Michael Percy writes
Oz wrote:

Michael Percy writes
Oz wrote:

Michael Percy writes

Do a reality check with a rainfall map of earth. What you see, the
rainfall isosomethings in the range 0 to 20" closely capture the arid
parts of earth including the deserts. Don't ask me why it does, but it
is a fact. You can't get the same mileage from a transpiration rate map.

That's a rather huge range, to put it mildly, and puts parts of the UK
and europe under your designation of 'desert'. Equally parts of the
world I would describe as 'arid' do indeed have significantly more than
20" rainfall, particularly at low latitude with seasonal intense
rainfall.

Oh well, nothing is perfect. Now you remind me, your definition of
'arid' alternative one, are you still working on it?

Look back in the thread,

Not that one, the one you screwed up in message id


No answer I see.

In the UK, for example, were I blessed with 10" rainfall evenly spread
through the year to roughly match transpiration I would be growing
massive crops with nary a worry in the world.

Could be quite a tourist attraction too

Not much of a reply, can't you do better?

Heh. Can't take a joke?

Still no answer, I note.

Heh. There was also no question. Are you always this helpless?

Still no answer I see.

The restriction of cropping isn't confined to low rainfall areas either.

You don't say that. Really, or should I say that is also my impression.
However, there is a bloke here who says if you just got 10" of rain damm
all will grow. Could he be right, and we wrong?

You offered average yields in my area?
With the right timing of rainfall I would be producing similar yields
with a 10" rainfall (probably more) than with my 20" rainfall.

I doubt that. Let us see your water budget for that enterprise.

Easy. It's not unusual for me to have less than 10" summer rainfall.

--
Oz
This post is worth absolutely nothing and is probably fallacious.
Note: soon (maybe already) only posts via despammed.com will be accepted.