1947-49 and the 1950-54 periods compared with the long-time average. There was an ac- cumulated excess of precipitation amounting to 3.72 inches and 6.74 inches at Lubbock and Plain- view, respectively, during 1947-49. In contrast, there was an accumulated precipitation deficiency amounting to 23.24 and 17.32 inches at Lubbock and Plainview, respectively, from 1950 through 1954. Precipitation was considerably below aver- age in 1952-54. The accumulated precipitation deficiency amounted to 17.61 inches and 18.01 CONTENTS Summary and Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 Overall Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 Type and Extent of Improvements . . . . . . .4 Cost of Improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5 Water Costs, 1954 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6 Crop Yields, I954 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Lynn and Terry Counties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Literature Cited . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 a0 - LEGEND? g Tom. cost —--— - OPERATING COST — —-— — 5O - OVERHEAD COST - - - - - - - -- b O I lll O v vursn cosr was ACRE m oorums 6 3 I | l l 1 | l _L l I m O UN3D°ER 30-50 51-70 71-90 Sl-IIO 111-130 131-150 151-170 171 EOVER ACRES IRRIGATED PER WELL Figure 1. Water cost per acre related to acres irrigated per well. inches, respectively, at Lubbock and Plainview during this period. OVERALL CHANGES Many changes in the amount and type of ir- rigation facilities occurred from 1950 through 1954. There were no changes in irrigation facil- ities or equipment during 1950-54 on 15 percent of the surveyed farms, but irrigation costs in- creased substantially, primarily because of the increased hours of pump operation required dur- ing the drouth years (Figure 1.) On 85 percent of the surveyed farms, the‘ installation of addi- tional wells and underground distribution sys- tems, the lowering of pumps and the increased hours of pump operation caused a material rise in the per-acre cost of irrigation. On some farms the operator was not able to maintain his 1949 scale of operation. On other farms, relatively minor capital outlay permitted an expansion of irrigated acreage. The net overall changes from improvements in 1950-54 are shown in Table 1. The number of irrigated farms increased 20 percent during 1950-54, mostly in the heavy-land areas (Table 1). During the drouth and near- drouth conditions of 1950-54, water use increas- ed from 0.86 acre-feet to 1.48 acre-feet per acre irrigatedf/2 Well numbers increased approxi- mately 20 percent and hours of pump operation increased 135 percent. Both were required to meet the increased Water demand, which sug- gests that well yields have dropped sharply. Table 1. Relative change in numbers of irrigated farms. wells. acres irrigated per tarm. acres irrigated per well and hours of operation per well, Texas High Plains, 1950-54 Percentage oi 1949 (1949 = 1C0) Item Sandy Heavy Area land land surveyedl 1953 1954 l 1953 1954 l 1953 1954 Irrigated farms (No.) 128 128 125 131 126 129 Irrigation wells (No.) 184 197 170 193 176 195 Irrigated acres. per farm 110 105 118 116 115 lll Irrigated acres. per well 71 62 93 84 82 74 Hours of operation per well’ 3 239 3 22D i‘ 235 ‘Exclusive oi Lynn and Terry counties. ‘Average hours oi pump operation 1947-49 = 100. “Data not available. 4 Table 2. Type ol improvement and proportion o1 I pre-1950 irrigated farms making improvements during » 1950-54 period, Texas High Plains Percentage of all pre-195l1 irrigated farms Sargdly l Hezvay I A: Type of improvement Installation of additional wells 61.6 48.9 55 Installation of distribution systems“ 46.5 33.7 39 Lowering oi pumps 31.3 65.2 I Installation of natural gas lines 9.3 19.5 l4 ‘Exclusive of Lynn and Terry counties. =Underground concrete tile or portable aluminum surface pipe. TYPE AND EXTENT OF IMPROVEMENTS The type, extent and combination of provements differ from farm to farm, dependi on conditions on the particular farm and methods used to maintain or improve farm W9: supplies. These improvements include: (1) stallation of additional Wells, (2) installation underground distribution systems, (3) loweri of pumps and (4) installation of natural gas lin The first three bear directly on the provision maintenance of water supplies; the fourth more important in connection with operating c0 (Table 2). The data in Table 2 are not additive, as t or more improvements usually are installed the same farm. In the sandy-land area, wa =1 bearing formations usually are thinner than‘ formations that underlie a large part of heavy-land area and a higher proportion of pum originally were set at or near the bottom of A formation. Under these conditions, it was nec sary to drill additional wells to maintain or i prove farm water supplies. In the heavy-l area, with unexploited Water resources, farm ter supplies have been maintained or supp, mented to some extent by lowering pumps-a 1 ' expensive operation than drilling a new well.