The economics of conjunctive use of ground and surface water

Burt, O

The economics of conjunctive use of ground and surface water

Author

Oscar R. Burt

Author Affiliations

Oscar R. Burt was at the time of the studies, was Assistant Professor of Agricultural Economics and Assistant Agricultural Economist in the Experiment Station and on the Giannini Foundation, Davis. He is now Associate Professor of Agricultural Economics at the University of Missouri.

Publication Information

Hilgardia 36(2):31-111. DOI:10.3733/hilg.v36n02p031. December 1964.

PDF of full article, Cite this article

Abstract

This study is primarily concerned with water storage control under conditions of conjunctive use and the role of storage control in guiding investment decisions in water resource development. Modern sequential decision theory is applied to water storage control in order to provide a theoretical framework for economic analysis. The theoretical model is utilized in an empirical investigation which is concerned with marginal value of imported water. The region chosen for study is serviced by Pine Flat Reservoir on the Kings River in the San Joaquin Valley.

Literature Cited

Arrow K. J., Harris T. E., Marshak J. Optmal inventory policy. Econometrica. 1951. 19(3):

Bellman Richard. Dynamic programming. 1957. Princeton Univ. Press.

Bellman Richard. Adaptive control processes: A guided tour. 1961. Princeton Univ. Press.

Buras N., Hall W. A. An analysis of reservoir capacity requirements for conjunctive use of surface and ground water storage. International Ass’n for Scientific Hydrology, Publ. 1961. 57:556-63.

Burt Oscar R. Optimal resource use over time with an application to ground water. Management Science. 1964. 11(1): DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.11.1.80 [CrossRef]

California Crop and Livestock Reporting Service. Annual. California fruit report, annual summary. Sacramento.

California Department of Water Resources. Report on proposed semitropic water storage district, Kern County. 1958. State of California.

Caton Douglas D., Hedges Trimble R., Schaller Neill. Inputs and costs for producing field crops (A statistical supplement to farm adjustments and earnings under 1955 cotton acreage allotments). 5. San Joaquin Valley West-side Cotton Farms, 1953-1955. Univ. of California Giannini Foundation Mimeo Report. 1958. 212: Berkeley

Cromarty William A. An econometric model for United States agriculture. J. Amer. Statist. Ass’n. 1959. 54: Sept.

Daly Rex F. The long-run demand for farm products. Agric. Econ. Research. 1956. 8: July.

Davis G. H., Green J. H., Olmsted F. H., Brown D. W. Ground water conditions and storage capacity in the San Joaquin Valley, California. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper. 1959. 1469: Wash., D.C.: Govt. Print. Off.

d’Epenoux F. A probabilistic production and inventory problem. Management Science. 1963. 10(1): ), Oct.

Dvoretzky A., Kiefer J., Wolfowitz J. The inventory problem, I, II. Econometrica. 1952. 20(2,3):

Fox Karl A. The analysis of demand for farm products, USDA Techn. Bull. 1953. 1081: Wash., D.C.: Govt. Print. Off.

Howard Donald. Dynamic programming and Markov processes. 1960. N.Y.: Technology Press and Wiley.

International Cotton Advisory Committee. Cotton-world statistics. 1960. 14(2): ) Part II. Washington, D.C.

Joint Economic Committee Staff and the Office of Statistical Standards. 1960 supplement to economic indicators. 1960. Wash., D.C.: Bureau of the Budget, Govt. Print. Off.

Kemeny J. G., Snell J. L. Finite Markov chains. 1960. N.Y.: D. Van Nostrand Co.

Little J. D. C. The use of storage water in a hydroelectric system. J. Operations Research Soc. of America. 1955. 3(3): ), May. DOI: 10.1287/opre.3.2.187 [CrossRef]

Manne Alan S. Linear programming and sequential decisions. Management Science. 1960. 6(3): DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.6.3.259 [CrossRef]

Masse Pierre. Application des probabilités en chaîne à l’hydrologie statistique et au jeu des réservoirs. 1945. Paris: Berger-Levrault. Rept. to the Société de Statistique de Paris June 21 1944

Mood A. M. Introduction to the theory of statistics. 1950. N.Y.: McGraw-Hill.

Pearson Karl. Tables of the incomplete gamma function. 1922. London: Cambridge Univ.

Shuffett D. Milton. The demand and price structure for selected vegetables. USDA Techn. Bull. 1954. 1105: Wash., D.C.: Govt Print. Off.

