My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP06419
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
6001-7000
>
WSP06419
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:22:41 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 1:36:54 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8276.150
Description
Grand Valley Unit - Colorado River Basin Salinity Project
State
CO
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Water Division
5
Date
7/1/1982
Title
Monitoring and Evaluation Plan -- Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program for Grand Valley Unit and Uinta Basin Unit, Utah -- PART I
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
53
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 />Cv <br />.-:) <br />'-:1' Some of the advantages and disadvantages for each soil monitoring method are: <br />-l <br /> <br />~- .., <br />" ~... <br /> <br />Hethod <br /> <br />Advant~ <br /> <br />1. Feel and <br />appearance <br /> <br />1. Low equipment cost <br />2. Moderate la"or requirement <br />3. Relatively rapid method <br />4. Very simple <br /> <br />2. Gravimetric <br /> <br />1. Direct method <br />2. ~09t accurate <br />3. Moderately simple <br />4. Overall equipment cost <br />rela ti vely low <br /> <br />3. Neutron Moisture 1. Rapid measurements <br />logging 2. An in-situ method <br />(neutron probe) 3. Succesfve measurements <br />are obtained in the same <br />profile <br />4. Overall labor requirement low <br />5. High degree of accuracy <br />6 _ Simple <br /> <br />Field Irrigation Evaluation <br /> <br />Disadv~ntag~ <br /> <br />1. Poor accuracy <br />2. Destructive metho~- <br />additional samples cannot be <br />obtained 1n same site <br />3. Indirect method <br /> <br />1. Large number of samples <br />2. Expensive where large number <br />of samples required <br />3. High labor requirement <br />4. Destructive method <br />5. Relatively slow method <br /> <br />1. Overall equipment cost high <br />2. An indirect methoi-requires <br />calibration at each soil moisture <br />site using gravimetric method <br />3. Requires installation of access tubes <br />4. Requires licensing; <br /> <br />Evaluation of farm irrigation systems will in general be conducted according to <br /> <br />procedure given in National Irrigation Guide Notices No.1, No.2, and No.3. <br /> <br />Some modifications of the procedure is required to account for deep percolation, <br /> <br />changes in procedure for evaluating semicontrolled flood:lng (border), and type <br /> <br />of equipment used in collecting data. Modification of procedure would be made <br /> <br />prior to start of a monitoring program. Adequate data w:l11 be collected to <br /> <br />determine the amount water infiltrated into the soil. All part of the <br /> <br />evaluation, rainfall data will be collected at each evaluation site. <br /> <br />Climatic Data <br /> <br />Special climatic data is needed in the case where daily erop evapotranspiration <br /> <br />(ET) is computed. To compute ET, the Modified Penman method will be used. The <br /> <br />25 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.