- The higher proportion of farms with und ground concrete tile or portable aluminum s face pipe distribution systems in the sandy-la area reflects an attempt to minimize ditch los which are much higher in this area than in heavy-land area.“ The proportion of farms making impro ments and the combination of improvements farms are shown in Table 3. l Table 3. Type and extent of improvements on irrig farms developed before 1950. Texas High Plains. 19511-5 i Percentage of all pre- irric ated larmsl ' Sandy Heavy land land Farms with no capital improvements since 19493 17.4 Farms making capital improvements. 1950-54 82. Type of improvement Lowering pumps + additional wells and distribution systems‘ 13.1 86.9 Additional wells only 19.9 11.9 Distribution systems only‘ 8.1 2.2 Wells and distribution systems‘ 23.3 7.6 l Lowering pumps only 8.1 21.7 1 Lowering pumps + additional wells 8.1 19.5 1 Lowering pumps + distribution systems‘ 4.6 14.2 9.8 l . ‘Number oi irrigated farms in sample. 177 (sandy-land area. B6: he land area. 91 ’-'Exclusive of Lynn and Terry counties. ' “Exclusive oi natural gas lines. ‘Sprinkler systems not included. Table 4. Change in acreage irrigated and in type of f- vements between 1949. and 1954 on farms where irriga- was developed before 1950 Av. Av. change in . Nm _ acres acres irrigated Type of improvement of ‘fngaled farms ‘fir; Net lNet ' am. oss. . 1"“ 1954 gcres acres T‘ I with no capital improvement “since 19492 154.2 3.0 _ - making capital improvements ‘ce 1949* 99 253.0 28.9 onal wells only 14 224.8 18.1 - ' ution systems only“ 7 201.7 27.3 -» 'ution systems + additional 011s“ 15 200.8 19.3 ering pumps only 22 202.4 4.5 ring pumps + additional ells d b 13 362.2 105.9 l‘ ering pumps + istri ution stems“ 254.0 .6 ering pumps + additional wells Aland distribution systems“ 18 321.1 68.4 ' 've of Lynn and Terry counties. _ ive of natural gas line installation. ler systems not included. i5 Improvements involving the installation of a tional wells contribute to increased irrigated (Table 4). Neither the installation of an Merground or surface pipe distribution system ffthe lowering of pumps alone enabled a farm rator to maintain the acreage irrigated in _.- 9. Installing a distribution system and lower- ". pumps provided sufficient water to maintain acreage irrigated. All the substantial gain jzirrigated acreage shown for lowering pumps g additional wells was realized in the heavy- d area. Lowering pumps and adding wells did a maintain the acreage irrigated on sandy-land _ s. The irrigated acreage on these farms raged 20 acres less in 1954 than in 1950. ‘Farms on which improvements were made lng this period were almost 100 acres larger '3: those making no improvement. The farm- data are incomplete; however, several of the i s in the “no improvement” category are rela- ely small 80 to 160-acre tracts. Possibly these f s were not improved in 1950-54 because the farm water supplies were more than ade- ‘te for the acreage irrigated and subsequent nges in the water supply have not reduced it 0nd the 1954 acreage needs. _, Tables 2, 3 and 4 relate to irrigated farms eloped before the 1950 crop year. Similar im- ‘vements were made on farms where irrigation '0 developed during 1950-54. Approximately 9 I ent of the farms on which irrigation was de- oped during the past 5 years installed addi- I: al wells, and 24 percent of all pumps installed Ethese farms were lowered. COST OF IMPROVEMENTS ‘ The wide differences in farm-to-farm costs A improvements during 1950-54 come primarily the number of wells installed and the total p; h of the distribution system. Some of the = erence was caused by changes in the installed ' of underground distribution systems. The rted per-foot cost of installed underground crete tile declined almost a third during 1950- i The average per-farm cost for the various Table 5. Average expenditures during 1950-54 for im- provements on irrigated farms developed before 1950 by type of improvement. Texas High Plains Average expenditure per Type of improvement “Imi-Il ' 41 Sandy eavy land land 5'6"’ Expenditure per farm making