Tools for Irrigation Stewardship Lyndon Kelley, MSU Extension

1
Tools for Irrigation Stewardship Lyndon Kelley,
MSU Extension
Thanks to Dr. Steve Miller - MSU Ag
EngineeringDr. Ted Loudon - MSU Ag
EngineeringDr. Ron Goldy - MSU ExtensionDr.
Jeff Andreasen MSU Geography
2
Size , Scale and Make-up
Michigan 452,000 acres
Indiana 313,000 acres
County Irrigated Acres
St Joseph 104,000
Montcalm 47,000
Branch 39,300
Kalamazoo 29,600
Cass 25,400
Van Buren 23,900
Berrien 19,200
Allegan 15,300
Ottawa 13,500
Calhoun 10,400
Tuscola 5,800
County Irrigated Acres
LaPorte 32,400
Knox 24,600
Elkhart 23,500
LaGrange 21,700
Jasper 20,600
St. Joseph 19,500
Pulaski 19,200
Kosciusko 19,100
Fulton 16,200
Starke 11,100
Bartholomew 9,100
2002 Agricultural Census
3
Size , Scale and Make-up
Indiana 313,000 acres
Michigan 452,000 acres
County Irrigated Acres
LaPorte 32,400 10.4
Knox 24,600 7.8
Elkhart 23,500 7.5
LaGrange 21,700 6.9
Jasper 20,600 6.6
St. Joseph 19,500 6.2
Pulaski 19,200 6.1
Kosciusko 19,100 6.1
Fulton 16,200 5.2
Starke 11,100 3.5
Bartholomew 9,100 2.9
County Irrigated Acres
St Joseph 104,000 23.0
Montcalm 47,000 10.4
Branch 39,300 8.7
Kalamazoo 29,600 6.6
Cass 25,400 5.6
Van Buren 23,900 5.3
Berrien 19,200 4.2
Allegan 15,300 3.4
Ottawa 13,500 3.0
Calhoun 10,400 2.3
Tuscola 5,800 1.3
Summarized from 2002 Agricultural Census
11 Counties 73.8 of total
11 Counties 69.2 of total
4
Size , Scale and Make-up

• Indiana / Michigan Similarities
• Predominantly Sandy Loam soils Irrigated
• Water availability abundant to scarce
• Heavy irrigation - St. Joseph River basin
• Knox / Montcalm geographic, Veg. outliers
• Irrigated crops make-up Corn (commercial,
  seed,)- soybeans, vegetables, alfalfa,
  ornamentals
• Water Regulation modified riparian rights

Summarized from 2002 Agricultural Census
5
Size , Scale and Make-up

• Indiana / Michigan Differences
• Indiana has a heavier emphasis on irrigated corn
• Michigan has a heavier emphasis on irrigated
  vegetables
• Indiana has a more mature and less complicated
  water use regulation system (registration,
  complaints, reporting)

Summarized from 2002 Agricultural Census
6
Targeted Audience Related to Irrigation

• Producers
• Field crop production
• Vegetable production
• Small fruit and tree fruit
• Turf and ornamentals
• Contractors of irrigated crop
• Seed corn production companies
• Vegetable and fruit processor / contractors

7
Technical Irrigation Issues

• Tools for Irrigation Stewardship Getting the
  most out of the water we use
• Helping producers to understand the water cycle
  for their farms.
• Working with irrigation equipment suppliers to
  help the irrigation related industries move
  economically and environmentally forward.

8
Tools for Irrigation Stewardship

• Irrigation System Uniformity
• Preventing Irrigation Runoff (comparing
  irrigation application rate to soil infiltration
  rate)
• Irrigation Scheduling
• Backflow protection
• Avoiding water use conflicts
• Record keeping

9
Needed Irrigation 5.5
Normal rainfall 34.6
Crop need 15.6 total
10
Equip Groundwater Conservation Program

• An NRCS Program to support Irrigation System
  Evaluations and System Corrections

11
Equip Groundwater Conservation Program - Michigan

• Qualifications
• System must have been in place for at least 2
  years
• Must use irrigation scheduling (Computerized or
  Paper System)
• System uniformity coefficient must be below 85
  to enter, and above 85 to qualify for payments.
• Need to have an irrigation conservation plan
• Write up that describes system, water source, how
  the irrigation is applied,

12
EQIP Groundwater Conservation Program - Michigan

• Compensation
• A one time payment of 50/acre.
• A maximum of 160 acres per producer can be
  enrolled in this program.
• Funds for this program are split between
  irrigation management and dairy plate water
  cooler 100 water recovery, total funds available
  somewhere between 380,000.
• See you local NRCS office.
• Deadline to signup for this program will be March
  15, 2007 at the Montcalm County NRCS Office.

