Re: Kevorkian Economics- long -- Stuck using chemicals

["Jory Shelton" <jory@novell.uidaho.edu>]

Sorry Bob,

I sent this before I completed the thought.

The average for the county may increase from 50+ to 60+ bushels 
per acre, but actual field yields get closer to 100 bushels per acre 
(this is in my personal experience, on our land - the average may 
very well be in the 60s).

However, another factor that needs to be taken into account is the 
use of seed that has been bred to provide higher yields.  Is there an 
agronomist out there that can shed a little light on the differences 
in yield based on the seed used between 1950 and today?  I'd be 
willing to bet that just as much is due to seed improvement as 
fertilizers and pesticides, however that seed improvement may be 
heavily dependent on those chemicals <IMHO>.

Hmm, maybe a test plot is order next fall...

-Jory

> >With the current price of grain, you cannot meet your expenses
> >(seed, equipment, fuel, wages, and especially property taxes) on
> >52 bushels per acre.
> 
> But if you spend $100 dollars on chemicals, and it only increases your 
> yield by $50 dollars (speculative numbers), how does that bring you ahead?

Jory Shelton
PC Network Specialist
College of Forestry, Wildlife, and Range Sciences
University of Idaho