absolutely right hobby,
That is a trade off ....... 200 bu corn(where water exists) as opposed to 60-70 bu beans. That is 1/3 the production at 80% of the cost ---- ................................
Not worth the math..... the real problem is that we are playing hammer the mole with Federal subsidies that are seldom well thought out. We try to meet the goals of the totally uninformed fools that redefine the term "science" and ......... well lets just say "think they can Wag the dog". Goals based on bogus theory and impossible climate hoax.
Lets just stay with market analysis of someone who is willing to say no to pressure...... and plant what the prices tell us to .
That may be continuing corn in Iowa where water is delivered cheaply and moving on to a different choice in the high risk high plains.
DC is leading us to slaughter..... after the fleecing. Lets just take this back to local thinking for local needs.
For too long agriculture has been falling into the global planning pot roast theory and thinking their borrowed money is real. It is not.