13
Conservation Security ProgramReward the best,
Inspire the rest.

1. Trend in Agriculture Government program is away
   from Subsidy based, toward Environmental
   protection.
2. Contracts for 5 or 10 years and payments of 2-8/
   acre (or more) are expected.
3. Available in counties starting in a rotational
   basis.
4. Farm must first meet soil erosion and water
   quality concerns.

14
Conservation Security ProgramReward the best,
Inspire the rest.

• Two years of prior practice record will be
  required.
• Irrigation scheduling.
• Irrigation system evaluation.
• Records water use, scheduling decisions, system
  repairs, evaluation data modifications.

15
Irrigation System Uniformity

• An 1 application should be 1 everywhere in the
  irrigated field
• 10 or less deviation from the average is ideal.
• Over applied area will likely be over applied
  each
• application
• Under applied areas will likely be under applied
  each
• application
• A 30 deviation on a field in an 8 irrigation
  application year will have areas receiving as
  little as 5.6 and as great as 10.4
• Repair all visible system leaks and problems
  first.

16
Irrigation System Uniformity
Basic system evaluation Collect enough uniform
container to to place every 10 feet the length of
the system or across the application pattern.
Spread the container every ten feet from the
center point to the outside edge of the
application area. Run the machine at standard
setting over the container. Measure and record
the water volume caught by each container Note
sample point varying greater than 50 of the
average.
17
Irrigation System Uniformity -Options

• Michigan Groundwater Stewardship Technicians
• Irrigator trainings ( MSU Ext., MGSP, NRCS )
• Private consultants

18
Tower 1
Tower 3
Tower 5
Tower 7
Tower 8
http//web1.msue.msu.edu/stjoseph/anr/anr.htm
19
(No Transcript)
20
Preventing Irrigation Runoff (comparing
irrigation application rate to soil infiltration
rate)
21
Preventing Irrigation Runoff (comparing
irrigation application rate to soil infiltration
rate)

• Sprinkler package or nozzle selection along with
  pressure dictates water application rate .
• Factors that increase runoff
• Small Wetted area or throw of sprinkler
• Low Pressure
• Larger applications volumes
• Soil compaction
• Heavy soils
• Slope
• Row hilling

22

• Instructions for completing the Evaluating
  Potential Irrigation Runoff form
•  
• Identify the areas of the irrigated field that
  has the lowest infiltration rates. (heavy soils,
  slopes, surface compaction).
• Select a transit line in the wetted area just
  behind the machine that covers the identified
  lowest infiltration rates of the field identified
  above.

23

• Instructions for completing the Evaluating
  Potential Irrigation Runoff form continued
•  
• Pace or measure 50 feet between observations
  starting at the pivot point and progressing to
  the furthest reaches of the machine.
• Record observations for each location look at
  several (4-5 areas) representing the row contour
  and differences in row traffic of the location.
  Record any specific concerns that may affect the
  application (drips or leaks) or affect the soils
  ability to take in water (compaction, row
  contours)

Key for Observation column A- no observed
puddling, ponding or sheen between rows B-
puddling, ponding or sheen between rows
identified, but no observed runoff
or flow of water C-observed runoff or flow of
water  
24
Irrigation Scheduling Right to Farm GAAMPs

• Irrigation scheduling for each unit or field
• Irrigation scheduling is the process of
  determining when it is necessary to irrigate and
  how much water to apply
• Irrigation water is applied to replace the water
  used by the plant.

