Investigating the Start of the Rainy Season and the Best Sowing Dates for St. George, Antigua

Similar documents
Agence Nationale de la Météorologie du Sénégal

16 th 17 th and 19 th May 2016 National Stakeholders Consultation on Climate Services (NCCS) Agronomy Research Centre Ashley Adams (MSc)

..Title Receive Report on Salinas Valley Water Conditions for the Third Quarter of Water Year

Electric Forward Market Report

Potential Impact of Biomass Burning on Urban Air Quality: Case-study of Chiang Mai

Woking. q business confidence report

University of Michigan Eco-Driving Index (EDI) Latest data: August 2017

UBT Performance Tracking Tool

2017 KEY INSIGHTS ON. Employee Attendance and Tardiness

CO2, SO2 and NOX Emission Rates. March 15, 2018

Geographical Information System-Assisted Water Availability Analysis for Grenada MAP COMPENDIUM

Climate Change Impacts for the Central Coast and Hunter Regions

Finding the Right Tool for your Purpose. Using Data to Show Improvement and the Need for Improvement

Administration Division Public Works Department Anchorage: Performance. Value. Results.

Barrie Bonsal, Elaine Wheaton, Virginia Wittrock, Evan Siemens, Nick Nicolichuk DRI Workshop, Winnipeg, May 11 th, 2010

Impact of Climate Change on Water Resources of a Semi-arid Basin- Jordan

Rainwater tank study of new homes

GSJ: Volume 6, Issue 4, APRIL GSJ: Volume 6, Issue 4, April 2018, Online: ISSN

Memorandum. Date: February 27, 2012 To: Dr. Reese From: Katelyn Ciaccio RE: Graphing and Charting Assignment

TL 9000 Quality Management System. Measurements Handbook. BRR Examples

Mid-level Evaluation of Climate Services: Seasonal Forecasts in Kazakhstan

Illinois in Drought. June 19, 2012, Updated June 21, 2012

Agenda. Evaluation of Lake Superior Regulation Plans Using Robustness and Climate Informed Risk

Cambridge International Examinations Cambridge International General Certificate of Secondary Education

Modeling Your Water Balance

Traffic Department Anchorage: Performance. Value. Results.

CO2, SO2 and NOX Emission Rates. August 21, 2015

City of San Clemente Water Usage Report

San Francisco Housing Authority (SFHA) Leased Housing Programs as of January 31, 2016

Crop Report. Stubble % incorporated into the top 10cm: 0 % Soil type: Red Kandosol (No498-Generic)

Crop Report. Report name: Graham Centre Field Site Crop Report SILO station used: Wagga Wagga AMO Rainfall records used: SILO

Crop Report. Stubble % incorporated into the top 10cm: 0 % Soil type: Red Kandosol (No498-Generic)

Chapter 6 Planning and Controlling Production: Work-in-Process and Finished-Good Inventories. Omar Maguiña Rivero

MARKET ANALYSIS REPORT NO 2 OF 2013: SWEET POTATO

Monitoring Cruise Report

Initial Assessment of Climate Change in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed

Abbotsford-Sumas Aquifer

The Impacts of Climate Change on Portland s Water Supply

What does climate change mean for Indiana?

Climate variability and Rubber production in Kerala

MAPPING MONSOON ON SUGARCANE PLANTING (SEASON )

Exhibit A. Scope of Services for Flow Monitoring Program 2015 Flow Monitoring City of Lawrence, Kansas

Mont Belvieu NGL Infrastructure

The Call Center Balanced Scorecard

Traffic Division Public Works Department Anchorage: Performance. Value. Results.

Corn and Soybean Market Update, August 9, 2017

MARKET ANALYSIS REPORT NO 2 OF 2013: POTATO

METEOROLOGICAL DROUGHT ASSESSMENT IN RAIPUR DISTRICT OF CHHATTISGARH STATE, INDIA

Climate Change Risk Assessment: Concept & approaches

Raynet Software Lifecycle

Monitoring Cruise Report

Agustinho da Costa Ximenes National Consultant for Food Security Ministry Of Agriculture and Fisheries Timor Leste

Agricultural Planning through Prediction of Rainfall Characteristics for Bilaspur Region of Chhattisgarh Plain in India

Crop Report. Report name: Crop Sequence Low N Crop Report Weather station used: Wagga Wagga AMO Rainfall records used: Weather station

Raynet Software Lifecycle

Feed Price Outlook and Risk Management for Dairy Producers

Yvette Everingham 1 & Sarah Park 2

Report on Performance of ET Based Irrigation Controller. Prepared for the Cities of: Boulder, Greeley, and Longmont, Colorado

Wind Workshop. Technical Characterization: Dependable Capacity & Firm Energy 10:00-10:30am

AGENDA ITEM D6. Climate Outlook

EIA Winter Fuels Outlook

Appendix 3A Water Demand Projections

The monthly variation of the Business Turnover 1 stands at 1.6%, after seasonal and calendar adjustment

George Paul, P. V. Vara Prasad, Scott A. Staggenborg, and Prasanna H.Gowda Kansas State University; and CPRL USDA ARS, Bushland, Texas

Comparison of water drainage and nitrate leaching under three land use types in the North China Plain

Crop Production Summary, Southeast Kansas 2017

April 2013 Livestock Market Update Public Policy Department Budget & Economic Analysis Team

Energy Data Efficiencies & Inefficiencies. Speaker: Mike Meola

Monitoring validated processes by using SPC

WILPINJONG COAL PTY LTD. Environment Protection Licence (EPL) 12425

Assessing Real Time - Drainage Water Management

WILPINJONG COAL PTY LTD. Environment Protection Licence (EPL) 12425

Estimation of irrigation water requirement of maize (Zea-mays) using pan evaporation method in maiduguri, Northeastern Nigeria

