California's Biggest Cash Crop And if there were a set of regulations to legitimize the production and sale of this naturally occuring weed, then we wouldn't have this problem. But we do have small problems like that, in addition to much larger problems involving overcrowded jails, increased crime, and large scale embedded infrastructure that costs upwards of $50 billion a year in tax dollars.The War On Drugs has never impeded any flow or usage in this country, something that rarely finds its way into the news. If drugs were legalized and regulated, I still wouldn't use them. I don't even take aspirin. But the fact that California's annual $14 billion cash crop of illegal marijuana surpasses every other crop legitimately grown in that state really ought to tell you something very important and very basic... there are enough people making so much money on illegal drugs in this country that it would be a real blow to all of them if these commodities were suddenly legalized and regulated.  When alcohol was illegal, there was a huge increase in crime in this country. Many people were killed over it, and innocently uninvolved citizens also got caught up the crossfire... just like they do now because of illegal drug activity.How many criminals are there involved in the alcohol trade, now that it's legal and regulated? Mandating a prohibition against the production, distribution, sale, or use of any world-wide commodity does only one thing. It makes that commodity far more valuable than it ever could've possibly been otherwise. As a horrific side effect, it also dramatically increases criminal activity involved with it. There is a vested interest in this country to continue the status quo. If drugs were legalized and regulated, billions of dollars in tax revenue could be freed up, but that eventuality would mean that police budgets would go down, along with all the other local, state, and federal infrastructure and organization devoted to enforcing the current laws, and processing those arrested. Defending against the heightened criminal activity is great for the private security business, too. I can be just as NIMBY about local efforts to cut down on dangerous criminal activity in Worcester as anyone else. But these problems are endemic to the nation, and they stem directly from the criminalization of commodities that, world-wide, can never be realistically expected to disappear. Only one thing can ever affect their flow, and that's the prospect of removing their artificially inflated value. All other efforts have been constantly demonstrated to have absolutely no effect at all.
|
Field Crops | |
 | Tobacco has historically been the major cash crop in North Carolina and remains one of the state's most predominant farm commodities. North Carolina produces almost three-quarters of the flue-cured tobacco grown in the United States. In 1939, the State harvested the record high number of acres of 851,000 acres. Tobacco remains one of North Carolina's most profitable crops and a substantial contributor to the value of farm production. Increased pressure on tobacco and the removal of the tobacco quota system will continue to prompt Tar Heel farmers to diversify and seek alternative crops. |
 | Cotton was once "king" in North Carolina, and until 1919 the value of cotton exceeded all other commodities in the state. Cotton acreage planted reached a high of 1.8 million acres in 1926. In 1978, cotton acreage reached a low of only 42,000 acres. Insect problems and the increase of synthetic fibers contributed to the decline of cotton. The boll weevil was the major pest affecting the decline of cotton production. North Carolina initiated an intensive effort to eradicate the boll weevil, and in 1987 the boll weevil was formally eradicated. The eradication of the boll weevil and increased world demand for cotton renewed interest in cotton production in North Carolina. |
 | Soybeans became an important crop in North Carolina around 1924 when about 75,000 acres were harvested. Acreage peaked in 1982 with 2.1 million acres. With the increased demand for bio-fuels and livestock feed rations, soybeans remain an important commodity in the State. |
 | Corn has been produced in most of North Carolina throughout history. Estimates of production started in 1866, when 1.675 million acres were planted with an average yield of only 9.5 bushels per acre. Corn acreage peaked in 1899 with 2.72 million acres planted, and has continued to decrease since that date. North Carolina's livestock industry uses more corn than is produced in the state. Therefore, livestock producers import corn from surrounding and Midwest states. |
 | North Carolina peanut farmers produce some of the best peanuts in the world, ranking first in the production of the large kernel Virginia-type cocktail peanut. The vast majority of peanuts in North Carolina are raised in the northeast and southeast areas of the State. The State harvested the peak number of acres in 1945 with 320,000 acres. Most of North Carolina's peanuts are consumed "out-of-hand," as cocktail peanuts, instead of crushed into peanut butter or incorporated into candies. Peanuts are one of the most significant agricultural crops in North Carolina
|
 | The wheat produced in North Carolina is winter wheat. Unlike most crops, wheat is planted in the fall and harvested in June. This allows farmers to plant another crop on the same acreage after the wheat has been harvested. The process of growing two crops on the same acreage is referred to as "double cropping". The second crop to follow wheat is usually soybeans. Wheat is also used as a cover crop for acreage intended for tobacco. The cover crop protects the soil from erosion throughout the winter, and then is plowed under providing nutrients for the tobacco crop. |
Process description
The present data refer to production on five typical Cash Crops farms in 2000, which combines dairy and (cash) crop production in a mixed farming system. Nitrogen balances for different cash crop farms can be seen here. The main characteristics of the eight farms are summarized in Table 1.
