Laserfiche WebLink
<br />~ <br />~.... <br />cr.), . <br />~ <br /> <br />Irrigation monitoring sites were established to represent the <br />general conditions in the Grand Valley with regard to crops, soils, <br />irrigation system, and management practices. criteria established <br />for site selection include that sites be isolated from other <br />fields, i.e. water source for inflow must be independent and <br />tailwater from outflow must be isolated so that water from other <br />sources do not get mixed. A monitoring site is defined as a single <br />. field or a fixed portion of a field, that is. irrigated as a single <br />irrigation set. or a series of sets. A site has a fixed size <br />throughout the irrigation season. <br /> <br />Daily evapotranspiration (ET) data obtained from the two Soil <br />Conservation Service (SCS) weather stations was made available to <br />two local television.stations and one radio stations daily, Monday <br />through Friday. Weekly ET data was provided to two local . <br />newspapers and to the Colorado state University Cooperative <br />Extension at Grand Junction. <br />Local producers could get daily ET information through code-a- <br />phone service. <br /> <br />","-. <br />:;:/~~ <br />-.:-:.':-' <br /> <br />."t _ i <br />, . <br /> <br />1993' Irrigation. Monitoring: in 1993, twenty-two irrigation <br />monitoring sites were established in 17 different fields with <br />improved irrigation systems and three without improved systems <br />(site 57, 58, 59 Table 1, Figure 1). site 54 had earth ditch to <br />siphon tubes in 1992 but had an improved system in 1993. Initially <br />24 sites were established in 1993, but two (15/41) were later <br />dropped because of data collection prOblems. of the.20 fields <br />.monitored, 18 of them had one monitoring site each, two of them had <br />two monitoring sites each for side-by-side comparison of <br />conventional and surge irrigation (discussed in detail later). <br /> <br />...... <br /> <br />;:.........;' <br /> <br />. . <br />. . . <br />For each site monitored in 1993, information on soil type, texture <br />and intake rate, slope, field size, length of run, and irrigation <br />systems is provided in the individual site summary data sheet <br />located in Appendix D. Figure 1 shows the location of the 1993 <br />irrigation monitoring and evaluation sites. <br /> <br />Of the 22 monitoring sites installed in 1993, <br />(sites 57, 58, 59, 60,and 61); however, seven <br />dropped (15/41, 43/44, 45/46, and 49). These <br />problems with field irrigation operations. <br /> <br />In 1990, four conventionally irrigated fields (11, 15, 43,' 45). were <br />split for accommodation of surge systems. Four new surge sites <br />(39, 41, 44, 46) were established in these fields for comparison of <br />surge irrigation with conventional irrigation. These sites were <br />established in conjunction with Colorado State University {CSU) <br />cooperative Extension's and US Bureau of Reclamation's (BOR) "Surge <br />project" in order to provide them with accurate inflow and outflow <br />data. Each cooperator was provided with a surge valve and a <br />controller, and trained in the use of surge valves. The surge <br />system was set up prior to the first irrigation <br /> <br />five of them were <br />from 1992 were <br />dropped sites had <br />, <br />, <br /> <br />new <br /> <br />'.:>.:;:~ <br /> <br />8 <br />