DOCSLIB.ORG

Surface Irrigation Return Flows Vary

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Surface Irrigation Return Flows Vary flooded throughout the growing season; 2.36 ac-ftlac were lost by seepage.) Surface irrigation the major crops in PDD are tomato, cot- Although the concentration of TDS ton, and other row and field crops, which in the spill water increased 1.7-foId, the return flowsvary are normally furrow irrigated. unit mass emission rate (Iblac) was only GCID captures and reuses about 44 44 percent of that brought in by the sup- percent of its drain waters within the dis- ply water, which is in line with the dis- trict and discharges the rest into the trict-wide 61 percent mass emission of Kenneth K. Tanji Colusa Basin Drain (CBD), where it is re- salts. Note that concentration of sus- Muhammad M. lqbal used downstream before final discharge pended solids was reduced by about one- Ann F. Quek back into the Sacramento River. PDD half, and the mass by nearly one-tenth. Ronald M.Van De Pol and the neighboring Central California As for nutrients, the nitrogen con- Linda P. Wagenet Irrigation District capture and reuse centration in the drain water was about Roger Fujii about 20 percent of PDDs surface drain- 1% times greater, but only 38 percent of Rudy J. Schnagl age (not counting reuse at farm levels) the nitrogen brought in by the water was Dave A. Prewitt and discharge the remainder into the discharged. It should be noted that about Grasslands Water District, where it is re- 90 percent of the total nitrogen was in uch attention is being focused on used in irrigated pastures and waterfowl the form of organic nitrogen, which im- M irrigation return flows as a result habitats. A small part eventually enters plies only small losses of chemical nitro- of recent legislation on water quality and the middle reaches of the San Joaquin gen fertilizers in runoff waters. pollution control and the concern for River. Table 4 contains water quantity water and energy conservation. State- Table 2 presents the flow-weighted and quality data for a tile-drained farm wide, surface irrigation return flows are average quality of supply and drain cropped to cotton, tomato, and wheat in nearly nonexistent where water normally waters from CGID and PDD. The impli- the PDD. The grower blended drain wa- is scarce or expensive. This report des- cations of these data are of considerable ters captured from the Panoche Drain cribes the variations in flow and quality importance. In CGID, the 2-fold increase with fresh water obtained from the Del- characteristics of surface drainage waters in concentration of total dissolved solids ta-Mendota Canal (DMC). Quality para- from two irrigation districts in Cali- (TDS)relative to supply water can be at- meters are given for the waters and for fornia’s Central Valley, and the factors tributed to the usual 2- to 4-fold increase the tile effluents collected in two tile that contribute to such variations. by evapotranspiration by crop plants. In sumps. The extremely high salinity level, PDD, however, the increase is 9.6-fold high boron content, and low sediment Irrigation return flows and quality and must be attributed to the pickup of concentration of the tile effluents are due characteristics salts from the chemical weathering (dis- more to the dissolved salts, gypsum, and solution) of native soil salts and minerals boron native to the soil than they are to The major components of surface (primarily gypsum). This is confirmed by the supply water. return flows include surface runoff (irri- soil and tile drain water analyses. A computer model predicted the gation tail water, rainfall runoff, and op- The increase in concentration of total dissolved salts of tile effluents in erational spills from distribution systems) suspended solids (SS)in drain water rela- PDD would be 7,150 mghter, which and collected subsurface drainage (efflu- tive to supply water is 1.5-fold in GCID, agrees with the 6,700 to 8,900 mgfliter ents from tile drainage and drainage and again much larger (3.9-fold) in PDD. (flow-weighted average of 7,380 mglliter) wells, and subsurface waters intercepted This may be attributed to two major fac- reported in table 4. The model predicted by natural and man-made open channels). tors: (1)the flooded rice fields of GCID the concentration of total dissolved solids With some exceptions, the various tend to act as settling basins for sus- in the surface irrigation return flow would components of surface return flows are pended