Should farmers continue Irrigating ou...

Should farmers continue Irrigating out of Lugert?

Created by Bass Master on Jul 24, 2009

475 votes

Click on an option to vote

Yes

No

Maybe for a few more years

tom

Lubbock, TX

#174 Jun 3, 2013
no
JimBob

United States

#175 Jun 4, 2013
jack wrote:
40 farmers make money off the lake, what used to be one MILLION tourists spending money there and the local businesses no longer come..
so, which would benefit the local econonmy more, 40 farmers and the minimum wage illegals they hire, or one MILLION tourists supporting local hotels, restuarants ect in the local economy??
The local cotton farmers have had a free ride for years. They have ruined the lake that was built for THEM. They are piss-poor stewards of what was built and essentially given to them.

I say take the lake away from them, take the crop subsidies away, take the crop insurance away from them, and save the taxpayers millions of dollars spent subsidizing a crop where subsidies are no longer needed or warranted!
Jimmy Joe

United States

#176 Feb 1, 2014
JimBob nailed it!
theothrfarmer

Altus, OK

#177 Feb 11, 2014
Sadly the dozen guys that control all that water are too powerful. Hell, the same cotton big-brother gov fools got a law passed to make it illegal here in Jackson county for us ranchers to spray chemical to kill mesquite trees during optimal time. But we cant restrict anything they spray. It's insane how much they are controlling.

It also was such a waste building all those arts buidings,hotel, etc up there with tax payers money.

With water being so critically low around here one would think some compromise would be in order.
JimBob

United States

#178 Apr 1, 2014
Was through Jackson County not too long ago. Looked to me like since they have ruined the lake and can't irrigate anymore, they have resorted to planting wheat, insuring it and hoping it will come up and then fail so they can make their profit on the crop insurance! Screw a few farm laborers along the way and, hot damn we're on our way to a cash crop! Yeehaw!
Ralph

Elk City, OK

#179 Apr 2, 2014
The lake is beyond words, but not repair. Sadly, the irrigation district is not going to do a thing about the sedimentaion in the lake bed. They are not going to do anything about the trees growing in the lake. They will not address any of the issues that plague the problems tht got us to where we are today. They do spend money to make sure water deliveries can be made through their dirt canals and laterals (provided they have water). The lake has not flowed over the spillway since 2007. This will be the 4th year no water has been available for irrigation. Insurance companies have stated they will pay irrigation prices again this year, if the crop is planted with the intent to water. The fleecing of America folks, right here at home............
JimBob

United States

#180 Apr 2, 2014
You betcha, Ralph. These cotton boys have fleeced the old taxpayers thru the crop subsidies and the crop insurance. The insurance companies are a conduit for tax money, i.e. legal money launderers!

You gotta hand it to em'- they have fleeced the taxpayers even more than the welfare crowd with the politicians shoveling it out faster than it can be made.
Thirsty fish

Elk City, OK

#181 Apr 3, 2014
Behind the scenes, the irrigation district errupted into an enthusiastic celebration when golden algae killed the fish. They thought it would be the last cry from people who enjoy the lake for other things besides irrigating cotton. They were wrong!!!!
JimBob

United States

#182 May 8, 2014
Google - Wells Run Dry During Irrigation Season - to see that Jackson County isn't the only place home to greedy cotton farmers. Their ' irrigate til it's all gone mentality' and 'to hell with everyone else attitude' is pervasive'.

As the article reads, Lubbock area cotton farmers are of the same ilk as those around here. Sad, sad, sad goings on!

Since: Jun 14

United States

#183 Jun 1, 2014
Sassy wrote:
it was built for irrigation and farmers have used it for 50 years distroying it almost every year for anyone but them. It is time they let it alone. I have an Idea lets tax them for every gallon of water they use out of it. I'll bet they wouldn't be greedy with the water then.
I have an idea too. Why don't you buy all that farmland up and then you can do what you want to with it! Ain't never seen so many cry babies about a farmer tryin to make a dollar.

Since: Jun 14

United States

#184 Jun 1, 2014
Tony wrote:
For all farmers and non-farmers in and around Altus, here's a list of crops that don't require any irrigation water: Wheat, oats, sunflowers, sorghum, and alfalfa.
Save the lake!
When farmers are set up for a certain crop they can't just wake up one morning and say, "ole tony said I should plant something else." They have lots of money tied up in what they make a living with. Would be like telling a sand pit that they need to crush you some rock. I figure if people don't like the farmers using the lake for what it was built for they have a couple options. Either buy the land up and plant what you want or move to a recreational lake instead of a lake that was built for the working man.
OSUpoke89