25
Irrigation Scheduling

• Method to determine the appropriate amount of
  water to be applied to a crop at the correct time
  to achieve healthy plants and conserve water
• Can measure soil moisture
• Or
• estimate evapotranspiration (ET) using weather
  data
• Potential ET measured by weighing lysimeter

26
Determining irrigation requirements

• The plant water requirement includes the water
  lost by evaporation into the atmosphere from the
  soil and soil surface
• and by transpiration, which is the amount of
  water used by the plant.
• The combination of these is evapotranspiration
  (ET).

27
Meteorologically, ET depends on

• Evapotranspiration (ET) fn (net radiation)
• fn (temperature)
• fn (wind speed)
• fn (air humidity)

28
Irrigation Scheduling Checkbook Method
29
Primary Factors

• Know available soil water for each unit
• Known depth of rooting for each crop
• Know allowable soil moisture depletion at each
  stage of plant growth
• Use evapotranspiration data to estimate crop
  water use
• Measure rainfall in each field
• Use container capacity for nursery crops

30
Think of your soil as a bank
Rainfall and irrigation water are deposit into
the bank
Plant water use is a removal from the bank
31
Think of your soil as a bank
Soil type Heavier soil can hold more water /
foot of depth than light soils
Water holding capacity The soil (bank) can hold
only a given volume of water before it allow it
to pass lower down.
Intake rate Water applied faster than the soil
intake rate is lost.
Deletion Plants may can pull out only 30 60
of the water
Rooting depth The plant can only get water to
the depth of its roots.
Water lost from the bottom of the profile can
wash out (leach) water soluble nutrients and
pesticides.
32
Calculating Water Holding Capacity
Soil Name Depth Inches Available water holding capacity Average Available water holding capacity Ave. Available water holding capacity ( 24 in.) Ave. Available water holding capacity ( 36 in.)
Oshtemo 0 - 14 14 35 35 - 60 0.10 0.15 0.12 0.19 0.06 0.10 0.125 0.155 0.08 14 x 0.1251.75 10 x 0.1551.55 ----------------------- 3.3 14 x 0.125 1.75 21 x 0.155 3.26 1 x 0.08 0.08 ----------------------- 5.09
Spinks 0 10 10 26 26 - 60 0.08 0.10 0.08 0.10 0.04 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.06 10 x 0.09 0.9 14 x 0.09 1.26 ----------------------- 2.16 10 x 0.09 0.9 16 x 0.09 1.26 8 x 0.06 0.48 ----------------------- 2.64
33
Calculating Water Holding Capacity
Soil Name Depth Inches Available water holding capacity Average Available water holding capacity Ave. Available water holding capacity ( 24 in.) Ave. Available water holding capacity ( 36 in.)
Bronson 0 - 10 11 26 27 34 35 - 60 0.13 0.15 0.12 0.18 0.06 0.08 0.02 0.04 0.14 0.15 0.07 0.03 10 x 0.141.4 14 x 0.152.7 ----------------------- 4.1 10 x 0.141.4 16 x 0.15 3.26 8 x 0.07 0.56 2 x 0.03 0.06 ----------------------- 5.28
Spinks 0 10 10 26 26 - 60 0.08 0.10 0.08 0.10 0.04 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.06 10 x 0.09 0.9 14 x 0.09 1.26 ----------------------- 2.16 10 x 0.09 0.9 16 x 0.09 1.26 8 x 0.06 0.48 ----------------------- 2.64
34
Available Water Holding Capacity
Soil Type / depth Bronson Capac Oshtemo Spinks
0to 6 0to 6 .84 .84 1.2 1.2 .75 .75 .54 .54
6to 12 0to 12 .86 1.70 1.2 2.4 .75 1.50 .54 1.08
12 to 18 0to 18 .90 2.60 .99 3.39 .87 2.37 .54 1.62
18 to 24 0 to 24 .90 3.50 .99 4.38 .93 3.30 .54 2.16
24 to 30 0 to 30 .58 4.80 .99 5.37 .93 4.23 .42 2.58
30 to 36 0to 36 .34 5.14 .93 6.30 .86 5.06 .36 2.94
35
Irrigation Scheduling Checkbook Method
University of Minnesota 

