WSP02111 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

w (.:) ~ ....... i)X;"1991 Irrigation Monitoring: In 1991, twenty three irr,igation 'monitoring sites were established in 18 different fields with improved irrigation systems <Table 1, Figure 1). Of the 18 fields monitored, 13 of them had one monitoring site each, five of them had two mon:itoring sites for side by side comparison of conventional with surge irrigation. For each site mon j to red in 1991, intake rate, slope, field size, is provided in the individual si Appendix D. Figure 1 shows the monitoring and evaluation sites. information on soi I type, texture .nd length of run, and irrigation systems te summary data sheet located in 'I ocat i on of ,the 1991 i rr i gat i on AI I 1990 monito~ing fields were monitored In 1991 with the exception of fields 12 and 27. Site 45 was dropped because the owner decided to irrigate the whole field with surge system. These three sites were dropped because of problems with ownership chan~es and field jr"rigation operations. Field 13 '...J8S reactivat.ed aga.in.after a few years of not being monitored; the original cablegation system was replaced with a new surge system. However, o~e new field 149/50) was added in 1991 <Table 1>. ,"0,:,;' In 1990 four surge sites 139, 41, 44, 46> were added to four different fields where conventional sites were located for comparison of surge with conventional irrigation <Table I). These sj'tes were established in conjunction with Colorado State Cooperative Extension's and the Bureau of Reclamation's "Surge Project" in order to provide them with accurate inflow and outflow data. Each cooperator was provided with a surge valve and a controller and trained in the use of surge valves.' The surge system was set up prior to the first irrigation and used throughout the season. In 1991. two more fields were added for compariSOn of surge and conventional irrigation 126/51, and 49/50>. However, site 45 from 1990 was not used for comparison. Therefore, five comparison sites were establ ished in 1991. .......... . . .~.. Of the 23 sites monitored, one had microspray system, two had siderol sprinkler systems and 20 had surface irrigation systems. Irrigation systems at each site is provided in Table 2. At each field with a surface irrigation system; automated electronic flow recorders were i nsta I I ed to measure the vo I ume of i nf I ow and outf I ow. These f I ow recorders were connected to electronic data recorders. The recorders measured inflow and outflow every 10 or 30 minutes. The measured flow data was recorded and stored In the data recorders. At siderol I sprinkler or microspray irrigation system volume of inflow was obtained from in-line mechanical located on the sites. There is no surface runoff and outflow was therefore not measured, For these sites, were considered to be evaporation losses ITable 2>. sites, the flow meters the volume of outflow values ...... 8