WILPINJONG COAL PTY LTD. Environment Protection Licence (EPL) 12425

Survey results: Revised Version. Unit: Bq/L. No :Observation hole : Observation hole for the Ice wall :Where the Ice wall is installed H25J [4]

Global Market Pulp Statistics

Analysis of Historical Rainfall Data and Associated Risks on Rain-Fed Tef Production at Debre Zeit, Central Ethiopia

Rainwater Management. Dr. Iftikhar Ahmad. College of Earth and. University of The Punjab Lahore

CIP Routine/Small Purchasing Team Close-out

3/17/2016. Ross Pruitt Associate Professor. What is happening? What may happen? Economic/management considerations

Findings through Nov. 2016

Gilleland Creek Intensive Bacteria Survey Addendum. March 18, 2010

Dairy Outlook Midwest & Great Plains Outlook Conference. Katelyn McCullock Dairy & Forage Economist Livestock Marketing Information Center

DATE: JANUARY 24, 2018 HERITAGE VALLEY POLICY ADVISORY COMMITTEE (HVTAC) HEATHER MILLER, TRANSIT PLANNER KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (KPI) REPORT

Climate Change/Variability and Reservoir Operations

Puget Sound Green Infrastructure Summit 2017

Monitoring Update April 1, Northeast Aquatic Research George Knoecklein Hillary Kenyon Sabina Perkins

WFP MONTHLY MARKET UPDATE

Call Center Benchmark India

Initial Analysis of Climate Projections and Implications for Irish Aid in N. Zambia

The Service Desk Balanced Scorecard

CITY OF LONDON WASTEWATER TREATMENT OPERATIONS ENVIRONMENTAL & ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT 2013 ANNUAL REPORT ADELAIDE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT

2059 PAKISTAN STUDIES

THE EFFECT OF SOILING ON LARGE GRID CONNECTED PHOTOVOLTAIC SYSTEMS IN CALIFORNIA AND THE SOUTHWEST REGION OF THE UNITED STATES

Does Water Resources Management in the Snake River Basin Matter for the Lower Columbia River? Or Is the Snake River Part of Another Watershed?

Non-consolidated Forecast of Income <1>

Mainstreaming Climate Change for Sustainable Development in Sri Lanka

Missouri Commodity, Labor, and Land Values. Historical Summary and. Seasonal Trends

Estimation of Irrigation Water Requirement of Maize (Zea-mays) using Pan Evaporation Method in Maiduguri, Northeastern Nigeria

San Francisco Housing Authority (SFHA) Leased Housing Programs SEMAP updates as of June 7, 2016

Transcription:

Investigating the Start of the Rainy Season and the Best Sowing Dates for St. George, Antigua By Dale Destin Climatologist Antigua and Barbuda Meteorological Service Climate Section Email: dale_destin@yahoo.com May 29, 2011 1

Table of Contents Map of Antigua... 3 Background... 4 Objectives... 4 Methodology... 4 Data... 5 Results... 6 Calculation of Risk... 11 The Super Brave Farmer... 11 The Brave Farmer... 11 The Bold Farmer... 12 The Cautious Farmer... 13 The Super Cautious Farmer... 14 Recommendations... 16 Appendix... 17 2

Courtesy: http://www.worldatlas.com/webimage/countrys/namerica/caribb/ag.htm Parishes 1 St. George 2 St. John, 3 St. Mary, 4 St. Paul, 5 St. Peter, 6 St. Phillip Map of Antigua Courtesy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/antigua 3

Background This report was prepared for the Ministry of Agriculture of Antigua and Barbuda in support of the farmers who operate in the parish of St. George. This parish is located in the northeast section of Antigua. Most of St. George lies within 3 miles of the V. C. Bird International Airport which is located at Latitude 17 8'N, longitude 61 47'W. The area is relatively flat, less than 100 metres above sea level. The area has a Tropical Marine Wet and Dry Climate. The dry season is January to June and the wet season is July to December. Objectives This study seeks to answer the following questions: For a super brave farmer, willing to sow early to catch the preseason rains, i.e. beginning of May, what would be the distribution of sowing dates, and what is the risk of early crop failure due to dry spells (10 days without rain after the first rain)? For a brave farmer, willing to sow early to catch the preseason rains, i.e. beginning of June, what would be the distribution of sowing dates, and what is the risk of early crop failure due to dry spells (10 days without rain after the first rain)? For a bold farmer, willing to sow at the start of the wet season, i.e. beginning of July, what would be the distribution of sowing dates, and what would be the risk of early crop failure due to dry spells (10 days without rain after the first rain)? For a cautious farmer, willing to sow in the middle of July, what would be the distribution of sowing dates, and what would be the risk of early crop failure due to dry spells (10 days without rain after the first rain)? For a super cautious farmer, willing to sow in the middle of July, what would be the distribution of sowing dates, and what would be the risk of early crop failure due to dry spells (10 days without rain after the first rain)? How often (i.e. in what proportion of years) will a super brave and brave farmers have a longer growing season than the bold farmer. How often will the bold farmer have a longer growing season than a cautious farmer? Methodology The objectives will be achieved by the use of the statistical tool INSTAT. With INSTAT, I will for each question in the objective section, obtain the start of the rains for each year. This would provide the distribution of sowing dates, with and without dry spells. For sowing dates that are equal irrespective of the dry spell, these are successful planting dates, otherwise there is 4