Newalla, OK

#185 Jun 6, 2014
Tony wrote:
<quoted text>
Do the math for yourself. The price of cotton is about 60 cents a pound and the average field gets about 700 pounds of cotton per acre. That works out to a gross profit of $420 per acre. Now you have to deduct the costs of irrigation and the labor costs for irrigation, plus the pesticides and herbicides and equipment costs, which knocks the profit down to about $200 per acre.
Compare that with simple double row, no till (or strip till) planting of dryland wheat, sorghum, sunflowers; no costs for water or irrigation, no labor costs till harvest, no pesticides or herbicides (in order to earn more from an "organic" and "natural" grain). Dryland Kansas wheat farmers were getting 60 bushels to the acre this year at a price of $6 to $7 a bushel, for a gross profit of $360 to $420 per acre, without inputs.
When you do the math, it makes more sense to turn your farm lands into dry land wheat, sorghum, sunflowers, and other crops without the extra costs of water, irrigation, herbicides, pesticides, or fuel associated with them.
Farming in southwest Oklahoma without pesticides or herbicides will more than likely reduce yields and quality due to increased pressure from pests, diseases, and weeds. Organic wheat production is not sustainable nor efficient. And just so you know, even organic producers do use pesticides and herbicides, just "not chemicals". I agree that some other crop besides cotton may be more feasible in this area, but there are some problems associated with making the switch. Not all farmers can just switch from one crop to another on a whim, because there is specialized equipment for each crop. To switch from cotton production to wheat production, new equipment would need to be purchased and the existing equipment would be obsolete. This is not necessarily feasible for all the producers in southwest Oklahoma who are currently cotton farmers.
district farmer

Elk City, OK

#186 Jun 8, 2014
To 'switch' crops is a hard choice to make. Its like quitting an old habbit. Since 1972 I have farmed cotton in this district. I have paid for water every year deliveries were available. This (2014) will be the fourth year water is not available. I understand drought, unlike some of my neighbors. I do not like dryland farming, but we must play the hand we are delt. So realizing there is no water, i planted wheat. For the second year in a row, this was a failure. It did make hay and seed wheat. My cotton equipment sold. I now own wheat equipment. It has been a tough transition but in the long run will save my farm and continue to allow me own my land. I am trying to set an example, hoping others will follow and let the lake resore itself. The monster drouth, with his searing breath has once again shown his ugly face.
Just Observing

Yukon, OK

#187 Jun 30, 2014
What other means do the farmers have to irrigate their crops if not from Lugert? f I'm not mistaken the lake was built for commerce, not recreation.
cowchoker

Yukon, OK

#188 May 13, 2015
Sassy wrote:
The Lake has been born and died so many times. I have seen it drained so low the water almost became stagnant. That is good for the lake? The farmers IMHO have benifited long enough from free water. Dig a well but leave the lake alone please.
Free water??? We pay for that water. The district owns the lake and the water and you town idiots can go to hell
cowchoker

Yukon, OK

#189 May 13, 2015
JimBob wrote:
<quoted text>
The local cotton farmers have had a free ride for years. They have ruined the lake that was built for THEM. They are piss-poor stewards of what was built and essentially given to them.
I say take the lake away from them, take the crop subsidies away, take the crop insurance away from them, and save the taxpayers millions of dollars spent subsidizing a crop where subsidies are no longer needed or warranted!
F'ing idiots. 40 farmers?? The district has nearly 10 times that many members and to be a member you either farm ground in the district or own it. Morons. And cotton and the farmers bring in far more money than tourism. Idiots. The district owns the lake and the water and tne farmers pay for that water. It's far from a free ride. But you can't expect ignorant city F's to know that.
cowchoker

Yukon, OK

#190 May 13, 2015
JimBob wrote:
Was through Jackson County not too long ago. Looked to me like since they have ruined the lake and can't irrigate anymore, they have resorted to planting wheat, insuring it and hoping it will come up and then fail so they can make their profit on the crop insurance! Screw a few farm laborers along the way and, hot damn we're on our way to a cash crop! Yeehaw!
You have no clue moron. There isn't a wheat base on the irrigated ground so the insurance is very minimal. In fact most isn't insured because the premiums are almost as high as toral disaster checks. Idiot
cowchoker

Yukon, OK

#191 May 13, 2015
JimBob wrote:
<quoted text>
The local cotton farmers have had a free ride for years. They have ruined the lake that was built for THEM. They are piss-poor stewards of what was built and essentially given to them.
I say take the lake away from them, take the crop subsidies away, take the crop insurance away from them, and save the taxpayers millions of dollars spent subsidizing a crop where subsidies are no longer needed or warranted!
You are a complete idiot
cowchoker

Yukon, OK

#192 May 14, 2015
Sassy wrote:
<quoted text>Looks like by the voting so far that the people are agreeing irigation should stop.
That's because it's ignorant town people who think it should stop. I think peopke shouls pay the irrigation district to ski,fish and swim in our water that we,the farmers pay for
cowpoker

Lawton, OK

#193 May 14, 2015
cowchoker wrote:
<quoted text>
That's because it's ignorant town people who think it should stop. I think peopke shouls pay the irrigation district to ski,fish and swim in our water that we,the farmers pay for
You are the IDIOT! Farmers do not nor have they paid for the any part of the lake!!!!

They do have to pay for it when they use it to irrigate with though.
You might want to read the "W. C. Austin Project". Sorry it does not have pictures but you can get someone to read it for you.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Altus Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Bobby Payne Jr 1 hr Need2Know 1
gallagher, john r. Mon Jstsyn 4
jody (Mar '16) Mon jodi 13
Where is the best place to eat in Altus (Jul '10) Sep 23 Terrie 20
Dead beat dads Sep 19 Anonymous 17
drugs being sold (Oct '08) Sep 18 Anonymous 54
Serria Jo cook (Nov '12) Sep 18 Anonymous 18

Altus Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Altus Mortgages