Table 1: Main characteristics of the considered dairy farms.
Soil type | Loamy (clay) | Sandy | ||||
| Farmtype | 2 | 3 | 11 | 15 | 24 | |
Main product | Sugar beets | Grass seed | Cereals | Potatoes | Cereals | |
Land area, total (ha) | 78 | 105 | 68 | 94 | 76 | |
| Percent per total land area | Spring barley | 26% | 15% | 22% | 28% | 28% |
| Wheat | 31% | 37% | 39% | 11% | 26% | |
| Other cereals | 3% | 3% | 11% | 10% | 11% | |
| Potatoes | 0% | 0% | 1% | 26% | 1% | |
| Seed | 5% | 22% | 2% | 2% | 6% | |
| Sugar beet | 22% | 2% | 1% | 0% | 1% | |
| Others1) | 14% | 20% | 24% | 23% | 29% | |
| ton crop yield per ha | Winter wheat | 86.3 | 80.3 | 75.1 | 59.3 | 64.0 |
| Spring barley | 61.8 | 59.4 | 53.6 | 46.0 | 45.7 | |
| Potatoes | 306.3 | 296.4 | 292.2 | 281.7 | 340.5 | |
| Grass seed | 11.2 | 10.8 | 8.9 | 11.5 | 8.8 | |
| Sugar beet | 559.9 | 535.6 | 537.5 | 460.5 | 506.2 | |
| Rape seed | 30.4 | 31.7 | 28.8 | 19.6 | 18.2 | |
Data collection:
All Danish farms are obliged to keep detailed records of purchases and sales for tax purposes and the yearly accounts are made with professional help. A representative set of these accounts, 2138, are reported by the advisors to the Danish Research Institute of Food Economics (FØI) and constitute the basic empirical input to the farm types presented here. Besides the economical data, information on the land use, livestock numbers and amounts produced are included in the data set by the advisors.
Data from other sources are used to model the technical processes: Data from the advisory services (feeding and grazing practices), the Directorate for Food, Fisheries and Agri-business, and Statistic Denmark (countrywide use of fertilizer and concentrates, partition of land use on different crops and their total yields). The Danish Institute of Agricultural Sciences (DIAS) together with FØI and Statistic Denmark is responsible for data collection.
Data treatment:
coffee beans
Coffee beans ripening in the Blue Mountains, Jamaica. Coffee was first imported to Jamaica in 1728 and rapidly gained importance as a cash crop. The unique soil of the Blue Mountains region produces a quality of coffee which has gained a reputation among connoisseurs as one of the best in the world.The data processing and details of the different farm types is the responsibility of DIAS and FØI. The FØI checks the account data and has divided the accounts according to the farm typology presented. These average data from each farm type has been used by DIAS to model a typical farm in terms of land use, herd size and production. All resource use, inputs, production and emissions is calculated using the farm level as the main unit and all the single enterprises have been described so that they fit coherently into the overall farm balances (e.g. crop production must fit the sum of homegrown feed used and exported). Thus, inputs of fertilizer, feeds and minerals are calculated to mach the livestock and cash crop production after correction for home grown feed (see also under validation).
The nutrient turnover on the farm is calculated by multiplying the physical turnover of inputs and products with N and P contents following standard procedures. Emissions of ammonia, methane and nitrous oxide (N20) from the livestock, stables, manure storage and handling and from crop residues and soil are calculated using standard coefficients (IPCC, 2000) on the amounts of nutrients and feed dry matter (DM).
Direct energy use is determined by the use of a model that attaches diesel use to field operations following Dalgaard et al. (2000).
Technical scope
The Inventory includes all processes on the farm necessary for the cultivation and preservation of crops and home-produced fodder (e.g. soil preparation, sowing, fertilizing/manuring, plant protection, harvesting, making silage and transport of crops).
Resource use and emissions related to the production of fertilizer, imported feeds, minerals and electricity are handled as external processes described separately.
Pesticide use is not included in the first version. Resource use and emissions related to the construction and maintenance of buildings and machinery used on the farm is not included.
Representativity
The dataset of 2138 accounts used is statistically representative of the Danish farming sector (50000 farms in total) following a method developed over several decades for yearly economical analysis of Danish farms (FØI) and for reporting to other bodies like the EU Farm Accountancy Data Network. In order to secure representativity within the established typology only farm types that could be described by at least 14 accounts from the sample were allowed for the basic products. Moreover, a given farm could be included in only one type depending on the main enterprise. The data represent only one year (2000), but the large number of farms allows for some generalizations of the input-output relationships.
The present dairy farm types are based on 8 sub samples. Together they represent all Danish dairy farms with a maximum of 10% of Gross Margin from pig production. The total milk production on these types account for 85% of the total milk produced in Denmark. The farms have been divided into groups in order to represent dairy production on sandy and loamy soil types respectively and with different stocking rates (number of standard livestock units per hectare). Two separate types represent organic dairy farms. Farms with low or medium stocking rates usually produce 1-3 secondary products, which may differ from farm to farm. The resulting farm type thus represents an average of these secondary enterprises, but the number of small enterprises is not typical for a single farm.