failure. It is the proportion of failures to successes that will, in the final analysis, determine what decisions are made in accordance with the objectives. Additionally, along the way to achieving the objectives, descriptive statistics will be used to give a clear picture of the rainfall pattern at St. George, Antigua. Here are the definitions used to extract the required events: I. First date from May 1 getting more than 20 mm in 1, 2, or 3 days. II. First date from June 1 getting more than 20 mm in 1, 2, or 3 days. III. First date from July 1 getting more than 20 mm in 1, 2, or 3 days. IV. First date from July 15 getting more than 20 mm in 1, 2, or 3 days. V. First date from August 1 getting more than 20 mm in 1, 2, or 3 days. VI. As (i) but with no 10 day (or longer) dry spell in the next 30 days. VII. As (ii) but with no 10 day (or longer) dry spell in the next 30 days. VIII. As (iii) but with no 10 day (or longer) dry spell in the next 30 days. IX. As (iv) but with no 10 day (or longer) dry spell in the next 30 days. X. As (v) but with no 10 day (or longer) dry spell in the next 30 days. The risk of early crop failure will be determined by whether there is a 10-day dry spell after the initial rain. Failure is assumed if there is a 10-day dry spell after the initial rain. For season length comparisons, this will be based on the success of each farmer as compared to the other, as determined by their planting strategies. A successful season is one in which there was no early crop failure i.e. no 10-day dry spell in the first 30 days after the initial rain. A rain or rainy day is one with at least 1 mm of rainfall. Thus, a 10-day dry spell is one with no day of the 10 days having 1 mm or more of rainfall. Data Forty years of daily rainfall data for V. C. Bird International Airport, St. George, Antigua was used, 1971 to 2010. This data is available at the Antigua and Barbuda Meteorological Service which is located at the above mentioned airport. The data is in EXCEL format, one column of 366 rows per year. As the climatologist and the person task with data management, there are systems in place to insure the highest quality data possible; the non-leap year coding used for day 60 was 9999.0. There is one missing month December 1984. The register, into which these data were inputted, has gone missing. After importing the data into INSTAT, three negative values were observed during further inspection via preliminary descriptive statistics. These values were set as missing; however, with available time, the correct value will be inputted. Notwithstanding these minor things, more than 99% of the data were available and were in good order. 5

Results Graph 1: Annual rainfall total for St. George, Antigua Graph 2: Comparison of the start of the rains based on the definitions 6

Graph 3: Mean daily rainfall at St. George, Antigua Graph 4: Summary values of monthly rainfall at St. George, Antigua 7

Table 1: Summary values of monthly rainfall at St. George, Antigua Min. 25% Median Mean 75% Max. SDE Jan 18.7 41.2 46.9 57.2 73.7 142.2 27.9 Feb 9.9 28.8 41.9 43.2 55.8 110.4 22.4 Mar 7.5 21.3 36.1 45.9 55.3 178.9 35.4 Apr 12.2 27.2 47.8 65.6 96.8 198.6 47.1 May 7.5 36.5 57.9 89.6 90.2 469.9 93.7 Jun 6.9 27.2 46.9 55.5 69.3 223.8 41.0 Jul 14.2 45.6 63.6 79.0 107.1 176.4 40.5 Aug 34.0 64.5 87.9 104.6 122.4 322.4 64.1 Sep 27.2 69.4 116.3 137.6 198.0 410.3 90.3 Oct 12.4 89.3 151.1 150.1 185.0 357.2 77.6 Nov 20.5 59.5 114.0 136.5 187.2 588.1 109.5 Dec 34.4 53.1 77.1 88.2 113.2 218.2 43.9 Table 2: Results obtained according to the definitions in the methodology Super Brave Farmer Brave Farmer Bold Farmer Cautious Farmer 8 Super Cautious Farmer Year I VI (stdry1) II VII (stdry2) III VIII (stdry3) IV IX (stdry4) V X (stdry5) 1971 142 217 217 217 217 217 217 217 217 217 1972 140 140 184 184 184 184 238 238 238 238 1973 227 227 227 227 227 227 227 227 227 227 1974 138 241 241 241 241 241 241 241 241 241 1975 126 126 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 1976 214 214 214 214 214 214 214 214 214 214 1977 214 214 214 214 214 214 214 214 214 214 1978 125 125 189 216 189 216 203 216 216 216 1979 129 129 177 177 187 187 199 242 242 242 1980 163 163 163 163 184 184 198 198 255 255 1981 122 122 156 181 183 183 197 197 247 247 1982 129 187 187 187 187 187 203 203 226 226 1983 138 138 211 0 211 0 211 0 228 0 1984 123 123 213 248 213 248 213 248 214 248 1985 183 198 183 198 183 198 198 198 224 224 1986 130 206 206 206 206 206 206 206 225 265 1987 137 137 220 220 220 220 220 220 220 220