• Items to Conduct Checkbook Irrigation Scheduling
• Two or more rain gauges
• Max-Min thermometer or access to local
  temperature reports
• Soil probe or in field moisture sensors
• Daily crop water use table or local ET hotline or
  website report
• Soil water balance worksheets
• Estimate of soil moisture holding capacity

36
Rain Gauges

• Basic unit 2 inch opening
• Cost less than 10
• One rain gauge for each 40 acres.
• Recording rain gauge cost 50 - 100

37
60
SW 1/4
Frasier
3.0
30
50
1.5
2.23 2.06 1.89 1.69 1.49 2.07 1.90
Jun 21 Jun 22 Jun 23 Jun 24 Jun 25 Jun 26
75 75 85 75 75 75
.17 .17 .20 .20 .17 .17
-0- -0- -0- -0- -0- -0-
0.75
38
60
SW 1/4
Frasier
60
SW 1/4
Frasier
3.0
30
3.0
30
50
1.5
50
1.5
2.23 2.06 1.89 1.69 1.49 2.07 1.90
2.23 2.06 1.89 1.69 1.49 2.07 1.90
0.77 0.94 1.11 1.31 1.51 0.93 1.10
Jun 21 Jun 22 Jun 23 Jun 24 Jun 25 Jun 26
75 75 85 75 75 75
.17 .17 .20 .20 .17 .17
-0- -0- -0- -0- -0- -0-
Jun 21 Jun 22 Jun 23 Jun 24 Jun 25 Jun 26
75 75 85 75 75 75
.17 .17 .20 .20 .17 .17
-0- -0- -0- -0- -0- -0-
0.75
0.75
39
Average Water Use for Christmas trees (estimated
at 1 inch/week) in inches/day
Ave. Temp May 1 2 3 4 Jun5 6 7 8 Jul 9 10 11 12 Aug 13 14 15 16 Sep17
50-59 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14
60-69 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14
70-79 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14
80-89 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14
90-99 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14 .14
Estimate of daily ET at 1 inch per week Estimate
40
Table 9. Average water use for any other crops
when at full canopy at different times of the
season
Daily high Temp May 1 2 3 4 Jun5 6 7 8 Jul 9 10 11 12 Aug 13 14 15 16 Sep 17
50-59 .06 .07 .07 .08 .08 .08 09 .09 09 09 09 .08 .08 .08 07 .07 06
60-69 .09 .10 .11 .11 .12 .12 .13 .13 .13 .13 .13 .12 .12 .12 .11 .10 .09
70-79 .12 .14 .14 .15 .15 .15 .17 .17 .17 .17 .17 .16 .16 .16 .14 .13 .12
80-89 .15 .17 .18 .18 .19 .19 .20 .20 .21 .21 .21 .20 .20 .20 .17 .16 .15
90-99 .18 .20 .21 .22 .22 .22 .24 .24 .25 .25 .25 .24 .24 .23 .21 .19 .18
Source Data estimates full potential of daily ET
per week by Killen, and was placed in the above
table by Wright in January 2002.
41
Field beans
Corn
Soys
Potato
Alfalfa
Alfalfa
Corn
Field beans
Soys
From Minnesota Extension bulletin Irrigation
Scheduling, assuming temperature 80-89
42
Estimates of ET

• Net radiation
• Max and min temperatures
• Relative humidly
• Wind
• Purdue Agronomy web site MichIna Irrigation
  Scheduler Est. From High / Low temp. date
• www.agry.purdue.edu/irrigation/IrrDown.htm

43
Estimates of ET

• U of Wisconsin web site -Next/rad radar
  http//www.soils.wisc.edu/wimnext/
• Net radiation
• Max and min temperatures
• Relative humidly
• Wind
• Provides the maximum water removal for the day

44
(No Transcript)
45
(No Transcript)
46
(No Transcript)
47
(No Transcript)
48
Converting acre inches to gallonsfor trickle
irrigation

• Calculate the of area covered by trees
• ( of area you intend to water / tree )
• One acre 43,560 sq.ft.
• One acre inch 27,154 gallons
• Example
• The large tree you are watering have a diameter
  of 6.5 ft.
• 6.5 ft. x 6.5 ft. 42 sq.ft. roughly 1/1000 of
  an acre
• 26 to 27 gallon / tree
• (include uncontrolled grass or weed area that is
  watered in tree area)