improvement“ $7.600 $5.664 $6.642 Expenditure per farm for: Additional wells only 5.024 6.110 5.336 Distribution system only‘ 4.540 2.400 4.234 Distribution system and additional wells* 8.440 11.049 8.788 Lowering pumps onl 1.049 383 574 Lowering pumps + a ditional wells 7.619 8.256 8.119 Lowering pumps + distribution system‘ 2.629 4.290 3.667 Lowering pumps + additional wells + distribution systemt 18.519 10.490 14.058 ‘Includes ASC payments for affected items; total cost of improvement. “Exclusive of Lynn and Terry counties. “Exclusive of natural gas line installation. ‘Underground concrete- tile and portable surface pipe; sprinkler systems not included. types of improvements alone and in combination is shown in Table 5. During 1950-54, approximately 85 percent of the operators of “old irrigated farms” averaged $6,642 per farm on capital improvements for maintenance and improvement of farm water sup- plies. Capital expenditures averaged $2,000 more per farm in the sandy-land area than in the heavy- land area. The average increase in irrigated acres per farm in the heavy-land area was 33.3; the average increase in the sandy-land area was 24.1 acres per farm. The total initial investment per farm on old farms is unknown. Table 5 shows capital ex- penditures above the initial development costs. Pump and engine replacement costs on pre-1950 wells are not included. The initial per-acre costs of developing irrigated farms during 1950-54 are shown in Table 6. The additional capital investment on old farms was slightly more than two-thirds of the total cost of developing a new irrigated farm dur- ing 1950-54. Additional capital investment in the sandy-land area closely approaches the 1950-54 cost of developing an irrigated farm. Because of the difference in farm size, per-acre development costs provide a better basis for comparison than total farm development costs. In the sandy-land area, which has a higher proportion of more ex- pensive improvements such as new wells and un- derground systems, the additional per-acre invest- ment cost on old farms was about 62 percent of Table 6. Capital investment in irrigation facilities, Texas High Plains. 1954 Average per farm 5132i’ H1313’ Area’ Item Farms developing irrigation during 1350-54: Investment (dollars) 702 00 ll.450.00 9,810.00 208.9 175.0 Acres irrigated (acres) 131.4 Investment per acre _ irrigated (dollars) 58.58 54.80 56.04 Farms developing irrigation prior to 19502: Additional investment (dollars) 1600.00 5.664.00 6,642.00 Acres irrigated 1949 (acres) 185.4 262.4 224.3 Acres irrigated 1954 (acres) 209.5 295.7 253.0 1949-54 increase in acres irrigated (acres) 24.1 33.3 28.7 Additional investment per acre irrigated. 1954 ollars) 36.27 19.15 26.25 ‘Exclusive of Lynn and Terry counties. ’Farms making improvements only. the 1950-54 development costs. In the heavy-land area, where underground distribution systems are fewer and less extensive and a higher proportion of pumps were lowered, the additional capital in- vestment per acre was about 35 percent of 1950- 54 development costs. Additional wells were installed on 55 percent of the old farms and on 9 percent of the farms developed during 1950-54 (Table 2). Redrilled or replaced wells are not included as additional wells. The average well cost per farm on old farms is shown in Table 5. The lower average well cost per farm in the sandy-land area shows the trend toward shallower wells and smaller, less expensive pumps. Declining water levels led to deeper pump settings and an increase in the aver- age well cost on old farms in the heavy-land area during 1952-54. The accelerated shift to smaller, less expen- sive pumps in the sandy-land area during 1952- 54 is shown by a 7.5 percent decrease from the 1950-51 well cost. The shift in pump size in the sandy-land area, where a higher proportion of new wells was installed, and the deeper initial pump settings on farms developed during 1950- 54 is reflected by the difference in cost between wells installed on old farms and those developed on new farms. For the whole area, the 1950-54 cost per well on old farms averaged $4,524; on new farms it averaged $5,283. Underground concrete tile or aluminum sur- face pipe distribution systems are relatively new on the High Plains. A few farms were equipped with underground systems in the late 1940’s. By the end of the 1954 crop season, 41 percent of the farms containing 45 percent of the irrigated acreage were wholly or partly equipped with clos- ed conduit distribution systems. In the sandy- “land area, 46 percent of the farms containing 