PROJECTED COSTS AND RETURNS FOR CRAWFISH AND CATFISH PRODUCTION IN LOUISIANA, 1997

Aquaculture production enterprises, like other farm enterprises, require advanced planning to make production and marketing management decisions that are likely to result in profits. The purpose of this report is to provide production cost estimates for selected aquaculture enterprises to assist aquaculture producers in making production decisions and obtain adequate financing. Aquaculture enterprises and their associated costs differ considerably among producers and resource situations. The projected costs presented here should not be interpreted as averages for producers in the industry. The purpose of the cost projections is to provide some guidelines whereby producers and others with an interest in aquaculture production costs can make cost estimates appropriate to their unique situation that will facilitate sound management decisions.Farm Management,

PROJECTED COSTS AND RETURNS FOR BEEF CATTLE, DAIRY, BROILER AND FORAGE CROP PRODUCTION IN LOUISIANA, 2001

This report presents projected costs and returns for beef cattle, dairy, broiler and forage crop production in Louisiana for 2001. Data for this report are based on Louisiana agricultural Experiment Station research results and selected surveys. The procedure used in this report was to apply new machinery and other current input price data to production practice data. This report is organized as follows: Tables 1 - 4 present forage requirements assumed for beef cattle production and summaries of costs and returns for each of the enterprises examined in this report. Tables 5 - 7 report breakeven selling prices for each of the products produced from these enterprises. Budgets in this publication are presented in two sections. The first section (tables with `A' designation) presents budgets showing a summary of estimated costs and returns for each enterprise. The second section (tables with `B' designation) presents cost budgets showing detailed costs and labor requirements by operation for each enterprise. The detailed cost budgets are presented in the same sequence and bear the same table numbers for each enterprise presented in the first section. For these enterprise budgets, expenses are itemized as fixed and variable, and returns above direct and total specified expenses are also calculated. Each of the budgets incorporates overhead costs as a residual claimant. The total overhead costs for a firm are related to tenure and size of business. The overhead costs included in this report are estimated on a per acre basis, and thus are included in enterprise budgets on a per acre of land use basis. Land use for beef and dairy is calculated as acres of open permanent pasture plus acres used for silage or summer annual forages. Since livestock enterprises are combinations of both crop and livestockproduction activities and some pasture crops are double cropped, particular attention is called to the accounting procedures used. No overhead is charged to forage production activities. Therefore, overhead costs appear directly as a residual cost in beef cattle and dairy enterprise budgets. Wintergrazed weanling calves do not include overhead charges since it is assumed that all wintergrazed crops would be double cropped on either pasture or cropland. Broiler budgets do not include overhead charges. A land opportunity cost is charged for livestock enterprises. This is interpreted as the amount that would be charged for the land if it were being rented to another producer. It assumes that pasture is rented at $15/acre. A land opportunity cost is not charged for broilers.Farm Management,

PROJECTED COSTS AND RETURNS FOR CRAWFISH AND CATFISH PRODUCTION IN LOUISIANA, 2001.

Aquaculture production enterprises, like other farm enterprises, require advanced planning to make production and marketing management decisions that are likely to result in profits. The purpose of this report is to provide production cost estimates for selected aquaculture enterprises to assist aquaculture producers in making production decisions and obtaining adequate financing. Aquaculture enterprises and their associated costs differ considerably among producers and resource situations. The projected costs presented here should not be interpreted as averages for producers in the industry. The purpose of the cost projections is to provide guidelines whereby producers and others with an interest in aquaculture production costs can make cost estimates appropriate to their unique situation that will facilitate sound management decisions. Data used in development of the budgets is a combination of information obtained directly from producers, Louisiana Cooperative Extension Service Specialists and Louisiana Agricultural Experiment Station Scientists. Current machinery and other input price data were combined with production practice data using the Microcomputer Enterprise Budget Generator developed at Mississippi State University. Fixed costs were estimated based on typical rates of use and sizes of operations. Production budget estimates are presented on a 'per acre' basis to facilitate using the estimates for different size operations. Overhead costs associated with operation of the farm business have been allocated as a residual claimant on a per acre basis in the enterprise budgets, but have not been included in the computation of breakeven selling prices.Farm Management,

PROJECTED COSTS AND RETURNS FOR BEEF CATTLE, DAIRY PRODUCTION, SWINE PRODUCTION AND FORAGE CROPS IN LOUISIANA, 1997

Data for this report are based on Louisiana Agricultural Experiment Station research results and selected surveys. The procedure used in this report was to apply new machinery and other current input price data to production practice data. Production practice and performance data for beef cattle and associated forage crops are based on surveys of beef cattle producers supplemented with research records for beef herds maintained at six branch stations of the Louisiana Agricultural Experiment Station.Production practice data for dairy production are based on unpublished survey data, Cooperative Extension Service recommendations and records from the LSU dairy herd.Farm Management,

PROJECTED CASH FLOWS AND PROFITABILITY FOR REPRESENTATIVE LOUISIANA FARMS, 2001.