matter, and (2) because of their be 1,820 mglliter (and that it would have collected in the same drain regardless of physical and chemical properties, surface been only 460 mg/liter if gypsum were their origin (surface or subsurface, point soils in the PDD are more susceptible to not present in the PDD soils). The mea- source or nonpoint source). A part of these erosion under surface irrigation methods. sured concentration was 2,050 mgfliter drain waters is reused, either by plan or However, on a mass basis, only (table 21. incidentally, at the site of production or slightly more sediments were discharged In summary, the ranges of varia- downstream. The remainder is discharged by PDD than were brought in by the tions in the quality and quantity of sur- with no readily apparent beneficial uses. supply water (15,487 vs. 13,135 tons). The face irrigation return flows are highly Table 1 shows expected differences impact of pollutants on possibilities of site-specific, and are affected by the para- in quality characteristics for collected water use often is appraised in terms of meters presented here and by many irrigation return flows. These are des- concentrations only; mass emission of other factors. Quantity is influenced by: cribed relative to the supply water, be- pollutants also should be considered. availability and cost of supply water; ir- cause actual concentrations in both supply rigation application methods and ef- and discharge waters are highly variable Rice fields vs. tile-drained farm ficiencies; extent of reuse at the on-farm, from place to place. district, and basin levels; special cultural Table 3 summarizes data obtained practices; and constraints on reuse due District supply water vs. drain from four commercial rice fields in GCID. to the presence of excess boron, sodium, water The supply (inflow) and the surface runoff and chloride, Quality is influenced by: (outflow) waters were continuously moni- the supply water; presence of salts, Figure 1 is a schematic diagram of tored over the whole growing season, and boron, and nitrogen native to the soils; supply and drain waters for the Glenn- various quality parameters were mea- leaching fraction and salt pickuplsalt Colusa Irrigation District (GCID) in the sured at weekly to twice-monthly inter- deposition phenomenon; use of agricul- west side of the Sacramento Valley; fig- vals. The average amount of water ap- tural chemicals and wastes, such as ani- ure 2 is for the Panoche Drainage Dis- plied was 7.64 acre-feet per acre (ac-ftlac), mal manures; erodibility of surface soils trict (PDDI in the west side of the San of which 1.91 ac-ft/ac were discharged as and open drain channel banks; and dis- Joaquin Valley. The dominant crop in spill water. (An estimated 3.37 ac-ft/ac charges into irrigation drains by other GCID is rice, which is usually contour were used in evapotranspiration, and sectors of society. 30CWWIAAGRICULTURE. MAY 1977 Kenneth K. Tanji is Associate Water Sci- R. J. Miller and W. 0. Pruitt of the same gation was made possible through the entist and Principal Investigator, Mu- department and G. L. Horner of USDA- cooperation and support of Robert Clark hammad M. Iqbal is Junior Developmen- Economic Research Service. We also ac- and Richard Haupala of Glenn-Colusa Irri- tal Engineer, Ann F. Quek is Staff Re- knowledge the assistance of J. W. Gold- gation District and Ray Ram of Panoche search Associate III, Ronald M. Van De inger, D. W. Wolfe, and J. A. Sellick for Drainage District. This work was partly Pol was Postgraduate Research Water laboratory and field work This investi- supported by EPA Grant No. R803603. Scientist, Linda P. Wagenet was Re- search Assistant, Roger Fujii and Rudy J. Schnagl are Research Assistants, and Dave A. Prewitt is Staff Research Associ- ate I, all of the Department of Land, Air, and Water Resources, University of Cali- fornia, Davis. This project staff acknow- ledges the overall guidance and support given by Co-Investigators J. W. Biggar, TABLE 1 Collected Surface Irrigation Return Flow Components and Their Expected Qualily Characteristics as Related to Applied Wales 835.400 ac-It 131,793 tn TDS Operational lrrig Subsurface Quality parameters rPllls tail water drainage 27,267 tn SS General quality 0 + ++ Salinity 0 o+ ++ Nitrogen 0 o+ ++ ++ + Oxygen demanding organics 0 +o 0-- Sediments o+ - ++ -- 6 31 ac-ft/ac Pesticide residues 0 ++ 0-+ 1 00 Wac TDS P hosp hog us 0 ++ 0- + 0 21 Wac SS 0 = not expected to be much different than supply water Recapture + - = some slight increaselpichup of decreaseldeposition n may occut 499,700 ac-ft + + = usually expected to be significantly higher due to concentrating effects application of agricultural 'I chemicals erosional losses pickup of natural geochemical 243,500 ac4t sources etc 80.803 tn TDS -- = usually expected to be significantly lower due to 11,922 tn SS liltration fixation microbial degradation etc TABLE 2 Quality of Supply and Surface Drain Waters in Glenn Colusa Irrigation District IGCID) and Panoche Drainage District IPDDJ for the 1975 Irrigation Season 1 84 ac-ft/ac 0 61 Wac TDS Supply water Drain water 0 09 Wac SS Qiial ty Parameter GrlD PDD GClD PDD Elerliicnl conductlvltvltri nilrmmlios cm I80 363 391 3 070 Flg.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Recommended Standards for Wastewater Facilities
    RECOMMENDED STANDARDS for WASTEWATER FACILITIES POLICIES FOR THE DESIGN, REVIEW, AND APPROVAL OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR WASTEWATER COLLECTION AND TREATMENT FACILITIES 2014 EDITION A REPORT OF THE WASTEWATER COMMITTEE OF THE GREAT LAKES - UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER BOARD OF STATE AND PROVINCIAL PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGERS MEMBER STATES AND PROVINCE ILLINOIS NEW YORK INDIANA OHIO IOWA ONTARIO MICHIGAN PENNSYLVANIA MINNESOTA WISCONSIN MISSOURI PUBLISHED BY: Health Research, Inc., Health Education Services Division P.O. Box 7126 Albany, N.Y. 12224 Phone: (518) 439-7286 Visit Our Web Site http://www.healthresearch.org/store/ten-state-standards Copyright © 2014 by the Great Lakes - Upper Mississippi River Board of State and Provincial Public Health and Environmental Managers This document, or portions thereof, may be reproduced without permission if credit is given to the Board and to this publication as a source. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE FOREWORD ..................................................................................................................................... v 10 ENGINEERING REPORTS AND FACILITY PLANS 10. General ............................................................................................................................. 10-1 11. Engineering Report Or Facility Plan ................................................................................ 10-1 12. Pre-Design Meeting ....................................................................................................... 10-12
    [Show full text]
  • Irrigation Return Flow Or Discrete Discharge? Why Water Pollution from Cranberry Bogs Should Fall Within the Clean Water Act’S Npdes Program
    GAL.HANSON.DOC 4/30/2007 10:08:35 AM IRRIGATION RETURN FLOW OR DISCRETE DISCHARGE? WHY WATER POLLUTION FROM CRANBERRY BOGS SHOULD FALL WITHIN THE CLEAN WATER ACT’S NPDES PROGRAM BY * ** ANDREW C. HANSON & DAVID C. BENDER Despite license plates proclaiming it as the “dairy state,” Wisconsin is the top cranberry producing state in the nation. Cranberry operations are unique in that they are agricultural operations that require vast quantities of water. Water discharged to lakes, wetlands, and rivers through ditches and canals during the production process can contain the phosphorus fertilizers and residues of pesticides that were applied during the growing season, which can cause serious water quality problems. Although the cranberry industry has not historically been subject to the Clean Water Act, cranberry bog discharges appear to fit squarely within the purview of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program under that statute. In 2004, the Wisconsin attorney general filed a public nuisance lawsuit against a cranberry grower, alleging that the grower discharged bog water laced with phosphorus to the lake. However, provided that cranberry bog discharges do not fall within the “irrigation return flow” exemption from the Clean Water Act, the NPDES permit program may be a more cost-effective approach to addressing the water quality problems that can be caused by cranberry bog discharges. I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 340 II. POLLUTANT DISCHARGES FROM COMMERCIAL CRANBERRY PRODUCTION ...................... 342 III. STATE V. ZAWISTOWSKI AND THE ATTEMPT TO USE PUBLIC NUISANCE AUTHORITY TO CONTROL POLLUTANT DISCHARGES FROM CRANBERRY BOGS ................................... 345 IV. OVERVIEW OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT ........................................................................... 347 V.
