My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CRC_SlowTheFlowPhase2_FinalReport
CWCB
>
Water Efficiency Grants
>
Day Forward
>
CRC_SlowTheFlowPhase2_FinalReport
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/17/2011 9:35:01 AM
Creation date
8/1/2007 4:14:00 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Efficiency Grants
Water Efficiency Grant Type
Public Education & Outreach Grant
Contract/PO #
OE PDA 07-21
Applicant
Center for Resource Conservation
Project Name
Slow the Flow Colorado 2006: Irrigation Audit Program
Title
Slow the Flow Colorado 2006 Colorado Water Conservation Board Final Report
Date
6/1/2007
County
Boulder
Water Efficiency - Doc Type
Final Report
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
36
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />of error. As such, any roots that are less than 4 inches deep are considered to be in <br />extremely poor health. In this case, poor health refers to the inability of the grass to <br />withstand extreme temperatures, drought, and disease. <br /> <br />Head Type 0/0 ~ 6 inches 0/0 ~ 4 inches 0/0 < 4 inches <br />Sprays 17.8 64.5 35.5 <br />Rotors 13.5 57.5 42.5 <br />Total 16.2 61.8 38.2 <br /> <br />Evapotranspiration (0/0 Over/Under-watered) <br />Evapotranspiration (ET) is the loss of water by evaporation from the soil and <br />transpiration from plants. Historical climatic averages show that Kentucl<y Blue grass <br />along the Front Range needs 27 inches of water during the growing season (May - Sept) <br />to replace the amount of water lost to evapotranspiration. By utilizing individual water <br />records to derive outdoor water use, the amount over/under-watered (% ET) in a given <br />year for each household can be estimated. <br /> <br />The graphs below display the watering trends for select years for households that <br />received an irrigation inspection in 2006. The cities of Golden, Greeley and Westminster <br />were eliminated from this analysis due to unusable water records for these years. Also <br />note that in 2005 more households were analyzed as compared to 2004. This is partly <br />due to an increase of new households in 2005 as well as a lacl< of information available <br />for 2004. <br /> <br />2005 Watering Practices of Households Audited in 2006 as Compared to <br />Front Range Historical Evapotranspiration (ET) Rate <br /> <br />120 <br />100 <br />80 <br />60 <br />40 <br />20 <br />o <br /> <br /> <br />I_ # of households 1 <br /> <br /><-100 -100 -8010-6010-4010-20100102010401060108010 >100 <br />10 -81 -61 -41 -21 -1 19 39 59 79 99 <br /> <br />0/0 Over/Under ET <br /> <br />8 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.