RSS 1.0Farm & Ranch Management
ABOUT THE COLLECTION
University of Arizona Cooperative Extension faculty from the Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics develop farm budgets and a variety of tools and templates to assist with budgeting and decision-making for farming and ranching enterprises. This information is useful not only to producers for short- and long-term planning and decision-making for their agricultural enterprises, but is of interest to researchers, policy makers, financial institutions, and others that would like more specific information about farm and ranch management. This collection includes both historical and current publications.
QUESTIONS?
Visit College of Agriculture, Life & Environmental Sciences Publications at https://extension.arizona.edu/educational-materials.
Recent Submissions
-
Cost and Return Estimates for Cow/Calf Ranches in Five Regions of ArizonaThe dependency of Arizona ranchers on federal lands has been well documented. Mayes and Archer (1982) estimated that public and state grazing lands outside of the Indian reservations account for 85% of the total grazing land in Arizona. The partnership between private ranchers, state lands, and the federal government comes with many complex factors that influence the cost of doing business both in terms of variable costs and fixed costs. Not only are the regulations, fees, and enforcement of regulations a challenge for managing mixed land ownership, but additional costs from vandalism, theft, and daily disruptions of operations add to the normal operating expenses (Ruyle et al., 2000). Ownership and maintenance of range improvements, such as wells, spring development, and dirt tanks, etc., is also complicated by the rangeland ownership mix. This study is designed to examine the cost of ranching in various areas in Arizona and how different production costs can be throughout the state.
-
Cash Flow Analysis WorksheetsThese spreadsheet templates can be used to generate budget information customized to your operation on an operating or cash cost basis only (fixed costs are not included).
-
Cotton Management Economic Notes, Volume 8, No. 1USDA's Risk Management Agency (RMA) announced last fall that cotton insurance rates would be recalculated for the 2000 crop year, resulting in a general lowering of rates for the West and MidSouth. RMA stated that, "rate changes have been adjusted to account for historically low producer participation in these regions." This adjustment has resulted in a fairly significant lowering of insurance premiums for most, but not all of Arizona's counties. The accompanying table illustrates the percentage change in rates for a "midlevel" policy by county from 1999 to 2000 for Upland and ELS. That is, rate changes assume a rate class of R07 (e.g., insured yield of 1,223-1,339 lbs. for Maricopa Upland) and 65 percent basic yield coverage level. Rate changes are before any government discounts.
-
Cotton Management Economic Notes, Volume 7, No. 4Unusually low cotton prices face Arizona’s farmers as they head into the 1999/2000 marketing year, sparking interest in government policies to raise farm incomes. By mid-October, Congress responded to low prices for many commodities by increasing subsidies across the farm sector, including cotton. Cotton industry watchers expect President Clinton to sign the legislation into law the week of October 18.
-
Cotton Management Economic Notes, Volume 7, No. 3Crop maturity, insect pressures, water costs, and market factors all need to be considered in deciding on the final irrigation. Low lint prices and a steep discount for high micronaire are two important market factors for this year's termination decision. To address this issue, yield and lint quality measures from prior irrigation termination studies were pricedaccording to current premium/discount schedules.
-
Cotton Management Economic Notes, Volume 7, No. 1On January 8, 1999 Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman announced an estimated 30% premium reduction for producers from previous premium rates that were also subsidized. This reduction plus the newly available Crop Revenue Coverage (CRC), which has benefits if prices increase at harvest, means that everyone should probably change their current policy before the sales closing date of February 28, 1999. Contact your local Farm Service Agency for their most current list of sales agents available for your area. In short, some have described the situation as “freedom to farm has become freedom to insure.”
-
Cotton Management Economic Notes, Volume 7, No. 2In 1997, U.S. consumers purchased $561 billion dollars of food products produced by what is known as the agribusiness sector of our economy. Agribusiness is often described as including firms that: a) provide inputs for production agriculture, b) produce raw commodities on the farm or ranch, and c) transform raw agricultural commodities to consumer ready goods. The accompanying figure (see reverse) illustrates how these three agribusiness areas contributed to the value of total food expenditures from 1950 to 1997.
-
Cotton Management Economic Notes, Volume 6, No. 1The decision of when to initiate irrigation termination for Upland cotton continues to be debated. Wide variations in yield changes from one season to the next, new technologies, uncertain lint prices, and changes in lint quality from "extending the season" make the irrigation termination decision difficult.
-
Cotton Management Economic Notes, Volume 5, No. 4In a State that relies entirely on irrigation water for cotton production, crop insurance may seem like a poor investment. Afterall, drought and heat related crop losses account for 47% of all crop loss insurance claims in the US. Followed by 22% for excess moisture, 13% for cold/ frost, 9% for hail damage, 3% for diseases, 2% for wind, 2% for flood, and 1% for insect damage. But is rolling the dice a wise practice, even if the odds of having a production wreck are low?
-
Cotton Management Economic Notes, Volume 5, No. 3The decision of when to terminate continues to be an issue of debate. With many fields relatively clean of insect pressure the temptation to extend the season is great. But do prices and added expenses warrant extending the season?
-
Cotton Management Economic Notes, Volume 4, No. 6A prior issue of this Newsletter discussed the Internet and cotton information available that is available automatically through Email. The World Wide Web (WWW) is more powerful than Email since formatted text, graphics, and pictures are available for viewing or printing with the simple point and click interface of a mouse. Simple text is all that can be viewed or printed with Email.
-
Cotton Management Economic Notes, Volume 5, No. 1Farmers who participated in the federal wheat, cotton or feed grain programs during any one of the last 5 years can enroll in the new program for 1996. Signup will be available from 20 May through 12 July. Most of Arizona’s commercial farmers will be eligible and should find participation in the new program to their benefit with fewer strings attached to payments.
-
Cotton Management Economic Notes, Volume 5, No. 2Supply and Demand Report (USDA) on June 12 project 96/97 world ending stocks at 35 million bales, up 1.33 million bales from the estimate for May. China’s 1995 crop estimate was revised upward by 6% to reach 21.9 million bales. This revision accounts for most of the increase in ending stocks for the 1996/97 season.
-
Cotton Management Economic Notes, Volume 4, No. 5The August 11 US and World Supply and Demand Report forecasts another record for US crop production at 21.81 million bales, up 11 percent from last year. The August crop report carries more weight than prior yield estimates since it is the first report of the year in which an objective yield survey of boll counts is combined with a crop condition score. Production was estimated 300,000 bales more or 1 percent higher than in the July report. The August estimate is 4 percent higher than USDA's June estimate. Every region is anticipating a larger crop this year with Southeastern States' post the largest gain of almost 1 million bales or a 27 percent increase. Increases for other regions are near 7 to 8 percent above 1994 production.