Year I VI (stdry1) II VII (stdry2) III VIII (stdry3) IV IX (stdry4) V X (stdry5) 1988 136 136 195 195 195 195 197 197 215 215 1989 153 223 153 223 223 223 223 223 223 223 1990 128 192 171 192 192 192 222 222 222 222 1991 128 181 181 181 200 244 200 244 244 244 1992 123 151 153 192 192 192 197 197 223 223 1993 126 145 153 153 184 184 204 204 295 353 1994 168 168 168 168 211 211 211 211 253 253 1995 150 230 230 230 230 230 230 230 230 230 1996 132 156 156 156 189 189 197 197 225 225 1997 149 149 177 177 221 221 221 221 221 221 1998 124 168 168 168 202 202 202 202 222 222 1999 132 189 160 189 189 189 235 235 235 235 2000 126 227 227 227 227 227 227 227 227 227 2001 210 210 210 210 210 210 210 210 228 228 2002 122 169 169 169 184 184 233 233 233 233 2003 171 171 171 171 237 237 237 237 237 237 2004 132 132 182 182 183 183 258 258 258 258 2005 126 126 161 161 195 195 197 197 234 234 2006 171 171 171 171 183 183 201 201 285 285 2007 179 239 179 239 201 239 201 239 239 239 2008 124 241 173 241 241 241 241 241 241 241 2009 122 122 154 154 186 186 246 246 246 246 2010 134 134 170 170 201 201 201 201 222 222 Earliest 122 122 153 0 183 0 197 0 214 0 Mean 146 173 186 191 204 203 215 214 233 231 Latest 227 241 241 248 241 248 258 258 295 353 Std 29.0 39.6 25.7 41.1 18.0 38.7 16.5 39.0 17.7 44.6 Earliest 01-May 01-May 01-Jun Never 01-Jul Never 15-Jul Never 01-Aug Never Mean 25-May 21-Jun 04-Jul 09-Jul 22-Jul 21-Jul 02-Aug 01-Aug 20-Aug 18-Aug Latest 14-Aug 28-Aug 28-Aug 04-Sep 28-Aug 04-Sep 14-Sep 14-Sep 21-Oct 18-Dec Note that definition v above in the second to last column is the same as strt_aug in graph 2. 9

Figure 1: Statistics of columns generated by the definitions in the methodology section Simple Models - Normal Distribution, One Sample Normal model, one sample Column i Minimum 122 Maximum 227 Range 105 Mean 146.15 Std. deviation 29.013 Standard error of mean = 4.5874 with 39 d.f. 95% confidence interval for mean 136.87 to 155.43 Simple Models - Normal Distribution, One Sample Normal model, one sample Column ii Minimum 153 Maximum 241 Range 88 Mean 186.3 Std. deviation 25.657 Standard error of mean = 4.0567 with 39 d.f. 95% confidence interval for mean 178.09 to 194.51 Simple Models - Normal Distribution, One Sample Normal model, one sample Column iii Minimum 183 Maximum 241 Range 58 Mean 203.85 Std. deviation 18.031 Standard error of mean = 2.8509 with 39 d.f. 95% confidence interval for mean 198.08 to 209.62 Simple Models - Normal Distribution, One Sample Normal model, one sample Column iv Minimum 197 Maximum 258 Range 61 Mean 215.2 Std. deviation 16.476 Standard error of mean = 2.605 with 39 d.f. 95% confidence interval for mean 209.93 to 220.47 Simple Models - Normal Distribution, One Sample Normal model, one sample Column v Minimum 214 Maximum 295 Range 81 Mean 233.1 Std. deviation 17.741 Standard error of mean = 2.8052 with 39 d.f. 95% confidence interval for mean 227.43 to 238.77 10

Calculation of Risk The Super Brave Farmer From the Methodology section, the super brave farmer proposes to plant at the beginning of May. If this is done, the following is observed: Figure 2: Probability of success (right) and failure (left) of the super brave farmer One proportion - binomial model Successes 18 Proportion 0.450 Approx s.e. of proportion = 0.079 0.293 to 0.615 0.296 to 0.604 One proportion - binomial model Successes 22 Proportion 0.550 Approx s.e. of proportion = 0.079 0.385 to 0.707 0.396 to 0.704 The left hand side of the above table represent the risks of failure for the super brave farmer, while the right hand side represent his chances of success. Assuming the sample to be exactly normal, failure would be observed every 2 to 3 years (1.63 to 3.41 years) at the 95% degree of confidence. There is as much as a 62% chance of failure and a minimum failure rate of 29%. For a given 10 year period, there would be three to six failures. Alternatively, with respect the successful planting by the brave farmer, this would happen as little as 39% of the time and a maximum of 71% of the time. This is equivalent to success every 1 to 3 years (1.41 to 2.60 years); success four to seven times every 10 years. The Brave Farmer From the Methodology section, the brave farmer proposes to plant at the beginning of June. If this is done, the following is observed: 11

Figure 2: Probability of success (right) and failure (left) of the Brave Farmer One proportion - binomial model One proportion - binomial model Successes 11 Proportion 0.275 Approx s.e. of proportion = 0.071 0.146 to 0.439 0.137 to 0.413 Successes 29 Proportion 0.725 Approx s.e. of proportion = 0.071 0.561 to 0.854 0.587 to 0.863 The left hand side of the above table represent the risks of failure for the brave farmer, while the right hand side represent his chances of success. Assuming the sample to be exactly normal, failure would be observed every 2 to 7 years (2.28 to 6.85 years) at the 95% degree of confidence. There is as much as a 44% chance of failure and a minimum of 15% chance. Further, in a 10 year period, there would be one to four failures. Alternatively, with respect the successful planting by the brave farmer, this would happen as little as 56% of the time and a maximum of 85% of the time. This is equivalent to success every 1 to 2 years (1.17 to 1.78 years); success six to nine time every 10 years. The Bold Farmer From the Methodology section, the bold farmer proposes to plant at the beginning of July. If this is done, the following is observed: Figure 2: Probability of success (right) and failure (left) of the Bold Farmer One proportion - binomial model One proportion - binomial model Successes 6 Proportion 0.150 Approx s.e. of proportion = 0.056 0.057 to 0.298 0.039 to 0.261 Successes 34 Proportion 0.850 Approx s.e. of proportion = 0.056 0.702 to 0.943 0.739 to 0.961 12