54 percent of the irrigated acreage have underground or surface pipe distribution systems. In the heavy-land area, 37 percent of the farms and 40 percent of the irrigated acreage are equipped to some extent with underground distribution sys- tems. There is a wide range in the per-acre distri- bution system costs among farms. These differ- ences stem from (1) the extent to which a farm is equipped, (2) the topography and layout of the farm which affects the length and layout of the system and (3) the time of installation. The range in per-acre costs for the farms studied is from 8'6 cents on a heavy-land farm with only 300 feet of underground tile to $84.83 on a rather elaborately-equipped sandy-land farm. In the Table 7. Proportion oi pumps lowered, Texas High Plains. 1954 ‘Percenta e of umps lowered‘ Land type Pre-l95O farms I Post-IQSO farms Sandy land l9 l6 Heavy land 54 30 Area” 37 24 ‘Percentage of total wells on farms developed before 1950 and those developed in 1950-54. rExclusive of Lynn and Terry counties. 6 sandy-land area, the more common cost on farms with a complete or reasonably complete under- ground system is $30 to $40 per acre. Per-acre costs on heavy-land farms generally are lower than for sandy-land farms. The average per-acre expenditure for underground distribution sys- tems was $19.18 for the sandy land, $11.44 for the heavy land and $14.96 for the area, exclusive of Lynn and Terry counties. Declining water levels and reduced well per- formances have forced the lowering of pumps. This method of improving water supplies has been used to some extent since the beginning of» irrigation development, but it increased during 1950-54, particularly on farms in the heavy-land area. The proportion of farms on which pumps‘ were lowered is shown in Table 2. The propor-F tion of pumps lowered one or more times from the initial setting is shown in Table 7. Pumps usually were lowered 10 feet, but since 1952 the number of pumps lowered 20 and 30 feet has increased. The cost of lowering pumps per farm is shown in Table 5. The average cost of lowering an individual pump, exclusive of repair costs that might have been sustained while the pump was out of the well, ranges from $445 in » the heavy-land area to $587 in the sandy-land- area. The use of pumping plants fueled with nat- ural gas expanded considerably during 1950-54... About 15 percent of the farms included in the sur- vey were using natural gas by the end of the 1954 pumping season (Table 2). Natural gas main lines are more numerous in the heavy-land area; the proportion of farms using natural gas in this area is twice that of the sandy-land area (Table 2). . Where natural gas is used, the farmer must! furnish his own connecting lines. These lines, run from the well to a main line provided by the gas company, or to a service line provided by a group of farmers. The average expenditure per farm for natural gas lines was $1,864 during 1950- 54. The average cost per well was about $1,000. Because this expenditure reduces fuel costs but does not improve farm water supplies, it was ex l cluded from the tabulations in Tables 3, 4, 5 and 6. ' WATER COSTS. 1954 - Although 1954 butane prices averaged 1. cents (18.7 percent) lower than 1949 prices an, approximately 15 percent of the farms surveye were using natural gas for pumping, which is a cheaper fuel, the 1954 average water cost per acre was more than double the 1947-49 average- Increases in cost were caused by increased hour of pump operation, capital additions and a de: crease in the acres irrigated per well (Table 8, and Figure 2). The average rate of water use during 1947- 49 was .86 acre-feet per acre and pumping plants operated an average of 930 hours per season? Higher rates of water use and a longer irrigation‘ ion were required during the drouth and near- th conditions of 1950-54, particularly during last?» years (Figure 1). Water-use estimates .1954 indicate an average of 1.48 acre-feet per iwirrigated, a 72 percent increase over 1947-49 ' . \ 2 The average hours of pump operation in 1954 shown in Table 8. The 1954 average was f! hours, or 135 percent more than the 930 i- s of pump operation per season reported in . 