Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Runoff <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />For the "KRK water budget", "present" and "future without" conditions, the <br />tailwater runoff quantity is the amount left after all recognized losses are <br />subtracted from the total farm delivery. This seems reasonable so long as <br />the resulting filtUl"e approximates a rational amount. For the "present" <br />condition this equals 0.34 aCt ft. per aCt and for the "future without" <br />condition it increases to 0.42. Both figures appear reasonable considering <br />that they are system figures and reco,~izing the amount of reuse that takes <br />place in the study area. For the "future with" condition, the tailwater <br />runoff is a calculated value from irrigation design procedures. This value <br />considers very little reuse and is added to other losse$ to calculate the <br />quantity of farm delivery needed. <br />For the "present condition", SCS apparently extrapolated from the tailwater <br />runoff estimates of its sample farms and did not give adequate consideration to <br />reuse. This could give the very high figures they show for "present" and <br />future without" conditions. The "KRK water budget" for "future with" condition' <br />uses the SCS uni t values of zero for sprinklers and 0.53 ac. ft. per ac. for <br />improved surface systems. However, for unimproved surface systems, I used <br />1.0 ac. ft. per ac. instead of the 1.8 they used. USBR measurements on the <br />four test farms they studied showed values of 1, 0.8, 1 and 0.36 ac. ft. per ac, <br /> <br />Conclusion <br /> <br />In reviewing the previous sections, one can see that there is really a <br /> <br /> <br />shortage of site specific data to use in a water budget. Reason and judgement <br /> <br /> <br />can and should be used for what might appear to be a more appI'Opriate budget. <br /> <br /> <br />However, the answers, to some extent, will be different for each person that <br /> <br /> <br />llOes throu,P)l the exercise. As additional data is accumlated and analyses <br /> <br /> <br />refined, the answers will converll;e. Therefore, the water budget should never <br /> <br /> <br />be considered fixed and all concerned should continually work together to <br /> <br />improve it. <br /> <br />nJ <br />