The left hand side of the above table represent the risks of failure for the bold farmer, while the right hand side represent his chances of success. Assuming the sample to be exactly normal, failure would be observed every 3 to 18 years (3.36 to 17.54 years) at the 95% degree of confidence. There is a maximum of 30% chance of failure and a minimum of 6% chance. Further, in a 10 year period, there would be one to three failures. Alternatively, with respect the successful planting by the bold farmer, this would happen 70 to 94% of the time. This is equivalent to success just about every year (1.06 to 1.42 years); success of seven to nine every 10 years. The Cautious Farmer From the Methodology section, the cautious farmer proposes to plant at the beginning of July. If this is done, the following is observed: Figure 2: Probability of success (right) and failure (left) of the Cautious Farmer One proportion - binomial model One proportion - binomial model Successes 6 Proportion 0.150 Approx s.e. of proportion = 0.056 0.057 to 0.298 0.039 to 0.261 Successes 34 Proportion 0.850 Approx s.e. of proportion = 0.056 0.702 to 0.943 0.739 to 0.961 The left hand side of the above table represent the risks of failure for the cautious farmer, while the right hand side represent his chances of success. Assuming the sample to be exactly normal, failure would be observed every 3 to 18 years (3.36 to 17.54 years) at the 95% degree of confidence. There is a maximum of 30% chance of failure and a minimum of 6% chance. Further, in a 10 year period, there would be one to three failures. Alternatively, with respect the successful planting by the cautious farmer, this would happen 70 to 94% of the time. This is equivalent to success just about every year (1.06 to 1.42 years); success of seven to nine every 10 years 13

The Super Cautious Farmer From the Methodology section, the super cautious farmer proposes to plant at the beginning of July. If this is done, the following is observed: Figure 2: Probability of success (right) and failure (left) of the Super Cautious Farmer One proportion - binomial model Successes 4 Proportion 0.100 Approx s.e. of proportion = 0.047 0.028 to 0.237 0.007 to 0.193 One proportion - binomial model Successes 36 Proportion 0.900 Approx s.e. of proportion = 0.047 0.763 to 0.972 0.807 to 0.993 The left hand side of the above table represent the risks of failure for the super cautious farmer, while the right hand side represent his chances of success. Assuming the sample to be exactly normal, failure would be observed every 4 to 36 years (4.22 to 35.71 years) at the 95% degree of confidence. There is a maximum of 24% chance of failure and a minimum of 3% chance. Further, in a 10 year period, there would be virtually no failures. Alternatively, with respect to the successful planting by the super cautious farmer, this would happen 76 to 97% of the time. This is equivalent to success just about every year (1.03 to 1.31 years); success of eight to 10 every 10 years. 14

Figure 3: How often (i.e. in what proportion of years) a Super Brave Farmer (i) would plants before the Bold Farmer; the Brave Farmer (ii) plants before the Bold Farmer; the Bold Farmer (iii) plants before the Cautious Farmer; the Cautious Farmer (iv) plants before the Super Cautious Farmer. (i) One proportion - binomial model Successes 35 Proportion 0.875 Approx s.e. of proportion = 0.052 0.732 to 0.958 0.773 to 0.977 (iii) One proportion - binomial model Successes 18 Proportion 0.450 Approx s.e. of proportion = 0.079 0.293 to 0.615 0.296 to 0.604 (ii) One proportion - binomial model Successes 22 Proportion 0.550 Approx s.e. of proportion = 0.079 0.385 to 0.707 0.396 to 0.704 (iv) One proportion - binomial model Successes 21 Proportion 0.525 Approx s.e. of proportion = 0.079 0.361 to 0.685 0.370 to 0.680 The above information speaks to the question of how often the various farmers would plant before each other. The super brave farmer that plants at the beginning of May would plant 88% (± 11%) of the time before the bold farmer. This amounts to a planting season of 58 days longer than the bold farmer (± 9 days) operating at the 95% confidence interval. The brave farmer that plants at the beginning of June would plant 55% (± 16%) of the time before the bold farmer. This amounts to a planting season of 18 days longer than the bold farmer (± 8 days) operating at the 95% confidence interval. The bold farmer that plants at the beginning of July would plant 45% (± 16%) of the time before the cautious farmer. This amounts to a planting season of 11 days longer than the bold farmer (± 6 days) operating at the 95% confidence interval. 15

The cautious farmer that plants at July 1 would plant 53% (± 16%) of the time before the super cautious farmer. This amounts to a planting season of 18 days longer than the super cautious (± 6 days) operating at the 95% confidence interval. Recommendations The following are my recommendations and associated rational: I. Planting be done at the beginning of July, the start of the rainy season, where on average there is an 85% success rate (± 12%) when planting at the beginning of July. Failure would only occur one to three times per 10 years. As can be seen from the information in the results section, success rates improve to even more acceptable levels through August 1, with failure rates being negligible. II. Further studies are done with respect to the predictability of the rainfall for May to determine if greater success cannot be had during certain phases of ENSO or some other predictor of precipitation. As can be seen, May has a higher average rainfall than June and July; however, its variability is more that twice the variability of these months. This suggests that there is a tendency for extreme rainfall events for this month and perhaps these extremes are predictable. Predicting the lower extremes would likely reduce the failure rate and increase success; allowing for possibly three crops per year. 16

