if you think mechanized is the way to go, what brand do you recommend? zimmatic? reinke? valmont?
early research (and the opinion of the sales people) suggests that mechanized will "pay for itself" in 5-7 years through higher yields.... anyone have any thoughts on that?
thanks in advance for all your help!
Soil type?
How does the land lay?
Added - what type of water source do you have? How do you pump it?
As i understand it, only 14% of US cropland is irrigated. I am surprised at how low that number is... I get it - there is nothing like mother nature in terms of a low cost solution to get water to crops - but it also seems like mother nature is increasingly unpredictable, and one drought would justify installing an irrigation system? for those of you that do not have an irrigation system, do you think you ever will? or do you think at this point most land that needs to be irrigated is?
and among the land that is irrigated, more than a third of it is just gravity flow. my understanding is that more targeted irrigation that can be adjusted on the fly saves money (reduces fertilizer cost b/c you don't end up washing away your fert) and increases yield (plants get exactly how much they need, when they need it). these 2 factors seem like they would make an irrigation system worth the investment?
in terms of mechanical irrigation, any opinions on lindsay - zimmatic vs reinke vs valley?
any thoughts appreciated from those that are boots on the ground. thanks in advance
Most have center pivot systems but there are some traveling gun systems left. The water table is fairly shallow so wells aren't prohibitively expensive. Most are Reinke pivots. They've been adding stop bars lately after some malfunctions caused pivots to swing through yards and across roads.
Lots of the land is under contract for vegetables, mostly sweet corn and peas.
When I worked for the Soil Conservation Service in Wyoming many years ago the potato and beet farmers all had center pivots and they used them all the time.
On the surface it sounds like if only 14% of land is irrigated there should be alot of future growth in irrigation, but as noted above, some of this land (alot of this land?) maybe never needs to be irrigated so maybe there isn't that much growth.
Of the land that is gravity irrigated, it sounds like that could still be opportunity for mech though? My understanding is that gravity is more labor intensive, and with changes to immigration laws maybe coming, maybe labor gets harder to find and more expensive?
like i said earlier, if you believe the salesmen at the zimmatic etc distributor the product pays for itself in a few years through higher yields (especially in a drought year), but that sounds kinda like asking the barber if you need a haircut.
has anyone out there put in a mech system, and if yes, do you feel like it was definitely worth it? is there anyone out there who thinks there is just no need for a mech system?
thanks again guys
1. Future growth for our area is about saturated. We are already much higher percentage of irrigated crop land. If water is available it is irrigated.
2. Land here is between 85 and 90 percent center pivot vs. gravity and I predict near 100 percent in the next few years as regulations on water laws are passed. A typical year here requires 18+ acre inches with gravity and 10 with center pivot which is close to a 50 percent savings of water.
3. Center pivots will pay for themselves in a few years depending on annual rainfall during those given years. Also keep in mind on row crops you will plant a lot higher seed population per acre increasing yield vs. dry land. Of course I'm biased since I am a T-L center pivot dealer but my customers give me an idea of true bottom line savings that their equipment gives them.
4. Not sure of your last question but if it's about pivot vs. gravity I think the labor and water savings are very important in the decision between the two. As mentioned earlier water savings will become critical as legislation is passed on water.
dman - thanks very much for your thoughts. it is interesting you mentioned NE - from what i can tell, that is where center pivot was invented, and culturally it is very much an accepted part of farming. Penetration in NE is very high as you mentioned. Part of what I have been wondering is if the penetration levels in NE can be matched in other parts of the country. for example, in CA center pivot is relatively uncommon from what i can tell.
As LINK mentioned, that is likely tied to the cost of install and availability of water, not just the farming culture which of course makes sense. However, as DMAN said, the water savings are significant, so in a place like CA where their are persistent drought problems, even if drilling and setup cost more, i'd think that center pivot might make sense - or even become necessary as water conservation laws change.
dman - you mentioned you're a dealer - do you mind if i ask how much of your business is maintenance/replacement? From what I can tell, these units have about a 20 year life. I assume that if you weren't doing a fair amount of maintenance and replacement you'd have a lot of free time on your hands... One thing I am thinking about is that a few years ago when corn prices were through the roof most people who want center pivot probably got it.... now there are another 15 or 17 years or something until those people will need to replace their systems. does that sound right?
thanks again for all your thoughts. very helpful.