To undertake an economic and agronomic evaluation of a high input treatment versus a district practice treatment.

• The District Practice treatment generated a much higher average gross margin than the High Input treatment ($607 vs $408) over the last 4 years.
• The beds performed worse than their flat counterparts in 1999.
• The District Practice treatment has been much more efficient in producing income relative to costs, by comparison to the High Input treatment.
• Over the 4 years of the trial, the deficit May - November rainfall of 227mm would have contributed significantly to the relatively poor performance of the high input treatment compared to the district practice.