Appendix Monthly rainfall totals 1971 to 2010 Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1971 72.6 69.3 25.4 61.7 89.4 16.3 55.6 124.5 141.5 135.1 35.3 218.2 1972 69.8 30.7 133.6 75.7 55.4 34.5 57.4 101.6 73.9 178.8 45.2 125.0 1973 41.7 35.3 21.1 16.5 24.6 35.8 44.5 101.9 166.4 95.0 38.1 41.1 1974 114.0 34.3 32.5 23.1 47.8 6.9 14.2 175.8 284.2 167.6 394.0 45.2 1975 90.7 13.2 19.8 32.0 75.9 20.1 35.3 87.6 145.0 122.9 143.0 141.5 1976 44.7 77.0 53.6 18.8 22.6 34.0 19.0 136.4 132.8 159.0 149.1 87.4 1977 20.3 24.6 25.1 42.9 36.6 24.1 27.9 183.1 135.1 165.6 237.7 53.1 1978 27.2 30.5 75.9 118.1 177.5 36.8 108.0 143.5 27.2 357.2 82.7 66.6 1979 47.8 13.7 49.4 66.8 324.0 85.9 113.5 79.9 362.6 164.2 253.1 134.7 1980 48.4 50.0 16.5 12.2 41.4 69.7 99.2 70.2 77.5 185.5 48.9 97.1 1981 46.0 72.2 58.8 198.6 139.3 49.8 155.3 78.1 199.9 135.7 140.9 176.2 1982 63.3 110.4 28.7 114.1 75.1 25.0 108.6 80.8 52.9 147.0 183.5 111.1 1983 32.1 9.9 30.0 19.1 88.7 45.1 64.0 90.4 71.9 54.7 22.7 42.7 1984 75.8 28.5 85.9 21.3 71.0 48.6 51.0 34.0 216.9 205.7 247.4 * 1985 41.2 44.5 178.9 91.0 24.3 10.9 93.9 93.4 186.5 177.3 188.8 57.9 1986 35.1 20.1 50.3 117.0 112.3 21.4 102.7 53.4 47.1 21.4 248.2 66.4 1987 42.1 18.0 57.1 25.8 469.9 64.3 41.3 78.6 139.8 143.0 242.1 96.4 1988 67.3 47.8 95.7 41.6 61.9 33.6 176.4 278.1 194.7 115.4 90.2 113.2 1989 78.6 46.9 50.2 39.1 30.5 77.1 41.5 134.1 295.7 155.3 112.2 39.1 1990 42.9 45.6 55.8 146.8 74.6 71.0 58.6 64.9 46.4 239.3 89.3 91.7 1991 44.7 78.7 16.0 66.9 56.8 56.3 89.2 54.2 118.5 12.4 143.7 38.6 1992 77.4 29.5 39.3 172.8 156.4 41.5 75.3 93.1 120.1 107.1 168.1 123.4 1993 64.5 12.9 35.1 107.8 324.9 48.6 139.6 49.3 56.6 60.5 37.2 71.5 1994 43.7 30.6 37.0 15.1 30.0 42.4 44.3 35.7 244.8 70.6 120.2 60.1 1995 20.1 56.7 37.6 79.2 59.0 15.5 49.1 263.2 410.3 160.0 66.2 60.3 1996 52.2 42.2 22.1 31.3 50.7 107.0 133.9 98.4 66.1 87.4 80.7 145.0 1997 74.1 78.8 23.2 41.8 56.1 41.6 62.7 64.4 85.5 82.1 42.8 45.1 1998 142.2 43.7 45.9 79.8 50.1 64.5 58.9 154.3 199.1 175.4 115.5 158.7 1999 76.6 45.1 7.5 85.6 78.8 125.4 104.4 62.0 113.1 216.9 588.1 75.7 2000 65.7 40.5 20.9 104.4 38.3 22.0 41.1 79.0 207.8 27.9 91.9 43.5 2001 18.7 20.5 11.8 40.0 7.5 24.8 91.4 88.2 49.2 113.9 57.2 153.4 2002 28.7 64.8 109.9 98.7 36.5 44.7 63.2 75.1 68.6 82.4 112.4 90.7 2003 44.6 37.5 13.6 22.9 14.4 64.1 51.5 42.7 52.9 128.6 196.2 82.6 2004 40.4 75.2 49.3 52.6 188.5 67.9 127.1 43.4 114.0 249.2 188.4 55.1 2005 43.5 57.9 13.3 38.2 50.4 223.8 164.3 116.1 97.5 200.8 140.0 34.4 2006 131.3 45.9 49.2 19.7 33.5 88.6 108.5 68.4 50.5 183.6 72.1 47.8 2007 61.3 41.5 82.0 41.7 30.2 52.9 62.5 106.7 76.8 217.3 20.5 106.9 2008 80.3 53.1 25.2 31.7 86.4 52.6 39.0 114.7 215.3 344.7 117.5 61.4 2009 36.3 35.3 20.0 60.2 101.8 76.4 87.0 62.7 80.3 82.4 72.3 77.1 2010 41.2 14.5 34.4 152.5 90.5 150.2 100.7 322.4 78.9 273.7 37.6 104.5 17