    [Show full text]
  • Sediment Transport Model for a Surface Irrigation System
    Hindawi Publishing Corporation Applied and Environmental Soil Science Volume 2013, Article ID 957956, 10 pages http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/957956 Research Article Sediment Transport Model for a Surface Irrigation System Damodhara R. Mailapalli,1 Narendra S. Raghuwanshi,2 and Rajendra Singh2 1 BiologicalSystemsEngineering,UniversityofWisconsin,Madison,WI53706,USA 2 Agricultural and Food Engineering Department, Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur 721302, India Correspondence should be addressed to Damodhara R. Mailapalli; [email protected] Received 16 March 2013; Revised 25 June 2013; Accepted 11 July 2013 Academic Editor: Keith Smettem Copyright © 2013 Damodhara R. Mailapalli et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Controlling irrigation-induced soil erosion is one of the important issues of irrigation management and surface water impairment. Irrigation models are useful in managing the irrigation and the associated ill effects on agricultural environment. In this paper, a physically based surface irrigation model was developed to predict sediment transport in irrigated furrows by integrating an irrigation hydraulic model with a quasi-steady state sediment transport model to predict sediment load in furrow irrigation. The irrigation hydraulic model simulates flow in a furrow irrigation system using the analytically solved zero-inertial overland flow equations and 1D-Green-Ampt, 2D-Fok, and Kostiakov-Lewis infiltration equations. Performance of the sediment transport model wasevaluatedforbareandcroppedfurrowfields.Theresultsindicated that the sediment transport model can predict the initial sediment rate adequately, but the simulated sediment rate was less accurate for the later part of the irrigation event.
    [Show full text]
  • Subsurface Drip Irrigation (Sdi) Systems
    NETAFIM USA SUBSURFACE DRIP IRRIGATION (SDI) SYSTEMS ADVANCED DRIP/MICRO IRRIGATION TECHNOLOGIES SUBSURFACE DRIP IRRIGATION QUALITY AND DEPENDABILITY FROM THE LEADERS IN DRIP IRRIGATION For over 50 years, growers world-wide have counted on Netafim for the most reliable, cost-effective and efficient ways to deliver water, nutrients and chemicals to their crops. This tradition continues with subsurface drip irrigation (SDI), the most advanced method for irrigating agricultural crops. With proper management of water and nutrients, a subsurface drip irrigation system can deliver maximum yields and optimal water use efficiencies. Drip irrigation, whether surface or subsurface, often results in increased production and yields as well as increased quality and uniformity. It provides more efficient use of the applied water resulting in substantial water savings. The flexibility of drip irrigation increases a grower’s ability to farm marginal land. WHAT IS SUBSURFACE DRIP IRRIGATION (SDI)? Subsurface drip irrigation is a variation on traditional drip irrigation where the dripline (tubing and drippers) is buried beneath the soil surface, rather than laid on the ground, supplying water directly to the roots. The depth and distance the dripline is placed depends on the soil type and the plant’s root structure. SDI is more than an irrigation system, it is a root zone management tool. Fertilizer can be applied to the root zone in a quantity when it will be most beneficial - resulting in greater use efficiencies and better crop performance. SUBSURFACE DRIP IRRIGATION (SDI) ADVANTAGES The key benefit of a surface micro-irrigation system is to apply low volumes of water and nutrients uniformly to every plant across the entire field.