The representativity of the farm accounts has been checked using standard methodology at FØI. The resource use and production on the farms have been validated at two levels: Internal coherence within each farm type and overall coherence between the sum of farm types and national level input use and production.
On the farm level the quantification of each type has been validated primarily by checking the coherence between land use, crop yields and livestock production (e.g. the feed needed for the herd matches the home-produced feed plus imported feeds less sold cash crops and the sum of homegrown feeds and sold crops fits the land use).
At a higher hierarchical level the land use has been validated by comparing the sum of each crop acreage over all types with national statistics for the same year, e.g. checking that the total wheat area and total wheat yield does not differ more than a few % from the national statistics.
Likewise, the total estimated use of inputs like diesel, fertilizer and concentrated feeds across all farm types have been checked against statistical information on national level. In case of differences that could not be ascribed to an error in a specific type, a general correction factor was multiplied into all types for the relevant input item.
Inputs and outputs
Inputs and outputs associated with production processes at eight different types of diary farms. Data are provided per farm per year.
| | Soil type | Loamy (clay) | Sandy | |||
| | Stocking rate | 2 | 3 | 11 | 15 | 24 |
| Products | ||||||
| Spring barley | ton | 0 | 0 | 78.4 | 8.1 | 88.7 |
| Winter barley | ton | 9.2 | 12.9 | 23.5 | 12.6 | 13.8 |
| Bread wheat | ton | 133.6 | 204.3 | 128.7 | 39.8 | 80.3 |
| Wheat | ton | 71.9 | 110.0 | 69.3 | 21.4 | 43.2 |
| Oat | ton | 0.410 | 1.3 | 8.2 | 2.6 | 1.7 |
| Rye | ton | 2.1 | 0 | 10.1 | 28.2 | 23.5 |
| Rape seed | ton | 2.5 | 21.1 | 16.6 | 4.1 | 12.0 |
| Grass seed | ton | 3.6 | 21.1 | 1.0 | 2.1 | 3.5 |
| Clover seed | ton | 0 | 0.7 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Peas | ton | 3.8 | 14.8 | 5.7 | 7.2 | 11.6 |
| Potatoes | ton | 8.3 | 13.3 | 10.5 | 691.9 | 14.3 |
| Sugar beet | ton | 937.2 | 111.9 | 51.6 | 6.9 | 31.9 |
| Milk-ECM | ton | 45.6 | 9.0 | 0 | 70.4 | 0 |
| Straw | ton | 53.1 | 78.8 | 65.9 | 20.3 | 27.7 |
| Beef meat | ton | 2.0 | 1.3 | 0.6 | 5.6 | 2.1 |
| Pork meat | ton | 44.6 | 44.8 | 0.8 | 37.9 | 0.6 |
| | | |||||
| Materials/fuels | | |||||
| Spring barley | ton | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Soy meal | ton | 37.6 | 23.0 | 0.9 | 29.8 | 0.2 |
| Rape seed meal | ton | 0 | ||||
| Lubricant Oil | liter | 1090 | 1261 | 1209 | 1209 | 806 |
| Manure | kg N | 481 | 710 | 1076 | 1538 | 1246 |
| Fertilizer , Calcium ammonium nitrate | kg N | 8541 | 12603 | 9227 | 10395 | 8423 |
| Fertilizer P | kg P | 798 | 1268 | 1010 | 925 | 1037 |
| Fertilizer K | kg K | 3887 | 4874 | 3625 | 5138 | 3777 |
| P, Mineral Feed | kg P | 341 | 281 | 9 | 293 | 23 |
| | | |||||
| Electricity/heat | | |||||
| Electricity Denmark | kWh | 25438 | 29880 | 12036 | 42028 | 14273 |
| Heating | MJ | 34241 | 24126 | 22750 | 22750 | 252 |
| Traction | MJ | 383634 | 443872 | 425428 | 425428 | 283652 |
| | | |||||
| Emissions to air | | |||||
| Methane | kg CH4 | 1614 | 877 | 198 | 2446 | 248 |
| Ammonia | kg NH3 | 1855 | 1865 | 942 | 2112 | 955 |
| N2O | Kg N2O | 383 | 530 | 388 | 702 | 459 |
| | | |||||
| Emissions to water | | |||||
| Nitrate | kg NO3 | 8044 | 15904 | 14370 | 35200 | 24578 |
| Phosphate | kg P | 23 | 43 | 31 | 77 | 53 |
| | | |||||
| Emissions to soil | | |||||
| Carbon | kg C | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| | | |||||
| Non material emissions | | |||||
| Arable land use | ha a | 78 | 105 | 68 | 94 | 76 |
No comments:
Post a Comment