49
Irrigation Scheduling Checkbook Challenges
Errors will accumulate over time -Weekly ground
truthing needed Rainfall variability is more
than often considered Only "effective rainfall
and irrigation should be considered Only water
entering root zone is "effective
50
Methods to Estimate Soil Moisture

• Feel an Appearance
• Electrical resistance electrodes on blocks in
  soil
• Tensiometers measures soil moisture tension
• Other probes Nuetron, TDR

51
(No Transcript)
52
Squeeze, Feel and Look
53
Not very accurate
Doesnt sample the entire root zone
Experience with the site important
54
Gravimetric Moisture sampling

• The standard for accuracy by which other are
  measured.
• Known volume of soil
• Wet weight compared to dry weight
• Used to calibrate other systems
• Very time consuming

55
(No Transcript)
56
Tensiometers
57

58
(No Transcript)
59
Soil water deficit estimates in inches per foot
for various soil tensions.
  Soil tension--centibars Soil tension--centibars Soil tension--centibars Soil tension--centibars Soil tension--centibars Soil tension--centibars Soil tension--centibars Soil tension--centibars
Soil texture 10 30 50 50 70 100 200 1500
Coarse sand 0 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.6 0.7
Fine sand 0 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.6 0.7 0.9 1.1
Loamy sand 0 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.8 0.9 1.1 1.4
Sandy loam 0 0.5 0.7 0.7 0.9 1 1.3 1.7
Loam-Clay               Loam-Clay               Loam-Clay               Loam-Clay               Loam-Clay               Loam-Clay               Loam-Clay               Loam-Clay               Loam-Clay              
Clay loams 0 0.2 0.2 .5 0.8 1.0 1.6 2.4
1500 centibars is permanent wilting point and
the soil water deficit value is equal to the
soil's total available water holding capacity.
60
Tensiometers
Good low tech system Common problem is to break
tension and loose reading near wilt point Must be
installed with the tip in good contact with the
soil Allow to come into equilibrium (few hours
to a few days)
61
                                                  
                                
                                  
62
(No Transcript)
63
Resistance
64
Resistance Blocks
Delmhorst Instrument Co.
MEA
65
(No Transcript)
66
Resistance Blocks
Good Soil Contact Important
Some Last Only One Season (gypsum)
Good in Fine Textured Soils
Readings Vary With Soil Type
67
Neutron Probe
Washington State University
New Mexico State University
68
Neutron Probe
Probe emits neutrons that interact with soil
hydrogen which is primarily present in soil water
Fast and Accurate (except in the top 8)
Expensive - 4000
Radiation Hazard (need a license)
69
Time Domain Reflectometry
Mesa Systems Co.
70
Time Domain Reflectometry
TDR devices send electrical pulses into the soil
and measure the velocity of the reflected wave
Difficult to install
Accurate
Useful for all soil types
Expensive 6000 - 7000
71
FrequencyDomainReflectometry
72
Frequency Domain Reflectometry
Determines soil Electrical Capacitance by
measuring the difference between an emitted
signal and the returning signal
Proper installation of access tubes important.
(No air between tube and soil)
73
Tube installation can be difficult (clay/stones)
Tube removal can be difficult
Need to establish baseline readings at
installation
Rapid and Accurate but a little pricey 5000
74
(No Transcript)
75
(No Transcript)
76
(No Transcript)
77
(No Transcript)
78
(No Transcript)
79
Qualitative evaluation of soil water monitoring
devices.  
DEVICE NP TDR GS AP AQ TM GB WB
INITIAL COST 3 1 8 2 7 8 8 8
FIELD SITE SETUP REQUIREMENTS 7 3 10 3 10 7 6 6
OBTAINING A ROUTINE READING 8 8 1 8 4 10 8 8
INTERPRETATION OF READINGS 10 10 10 10 3 5 3 5
ACCURACY 10 10 10 8 2 7 2 3
MAINTENANCE 9 9 8 9 7 3 9 9
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS 2 8 5 8 9 7 5 8
COMPOSITE RATING 49 49 52 48 42 47 41 47
A score of 1 is least favorable while a score of
10 is most favorable.
AQ - Aquaterr Probe TM - Tensiometer GB - Gypsum
Block WB - Watermark Block
NP - Neutron Probe TDR -Time Domain
Reflectometry GS - Gravimetric Sampling AP -
Troxler Sentry 200-AP
80
Are appropriate backflow prevention devices in
place and properly maintained if fertigation or
chemigation is used?
Backflow prevention safety devices are used and
properly maintained if fertigation or chemigation
are used.
2.9 Irrigation Management Practices
81
Are appropriate backflow prevention devices in
place and properly maintained if fertigation or
chemigation is used?
Distance requirements between well and
contamination, and agricultural
chemical/fertilizer storage and preparation areas
are at least 150 feet from the well.
2.11 Irrigation Management Practices
82
Irrigation management to Protect Groundwater