7-49. The effects of increased hours of pump op- tion are shown in per-acre operating costs ble 8). Increased hours of plant operation not wholly responsible for the difference in ration costs between sandy-land and heavy- “d farms. Lower per-acre water costs on heavy farms are caused mainly by the greater use ; pumping plants fueled with natural gas and a ‘ger irrigated acreage per well. 5 The investment in irrigation facilities on V s developed during 1950-54 and the added gestment in facilities on farms developed be- f5 e 1950 are shown in Tables 5 and 6. Some of reasons for differences in the installed cost is. plant are discussed in the preceding section “Cost of Improvements.” Pre-1950 develop- ‘nt costs were not obtained in the 1955 survey. ‘ bases for calculating overhead costs on old s, an estimate of $4,500 per well was adopted -all wells developed before 1950. This esti- yte is slightly higher than the average cost re- ed in TAES Bulletin 745. A higher invest- fnt cost in pre-1950 wells was adopted to com- sate for the additional investment incurred “ough the lowering of pumps. “ q Assuming a pre-1950 development cost of 5,500 per plant, the 1954 average initial invest- __nt on old farms is $69.35 per acre on sandy- farms, $46.75 on heavy-land farms and ' 7.60 for the area, exclusive of Lynn and Terry nties. In the sandy-land area, the present -acre investment in irrigation facilities of all As is $10.77 greater on old farms than on those eloped during 1950-54 (Table 6). In the heavy- " area, where fewer new wells and less exten- é distribution systems have been installed, the sent initial investment is $8.05 per acre less old farms than on new farms. 4* Excepting the cost of natural gas lines, Table ?Tincludes the cost of all capital improvements de on the surveyed farms during 1950-54. The erage initial per-acre investment in irrigation ilities is based on the total cost of all facilities ided by the acres irrigated during 1954. These Qimates, both in Table 6 and the per-acre in- ‘tment costs, include the cost of farm distribu- systems. These systems provide some bene- p bv eliminating or reducing transmission loss- , The data on which this report is based do f provide sufficient information to determine benefits; consequently, neither the over- ‘d nor the operating costs of a farm distribu- Table 8. Average water cost per irrigated acre related to hours of operation and predominant soil textures. Texas High Plains. 1954 Land type opfllflflfllo, Overhead Operating Total 1954: — — — — Dollars — — — — S2233 1535‘ 513%.‘; Z135 ‘$3353 i333? leg-tics: average‘ 2.207 6.472 8.58" 15.05" Area average 930 3.25 3.81 7.067’ ‘Average for all types of plants. '-’Pre-l950 developments at an estimated cost of $4.500 per plant. “Does not include labor for plant attendance. "Exclusive of Lynn and Terry counties. “Based on data in Table ll. TAES Bulletin 745 and Table 3. TABS Bulletin 756. tion system are included in the costs in Table 8. Overhead costs in Table 8 include an allowance for depreciation, interest, taxes and insurance on the initial investment in wells and subsequent pump lowering costs for all wells used during the 1954 irrigation season. The effects of increased investment on per- acre water costs are shown by a comparison of the 1954 and 1947-49 overhead costs per acre (Table 8). For the farms surveyed, overhead costs, exclusive of those on farm distribution systems, increased almost 100 percent during 1950-54. The data in Bulletin 745 are not suffi- ciently detailed for determining overhead costs by major soil types during 1947-49. Because of the higher investment in new well developments and smaller irrigated acreages per well in the sandy-land area, overhead costs in this area are $2.31 per acre greater than in the heavy-land area. The number of acres irrigated per well in- fluences total water costs. The effect of acres irrigated per well is shown in Figure 2. Cost es- timates on which this figure is based are group averages of the per-acre water costs on all wells regardless of the fuel or type of power unit used. For the wells enumerated in this study, differ- ences in the acreage irrigated per well have a sim- 3O l“ C) Average, Lubbock J PRECIPITATION m mouse 6 _—l947 I948 I949 I950 I95! I952 I953 I954 WATER YEARS-BEGINNING SEPT. I Figure 2. Annual and average precipitation by water years. Lubbock and Plainview. Texas. 7 Hours of Average cost per irrigated acre‘ - Table 9. Irrigated and nonirrigated cotton and grain sorghum yields on sandy and heavy soils. 1947-49 average and, 1954. Texas High Plains Year 19471 536 278 2.305 1.055 492 196 2.498 1948 ‘ 402 106 2.272 606 415 73 2.598 289 19f‘ 460 296 2.609 1.513 476 295 2.636 1.271 v . 