Laserfiche WebLink
<br />consumption to landscape size, it is impossible to know if a participant is over-watering. <br />A common misconception is that if a property is using a large amount of water or has a <br />large landscape, the property is most likely over-watering. However, a trend was <br />observed during the course of this study that actually indicated the opposite. That is to <br />say that the larger properties tended to be less likely to be over-watered. Nonetheless, <br />even if these large properties are watering the correct amount given their landscape size <br />and the ET rate, they still might be categorized as a "high water user." <br /> <br />Therefore, it is possible that alternative initiatives such as limiting the amount of turf that <br />can exist in new landscapes, reducing the amount of turf in existing landscapes, and <br />implementing xeric alternatives to turf would be helpful in water conservation measures. <br /> <br />Another finding observed during this analysis was the role that drought and mandatory <br />watering restrictions had on outdoor water use. The 2002 drought prompted many cities <br />along the Front Range to implement mandatory watering restrictions. As can be <br />expected, during 2002 water use was considerably lower than average for most <br />properties. However, a "roll-over affect" or "drought shadow" was observed in the year <br />following the drought in which mandatory watering restrictions were no longer in effect. <br />For example, in 2003, two-thirds of households analyzed were watering below the ET <br />rate. However, in 2004, that number dropped to only one-third of households watering <br />below the ET rate. In other words, a general trend was observed in which water use <br />tended to increase with each year after the drought. The irrigation inspection program <br />effectively reduced the water use of households watering above the ET rate in the years <br />following the drought. Though the severe restrictions did result in reduced water use, the <br />success of Slow the Flow Colorado provides the basis for efficiency as a means of water <br />conservation, rather then solely relying on severe restrictions to meet water use reduction <br />or conservation goals. <br /> <br />Another outcome to consider is that households watering below ET prior to the <br />inspection tended to increase water use after the inspection (the trend was to water closer <br />to actual ET rates, without watering above ET rates). Nonetheless, these customers still <br />received valuable information from the inspection regarding Best Management Practices <br />and efficient water use. The urban landscape has many environmental and community <br />benefits, such as reducing the "heat island" effect and filtering storm water. Through <br />Slow the Flow Colorado, customers can help maximize the benefits of the urban <br />landscape by maintaining healthy lawns and using water as efficiently as possible. <br /> <br />Problems seen in residential irrigation systems occurred in both contractor and <br />homeowner installed systems. In almost all cases maintenance problems contributed to <br />inefficient water use, or water waste. Improper design was also widely seen and posed a <br />much larger burden on the homeowner to finance and complete changes that would <br />improve upon efficiency. Landscape ordinances prior to installation could be an effective <br />tool in addressing this problem. <br /> <br />10 <br />