Daily rainfall data May to Aug, 1971 to 1973 Daily data for: 1971 Mon May Jun Jul Aug Daily data for: 1972 May Jun Jul Aug Daily data for: 1973 May Jun Jul Aug Day. 1 -- 2.8 0.3 2.0 2 -- 18.0 -- -- 3 7.1 2.5 3.3 0.5 4 7.9 -- -- 1.8 5 -- 6.4 0.3 -- 6 -- 0.5 -- -- 7 -- 0.3 11.4 -- 8 -- 2.5 -- -- 9 0.8 -- 4.8 0.3 10 0.3 -- 4.3 1.0 11 -- -- -- 2.0 12 8.6 -- -- -- 13 0.8 -- -- -- 14 0.3 2.8 -- -- 15 0.5 -- -- -- 16 -- -- -- 0.3 17 18 -- 1.0 -- -- 19 -- 4.8 -- 42.9 20 -- 8.4 -- -- 21 26.4 6.4 -- -- 22 -- 11.2 -- -- 23 3.3 -- -- -- 24 5.8 -- -- -- 25 -- 0.5 -- -- 26 1.5 1.3 1.0 1.5 27 1.8 -- -- 8.9 28 2.5 -- -- 0.5 29 -- m -- -- 30 4.1 -- -- -- 31 1.0 -- -- Mean (Overall: 1.9) 2.3 2.4 0.8 2.0 Total (Overall: 229.1) 72.6 69.3 25.4 61.7 Minimum (Overall: 0.0) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Maximum (Overall: 42.9) 26.4 18.0 11.4 42.9 Number greater than 0.99 (Overall: 35) 11 12 5 7 Number of missing values (Overall: 1) 0 1 0 0 -- 0.5 7.9 -- -- 6.1 -- -- 1.8 5.6 2.5 1.3 11.7 2.3 -- -- 2.3 -- 1.8 -- -- -- 1.0 32.8 1.0 0.3 -- 6.4 13.5 2.3 -- 4.1 5.3 0.5 -- 4.1 -- 1.0 -- 3.0 2.5 -- 1.0 -- 0.3 0.8 -- 4.1 8.9 -- -- 0.3 2.0 -- -- -- -- -- 1.0 -- -- 0.5 -- -- 0.5 -- -- 15.5 0.5 0.8 2.3 -- 3.3 2.5 14.7 -- -- -- 2.3 0.3 0.3 -- 49.5 -- 0.8 -- 4.1 0.5 0.5 0.8 3.0 -- -- 2.5 21.6 -- 5.8 -- -- -- -- 3.8 -- 3.6 2.8 0.5 -- -- 1.3 20.8 -- -- 4.8 -- 2.5 Mean (Overall: 2.6) 2.3 1.7 3.6 2.5 Total (Overall: 312.4) 69.8 51.6 112.8 78.2 Minimum(Overall: 0.0) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Maximum(Overall: 49.5) 13.5 20.8 49.5 32.8 Number greater than 0.99 (Overall: 46) 14 9 13 10 6.6 3.0 1.8 -- 2.0 0.8 0.8 -- -- -- 1.0 -- 3.0 0.8 0.3 -- 2.8 0.5 7.4 -- 0.5 3.0 4.8 -- -- 0.3 -- -- -- -- 0.8 -- -- -- -- 1.8 4.3 -- 2.0 4.1 -- 2.0 1.0 -- 1.5 -- -- 1.3 0.3 -- -- -- 0.5 2.0 -- 0.5 -- -- -- 8.6 0.8 0.5 -- -- 2.0 3.8 -- -- 3.0 2.5 1.3 -- -- 1.8 -- 0.3 -- 13.2 -- -- -- 1.0 -- -- 1.0 -- -- -- 2.0 m -- -- 2.5 -- -- -- 8.6 -- -- Mean (Overall: 1.0) 1.3 1.2 0.7 0.5 Total (Overall: 114.6) 41.7 35.3 21.1 16.5 Minimum(Overall: 0.0) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Maximum(Overall: 13.2) 8.6 13.2 7.4 8.6 Number greater than 0.99 (Overall: 32) 12 9 7 4 Number of missing values (Overall: 1) 0 1 0 0 (Overall: 1) 0 1 0 0 18

Daily rainfall data May to Aug, 1974 to 1976 Daily data for: 1974 Mon May Jun Jul Aug Daily data for: 1975 May Jun Jul Aug Daily data for: 1976 May Jun Jul Aug Day. 1 4.3 -- 0.5 -- 2 6.1 -- 0.8 -- 3 4.6 -- 12.4 2.8 4 1.3 -- -- 1.3 5 -- -- 4.3 -- 6 0.8 -- 1.5 -- 7 1.0 -- -- -- 8 -- 3.0 -- 5.8 9 2.8 -- -- 3.6 10 3.0 3.8 3.0 0.5 11 1.8 4.3 0.8 -- 12 1.3 7.9 -- 3.6 13 -- 2.0 -- -- 14 2.5 -- -- -- 15 2.8 1.3 -- 5.1 16 5.1 5.1 -- -- 17 6.4 -- -- -- 18 -- 2.5 -- -- 19 1.0 -- -- -- 20 0.8 -- -- -- 21 22 0.3 2.3 4.3 -- 23 4.3 1.3 1.0 -- 24 10.4 0.8 -- -- 25 26 3.6 -- -- -- 27 28 2.3 -- 1.3 -- 29 4.8 m -- -- 30 1.0 2.5 -- -- 31 41.9 0.5 -- Mean (Overall: 1.7) 3.7 1.3 1.0 0.7 Total (Overall: 204.0) 114.0 36.8 30.5 22.6 Minimum (Overall: 0.0) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Maximum (Overall: 41.9) 41.9 7.9 12.4 5.8 Number greater than 0.99 (Overall: 45) 21 11 7 6 Number of missing values (Overall: 1) 0 1 0 0 21.3 -- -- -- 1.8 -- -- -- 3.3 -- -- -- 3.0 -- -- -- - 0.5 0.5 -- 1.8 3.3 1.3 0.8 -- -- 8.4 1.5 0.5 0.8 7.1 0.5 -- 0.5 0.8 -- 1.3 -- -- 3.3 9.4 3.8 -- -- 2.8 1.3 -- -- 10.2 -- -- 1.3 5.3 -- 1.8 -- -- -- -- 3.8 0.5 -- -- 4.8 7.4 -- -- -- 3.3 0.8 -- 2.5 7.1 1.0 -- 1.3 8.1 0.3 -- 12.2 2-- 0.3 -- -- 1.3 0.8 -- -- -- m -- -- 2.3 -- -- Mean (Overall: 1.3) 2.9 0.5 0.6 1.0 Total (Overall: 155.7) 90.7 13.2 19.8 32.0 Minimum(Overall: 0.0) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Maximum(Overall: 21.3) 21.3 3.8 8.4 12.2 Number greater than 0.99 (Overall: 32) 16 4 4 8 Number of missing values (Overall: 1) 0 1 0 0 -- 0.5 8.1 -- -- 1.0 2.0 -- -- 1.0 0.5 -- -- 3.3 -- -- 1.3 -- -- -- -- 14.0 2.5 -- 0.8 -- -- 0.3 0.5 0.5 0.5 -- 1.5 -- 5.1 -- -- 0.5 -- -- 1.5 -- -- -- -- -- -- 1.3 4.6 -- -- 3.3 7.6 2.8 -- 0.3 2.8 15.5 4.6 -- 7.4 3.6 -- -- 1.0 13.0 0.3 -- 3.0 1.3 17.8 -- 3.0 4.6 3.3 2.0 -- -- 0.8 -- 0.5 2.8 -- -- -- 8.1 3.3 -- 0.3 4.1 -- 2.3 3.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- 9.1 -- 0.5 -- -- -- -- -- 0.3 2.3 4.8 -- -- 3.6 -- -- Mean (Overall: 1.6) 1.4 2.7 1.6 0.6 Total (Overall: 194.1) 44.7 81.8 48.8 18.8 Minimum(Overall: 0.0) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Maximum(Overall: 17.8) 7.6 15.5 17.8 9.1 Number greater than 0.99 (Overall: 40) 13 14 8 5 19