1947-49 1 466 227 2.395 1.058 461 188 2.585 1954 548 122 2.751 409 600 '-’ 3.224 ‘Abstracted irom Table 13. “Use ot Irrigation Water on the High Plains." TAES Bulletin 756. “None reported. ilar, although not necessarily the same, effect on per-acre water cost irrespective of type of fuel or equipment used. During 1954, the acres irri- gated per well ranged from 15 on a sandy-land farm to 600 on a heavy-land wheat and sorghum ‘farm. The acres irrigated per well averaged 95 142 in the heavy-land in the sandy-land area, exclusive of Lynn and area and 119 for the area, Terry counties. Per-acre water costs rise sharply once the acreage irrigated per well falls below 90 acres. Per-acre water costs on wells serving 30 acres or less are three times those for wells serving 71 to 90 acres and 4.5 times those for wells serving 151 to 170 acres. The increase in per-acre water cost is caused by an increase in per-acre invest- ment costs, as indicated by the rise in overhead costs (depreciation, interest, taxes and risk), and by greater hours of pump operation per acre, as indicated by the rise in operating costs (fuel, oil and repairs). During 1950-54 the acres irrigated per well declined 26 percent with 8 percent of the decline occurring between 1953 and 1954 (Table 1). Fig- ure 2 also indicates that a further decline in acres irrigated per well will increase per-acre water costs. CROP YIELDS. 1954 Yields of irrigated cotton and grain sorghum were higher in 1954 than in previous years. Dry- land cotton yields in the sandy-land area were up slightly over those of the preceding 3 years, but were considerably lower than those of 1947-49. Dryland grain sorghum yields in 1954 were less than half the 1947-49 average (Table 9). LYNN AND TERRY COUNTIES Most of the irrigation development in these counties has occurred since 1950 with a particu- _ Table 10. Acres irrigated and investment in irrigation facilities. Lynn and Terry counties. 1954 . Average Hem l Umt Lynn I Terry Acres irrigated per tarm Acres 134.0 266.4 Acres irrigated per well Acres 47.8 102.4 Pump operation Hours 3.213 2.158 Investment per acre in: ells Dols. 59.35 74.39 Surlace and underground pipe‘ Dols. 9.85 20.06 Sprinkler systemsl Dols. 7.222 37.89 Investment per irrigated Iarrn Dols. 9.l09.00 24.8l9.00 Investment per irrigated acre Dols. 67.97 93.16 ‘Investment per acre on larms so equipped. QOne small sprinkler system. 8 larly sharp increase beginning in 1953 and carry- ing on into early have been excluded from the comparison present- ed earlier in the report. Because of the newnes of these developments and the size and type of. equipment used, such comparisons are not valid» ent between the two counties. there is a predominance of small 4 to 5-inch an a few 3-inch pump-equipped wells. there is more than one well per farm. Wells a interconnected and water is rows through closed conduits, surface pipe. monly equipped with 8-inch pumps. ginning of the were equipped with sprinkler systems. ment in Lynn and Terry counties are shown i“ Table 10. cultural economists, Production Economics search Branch, Agricultural Research Servic U. S. Department of schedule and participated in the field work o this study. f f] 1955. Data for these counties Development conditions are radically differ- In Lynn county Generally delivered to the fur; usually aluminu 7 In Terry county, the wells are comi By the w" 1955 season, all the farms studie , >- Some details concerning irrigation develo_ ACKNOWLEDGMENTS A W. Herbert Brown and Wylie Goodsell, agri Agriculture, designed th LITERATURE CITED Leggat, E. R., “Development of Wells for Irrigati and Fluctuation of Water Levels in the High Plains .1 Texas to January 1951,” State Board of Water En neers Bulletin 5104, USGS and S. BWE, Nov. 1951. ' Compiled from various sources by W. L. Broadhu =~ chief hydrologist, High Plains Underground Wa . Conservation District No. 1, Lubbock, Texas. l Based on published and unpublished well measureme by the USGS Ground Water Division, and the Te State Board of Water Engineers. Leggat, E. R., “Summary of Ground-Water Develo ment in the Southern High Plains, Texas,” Bulle 5402, State Board of Water Engineers and USGS s operating, Feb. 1954. , Study reported in TAES Bulletins as follows: g Magee, A. C., et al, “Cost of Water for Irrigation on t g High Plains,” TAES Bulletin 745. Bonnen, C. A. et al, “Use of Irrigation Water on t, High Plains,’_’ TAES Bulletin 756. ' Magee, A. C., et al, “Production Practices for Irrigat Crops on the High Plains,” TAES Bulletin 763. - Bourns, Charles T., “Seepage Losses From Irrigati Ditches on the South Plains of Texas,” Texas Tec nological College, Lubbock, Texas, Feb. 1955. ' Magee, A. C., et al, “Cost of Water for Irrigation 0 ghe High Plains,” TAES Bulletin 745, Feb. 1952, Tab , page 7. ' _~, \