Changes in commodity prices and input costs along with adjustments in capital structure significantly affect farm cash flow requirements and whole farm profitability. These changes coupled with crop yield and price variability increase the need for farm business cash flow and profitability planning on a whole farm basis. Planning for profits is expected to affect both the short and long run success of the business and cash flow planning is expected to allow the manager to establish farm business cash needs for a specified period of time (production period) so that cash commitments are met as they come due. Furthermore, agricultural lenders have become increasingly concerned with loan repayment capacity and are placing relatively more emphasis on cash flow analysis in the loan evaluation process. In general, farm managers who develop cash flow and profitability projections should find it easier to justify and to secure adequate financing for their businesses. The purpose of this report is to supplement the series of annual cost projections for enterprises by providing profitability and cash flow projections for several whole farm situations throughout the state. Whole farm projections of returns and expenses are expected to provide information regarding the relative profitability of individual farming situations throughout the state. Estimates from cash flow projections provide information concerning the timing of cash flows and the distribution of cash flows for individual farm situations and comparison of estimates for these situations provide an indication of the relative cash flow positions of farms across the state. These projections are expected to be of value to farmers, agricultural credit agencies, extension personnel, researchers, and other professionals with an interest in the agricultural production industry. This report is organized into three general parts. Data sources and procedures used in the study are presented in the first section. In the second section, projected income and cash flow statements for representative farms in major crop producing areas of the state are presented and discussed. The final section summarizes the financial projections for representative farms considered in the study.Farm Management,

PROJECTED CASH FLOWS AND PROFITABILITY FOR REPRESENTATIVE LOUISIANA FARMS, 1997

The purpose of this report is to supplement the series of annual cost projections for enterprises by providing profitability and cash flow projections for several whole farm situations throughout the state. Whole farm projections of returns and expenses are expected to provide information regarding the relative profitability of individual farming situations throughout the state. Estimates from cash flow projections provide information concerning the timing of cash flows and the distribution of cash flows for individual farm situations and comparison of estimates for these situations provide an indication of the relative cash flow positions of farms across the state. These projections are expected to be of value to farmers, agricultural credit agencies, extension personnel, researchers, and other professionals with an interest in the agricultural production industry.Agricultural Finance, Farm Management,

Heisenberg and Modular Invariance of N=2 Conformal Field Theory

We present a theta function representation of the twisted characters for the rational N=2 superconformal field theory, and discuss the Jacobi-form like functional properties of these characters for a fixed central charge under the action of a finite Heisenberg group and modular transformations.Comment: 21 pages, Latex, 1 figure; minor typos corrected--Journal versio

Biogeography of a changing landscape: Pipidinny Swamp, Yanchep National Park Western Australia

The resources of Pipidinny Swamp were utilised by the Nyoongar Aboriginal people for possibly 40,000 years. Since the late 1800s, the resources of Pipidinny Swamp were used by non-Indigenous settlers. More recently, the wetland was incorporated in the Yanchep National Park in 1991.This study sought to reconstruct the changes to the natural and cultural environments within the wetland to provide background knowledge for the management board of the Park. Field investigations abo demonstrated the dynamic state of the wetland over a six-month period between low water (Feb-Apr) and high water (Aug-Oct) by monitoring the groundwater system, the vegetation system, and the waterbird system. In addition, historical records relating to Pipidinny Swamp (mainly water level and waterbirds) were analysed to show the dynamic state of the wetland over several decades. This study found that Pipidinny Swamp has been highly modified and severely degraded apparently due to past human activities. In the last decade, there has been a dramatic decrease in both the wetland\u27s water level, as well as waterbird abundance and diversity. Furthermore, there has been an increase in the number of exotic vegetation species since market gardening commenced in the 1950\u27s. Such information will be useful to the Management Board of the Yanchep National Park to establish a database on both the cultural and natural environments of Pipidinny Swamp, and for development of future management plans for the wetland. The techniques adopted in this study also have broader applications for the management of other wetland habitats and areas of remnant bushland

Case Studies of Strategic Alliances in Southeastern Beef Production

Three calf marketing and three commercial beef carcass strategic alliances were examined via case study to determine alliance structure and whether each addressed risk, transaction costs, capital availability, and other concerns. The alliances reduced transaction costs and increased information flow among segments, but did not specifically address risk.Livestock Production/Industries,