Stewart J. Ian. Cantaloupes as a crop in Merced County. 1954. Merced County: Farm Advisor’s Office. January.

Suits Daniel B. An econometric model of the watermelon market. J. Farm Econ. 1955. p.37. May.

Thom H. C. S. A note on the gamma distribution. Monthly Weather Rev. 1958. 86: April.

Thomas H. A., Watermeyer P., Maass Arthur, et al. Mathematical models: A stochastic sequential approach. Design of water resource systems. 1962. Harvard Univ. Press. chapter 14.

Todd David K. Ground water hydrology. 1959. N.Y.: Wiley.

University of California. Staked tomatoes: Production costs in Tulare County. 1953. Tulare County: Farm Advisor’s Office. April.

University of California. Beef cattle on irrigated pastures. 1954. Berkeley: Agric. Ext. Serv. October.

University of California. What will it cost to grow irrigated barley in Fresno County: West Side Farm Advisor’s Office. 1955. Fresno County. January.

University of California. Sample costs of growing sweet potatoes in Merced County, California. 1956. Merced County: Farm Advisor’s Office. March.

University of California. Sample dairy farm management budgets for the San Joaquin Valley. 1957. Agric. Ext. Serv. September.

University of California. Cost analysis work sheet: Field corn, single cropped, in Fresno County. 1958a. Fresno County: Farm Advisor’s Office. May.

University of California. Cost analysis work sheet: Sample costs to produce blackeye beans in Fresno County. 1958b. Fresno County: Farm Advisor’s Office. April.

University of California. Sample costs to produce blackeye beans in Tulare County. 1958c. Tulare County: Farm Advisor’s Office. May.

University of California. Cost analysis work sheet: Sample costs to produce watermelons in Fresno County on rented land. 1958d. Fresno County: Farm Advisor’s Office.

University of California. Milo in Kings County. 1958e. Kings County: Farm Advisor’s Office. May.

University of California. Sample costs to produce apricots, Kings County. 1958f. Kings County: Farm Advisor’s Office. January.

University of California. Cost analysis work sheet: Fay Elberta peaches. 1959a. Fresno County: Farm Advisor’s Office.

University of California. Cost analysis work sheet: Field corn, single cropped, in Kings County. 1959b. Kings County: Farm Advisor’s Office. March.

University of California. Cost analysis work sheet: Sample costs to produce almonds in Merced County. 1959c. Merced County: Farm Advisor’s Office. May.

University of California. Cost analysis work sheet: Sample costs to produce navel oranges in Tulare County. 1959d. Tulare County: Farm Advisor’s Office. March.

University of California. Cost analysis work sheet: Sample costs to produce Manzanillo olives in Tulare County. 1959e. Tulare County: Farm Advsor’s Office. April.

University of California. Cost analysis work sheet: Sample costs to produce walnuts in Tulare County. 1959f. Tulare County: Farm Advisor’s Office. December.

University of California. Costs of producing grapes in the San Joaquin Valley: Emperor grapes. 1959g. Agric. Ext. Serv.

University of California. Costs of producing grapes in the San Joaquin Valley: Standard wine varieties. 1959h. Agric. Ext. Serv.

University of California. Costs of producing grapes in the San Joaquin Valley: Thompson seedless for raisins or wine. 1959i. Agric. Ext. Serv.

University of California. Costs of producing grapes in the San Joaquin Valley: Thompson seedless for table use. 1959j. Agric. Ext. Serv.

University of California. Growing hybrid corn in Tulare County. 1959k. Tulare County: Farm Advisor’s Office. February.

University of California. Cost analysis work sheet: Sample costs to produce clingstone peaches in Tulare County. 1960. Tulare County: Farm Advisor’s Office.

U. S. Agricultural Marketing Service. Annual A. Crop production, annual summary. Wash., D.C.: Govt. Print. Off.

U. S. Agricultural Marketing Service. Annual B. Crop values, season average prices received by farmers, and value of production Govt. Print. Off., Wash., D.C.

U. S. Agricultural Marketing Service. Annual C. Vegetables—fresh market, annual summary. Wash., D.C.: Govt. Print. Off.

U. S. Congress. Kings River project in California, House Document 631. 1940. Wash., D.C.: Govt. Print. Off.

U. S. Senate. Water resources activities in the United States. Population projections and economic assumptions. Select Committee on National Water Resources, Print 5. 1960. Wash., D.C.: Govt. Print. Off. March.