Daily data rainfall May to Aug, 2008 to 2010 Daily data for: 2008 Mon May Jun Jul Aug Daily data for: 2009 May Jun Jul Aug Daily data for: 2010 May Jun Jul Aug Day. 1 6.2 1.9 0.1 11.1 2 0.3 5.2 4.3 1.1 3 1.6 1.6 5.3 0.5 4 0.4 6.5 0.4 1.7 5 -- 1.3 1.1 0.1 6 0.5 -- -- 0.6 7 -- 0.7 0.8 -- 8 -- 0.8 2.0 -- 9 0.4 -- -- -- 10 0.1 -- -- 1.6 11 9.6 0.3 -- 0.7 12 0.7 1.5 -- 2.7 13 -- 2.2 0.2 -- 14 0.7 4.7 -- 0.2 15 1.4 -- -- 0.5 16 0.2 2.9 -- -- 17 3.9 -- -- 0.1 18 -- 0.1 1.9 -- 19 1.6 1.9 -- 9.0 20 47.2 5.6 -- 0.4 21 0.6 2.9 0.2 -- 22 -- -- 1.0 -- 23 1.9 -- 4.5 -- 24 1.4 0.4 0.6 -- 25 -- 2.6 0.1 -- 26 -- 0.7 0.7 -- 27 1.2 0.5 -- -- 28 0.1 6.1 -- -- 29 -- 2.7 1.7 -- 30 -- -- 0.3 -- 31 0.3 1.4 -- Mean (Overall: 1.6) 2.6 1.8 0.9 1.0 Total(Overall: 190.3) 80.3 53.1 26.6 30.3 Minimum (Overall: 0.0) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Maximum (Overall: 47.2) 47.2 6.5 5.3 11.1 Number greater than 0.99 (Overall: 40) 10 15 9 6 -- 0.5 3.0 -- 0.4 0.5 4.7 6.1 -- 3.4 -- -- 0.2 0.3 0.2 -- 2.6 -- 1.3 -- -- -- 0.1 -- 0.5 2.8 -- 7.5 0.5 -- -- 1.4 0.7 -- -- 0.1 -- 3.6 0.1 -- -- 2.9 0.1 -- -- -- 0.1 -- 0.4 0.2 1.5 5.1 0.7 12.4 -- -- 4.7 0.3 2.9 -- 5.8 -- -- -- 0.2 -- -- -- 1.2 1.5 -- 0.1 0.8 4.0 0.1 1.2 6.8 -- -- -- 2.5 0.4 -- -- 2.0 -- -- 2.2 -- 1.9 -- 9.2 -- -- -- 1.0 1.7 0.6 -- 0.5 0.4 -- -- 1.4 -- -- -- 0.3 0.4 -- -- -- 1.1 m 5.7 24.1 2.2 0.2 -- 0.5 0.5 -- -- Mean (Overall: 1.3) 1.2 1.2 0.6 2.0 Total (Overall: 152.3) 36.3 35.5 19.8 60.7 Minimum(Overall: 0.0) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Maximum(Overall: 24.1) 6.8 12.4 5.7 24.1 Number greater than 0.99 Overall: 34) 10 8 6 10 Number of missing values (Overall: 1) 0 1 0 0 -- 1.9 -- 3.2 0.1 -- -- -- -- 0.1 -- -- -- 3.5 0.9 -- -- 0.5 -- 0.4 -- 0.8 -- -- -- -- 25.1 0.8 8.6 -- 0.1 3.1 -- -- 1.6 0.7 1.0 0.1 -- 5.2 -- -- -- 93.9 -- -- 0.2 0.7 -- -- -- 22.9 6.7 -- -- 0.2 7.8 0.1 -- -- 2.1 0.1 -- -- 2.0 0.2 0.8 -- 2.2 -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.1 -- -- -- 9.2 6.5 7.2 -- 11.9 0.4 -- -- -- -- -- 0.2 -- 2.0 m 0.2 -- 1.5 -- 5.3 -- 0.3 0.2 -- Mean (Overall: 2.1) 1.3 0.5 1.1 4.9 Total (Overall: 242.6) 41.2 14.5 34.6 152.3 Minimum (Overall: 0.0) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Maximum(Overall: 93.9) 8.6 7.2 25.1 93.9 Number greater than 0.99 (Overall: 23) 10 3 3 7 Number of missing values (Overall: 1) 0 1 0 0 20