• Backflow protection with Air gap and vacuum
  relief
• -required for chemigation and fertigation
• - good idea for all systems.
• -Interlocks between nitrogen pump and irrigation
  pump.
• -Backflow protection between injection point and
  supply tank.

83
Chemigation / Fertigation Systems - Safety
Interlock
84
Are split applications of nitrogen fertilizer
used when nitrogen is used in irrigated field?
Split applications of nitrogen fertilizer are
used when nitrogen is used in an irrigated field.
N application does not exceed MSU
recommendation.
2.8 Irrigation Management Practices
85
SUBSURFACE DRIP
86
(No Transcript)
87
(No Transcript)
88
(No Transcript)
89
Subsurface Drip Irrigation
Subsurface Drip Surface Drip
90
(No Transcript)
91
Avoiding water use conflicts
Except for cost, well water is the
preferred water source for irrigation.
A well owner may not diminish the use of well
water of his neighbors If a neighbors well use
is impaired you legally must rectify the
situation if responsible.
92
Legal aspects groundwater useGood irrigator
response to neighbors well problems

• pump from another location
• (There is no restriction on transport or use
  from other locations from wells).

93
Proactive Options for Agricultural Consider
Using Surface Water ACT 177, P.A. 2003 only
affect well water use

• Riparian Doctrine Surface Water -Reasonable use
  rule- allowing diminished flow for extraordinary
  use such as recreational, municipal, industrial
  or agriculture use, as long as other riparian
  owner Natural Uses where not impaired
• -Extraordinary uses have been considered
  equal.

94
Proactive Options for Agricultural

• Legal aspects of groundwater use have not
  changed A well owner may not diminish the use
  of well water of his neighbors
• A prudent response to a neighbors
  substantiated complaint of being negatively
  effect by an irrigation well is to offer to
  deepen their well and consider it an irrigation
  cost
• Identify the neighbor you may affect and
  layout a plan of action to prevent or provide
  remediation of the problem if it occurs.

95
Proactive Options for Agricultural

• Identify the neighbor you may affect and
  layout a plan of action for remediation of the
  problem if it occurs.
• You can get scanned well logs off of the internet
  (1999 and older) by Township and section at
• www.deq.state.mi.us/well-logs
• Well logs that are 2000 and newer are available
  on WELLOGIC at
• http//dwrp.deq.state. mi.us/wellogic
• You need a username and password for wellogic,
• (issued to registered well drillers and
  agencies)

96
Does your well affect neighbors?
Home well
Irrigation well
Groundwater flow direction
Home well
Zone of influence
Irrigation well
Zone of influence
Home well
97
GW DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCESS PA. 177
WELL DRILLERS ASSESSMENT
ON-SITE INVESTIGATION
COMPLAINT FILING
COMPLAINT VERIFICATION
RESOLUTION
CIRCUIT COURT APPEAL
PROPOSE REMEDY
DEQ ISSUES ORDER
98
PROACTIVE GROUNDWATER DISPUTE RESOLUTION
Identify neighbor your Well may effect
Devise a plan for them to contact you if Well
problems arise
If a well problem arises
Contact well driller for assessment of well
Circuit court avoided
Well driller proposes remedy
Formal complaint filing avoided
Farmer is a neighborhood hero
Large well user pays RESOLUTION