Laserfiche WebLink
<br />The Surge Project <br /> <br />l\j <br />co <br />~ <br />CD <br /> <br />Eighty cooperators participated in the surge irrigation research and demonstration projects. Of <br />those eighty, there were forty one in 1992 and thirty nine in 1993, Inigation Water Management (IWM) <br />and surge systems training workshops were held for the participants as well as individual training in the <br />field on the use of the surge systems, Cooperators in the demonstration program were equipped with <br />a surge controller, and either a T -Valve, Inline Valve or a Surge Gate depending on the type of inigation <br />system they were using; j,e, gated pipe or ported ditch, <br /> <br />~~.~./~: <br />."" .~ <br /> <br />Cooperators agreed to let CSU Cooperative Extension monitor their fields for a peliod of two <br />years, The Delta-Monu'ose Cooperative Extension team monitored 216 conventional and surge <br />liTigation events of which 105 produced usable data for the years of 1992 and 1993, The remainder <br />of the data was not usable due to fUITOW washouts, irrigation water cross-over between fuI1'ows, floats <br />disturbed by wildlife, malfunctioning of the data gatheling equipment and siltation build up in the <br />fuI1'oW flumes, In some cases, surge and/or conventional data for a particular event was not available <br />for comparison because of an unavailability of equipment to meet high peak demands. <br /> <br />The total area monitored for 1992 and 1993 included 575,82 acres irrigated conventionally and <br />610,05 acres irrigated by surge, Some irrigation sets were excluded where data collection became a <br />problem during the inigation season, On each site, during each irrigation event, two fuI1'oWS or <br />cOl11Jgations were selected at random and lirigations (surge and conventional) were monitored, <br />Generally non-compacted wheel fUITOWS or cOlTUgations were chosen to be monitored, This produced <br />more conducive conditions regarding the greatest amount of deep percolation, with the least amount of <br />applied water run-off; which is a worst case scenario. Inflow and outflow of the fUlTOWS were measured <br />using specially constructed v-notch fun'ow flumes fitted with stilling wells and potentiometers, The <br />flumes were connected to a model #211 datapod, where the data was collected and stored on a data <br />storage module computer chip, Upon completion of each irrigation event, the equipment was removed <br />from the field to be used elsewhere, The data chips were removed from the datapods and downloaded <br />into a computer information processing system. The information was then processed using a program <br />called 93Flume,wkl & Aing,wkl which are specially designed programs for the surge demonstration. <br /> <br />TIu'ough interagency cooperation, the Soil Conservation Service monitoring team also collected <br />data from two surge demonstration sites, in which total inflow and outflow were measured. The <br />information gathered independently by both agencies provided the opportunity for tlle results to be <br />compared, <br /> <br />Page 10 . Lower Gunnison Surge Demonstration Project <br />