    [Show full text]
  • Troubleshooting Activated Sludge Processes Introduction
    Troubleshooting Activated Sludge Processes Introduction Excess Foam High Effluent Suspended Solids High Effluent Soluble BOD or Ammonia Low effluent pH Introduction Review of the literature shows that the activated sludge process has experienced operational problems since its inception. Although they did not experience settling problems with their activated sludge, Ardern and Lockett (Ardern and Lockett, 1914a) did note increased turbidity and reduced nitrification with reduced temperatures. By the early 1920s continuous-flow systems were having to deal with the scourge of activated sludge, bulking (Ardem and Lockett, 1914b, Martin 1927) and effluent suspended solids problems. Martin (1927) also describes effluent quality problems due to toxic and/or high-organic- strength industrial wastes. Oxygen demanding materials would bleedthrough the process. More recently, Jenkins, Richard and Daigger (1993) discussed severe foaming problems in activated sludge systems. Experience shows that controlling the activated sludge process is still difficult for many plants in the United States. However, improved process control can be obtained by systematically looking at the problems and their potential causes. Once the cause is defined, control actions can be initiated to eliminate the problem. Problems associated with the activated sludge process can usually be related to four conditions (Schuyler, 1995). Any of these can occur by themselves or with any of the other conditions. The first is foam. So much foam can accumulate that it becomes a safety problem by spilling out onto walkways. It becomes a regulatory problem as it spills from clarifier surfaces into the effluent. The second, high effluent suspended solids, can be caused by many things. It is the most common problem found in activated sludge systems.
    [Show full text]
  • 4. Drainage of Irrigated Lands
    ARBA MINCH UNIVERSITY Water Technology Institute Faculty of Meteorology and Hydrology Course Name:-Irrigated Lands Hydrology Course Code:- MHH1403 CHAPTER FOUR DRAINAGE OF IRRIGATED LANDS Prepared by: Tegegn T.(MSc.) Hydrology Objectives of the chapter • By the end of the session, the student will able to: – Understand what we mean by Agricultural drainage – Understand causes of excess water in agricultural lands – Know Problems and effects of poor drainage – Understand need of drainage – Know different types of drainage 4/21/2020 2 4.1 Definition of Drainage • Good water management of an irrigation scheme not only requires proper water application but also a proper drainage system. • Agricultural drainage can be defined as the removal of excess surface water and/or the lowering of the groundwater table below the root zone in order to improve plant growth. 4/21/2020 3 Cont… Class activity • Be in group and discuss on following topics – Causes of excess water or rise of water table – What are the effects of poor drainage – Why drainage is needed? 4/21/2020 4 Causes of excess water or rise of WT: • Natural Causes: – Poor natural drainage of the subsoil – Submergence under floods – Deep percolation from rainfall – Drainage water coming from adjacent areas. • Artificial Causes: – High intensity of irrigated agriculture irrespective of the soil or subsoil – Heavy seepage losses from unlined canals – Enclosing irrigated fields with embankments – Non-maintenance of natural drainages or blocking of natural drainages channels by roads. – the extra water applied for the flushing away of 4/21/2020 salts from the root zone. 5 4.2 Problems and effects of poor drainage • Drainage problem could be: – Surface drainage problem ---- when excess water builds up the water table and reaches to the ground level (i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Surface Water and Groundwater Interactions in Traditionally Irrigated Fields in Northern New Mexico, U.S.A
    water Article Surface Water and Groundwater Interactions in Traditionally Irrigated Fields in Northern New Mexico, U.S.A. Karina Y. Gutiérrez-Jurado 1, Alexander G. Fernald 2, Steven J. Guldan 3 and Carlos G. Ochoa 4,* 1 School of the Environment, Flinders University, Bedford Park, SA 5042, Australia; karina.gutierrez@flinders.edu.au 2 Water Resources Research Institute, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM 88003, USA; [email protected] 3 Sustainable Agriculture Science Center, New Mexico State University, Alcalde, NM 87511, USA; [email protected] 4 Department of Animal and Rangeland Sciences, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331, USA * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +1-541-737-0933 Academic Editor: Ashok K. Chapagain Received: 18 December 2016; Accepted: 3 February 2017; Published: 10 February 2017 Abstract: Better understanding of surface water (SW) and groundwater (GW) interactions and water balances has become indispensable for water management decisions. This study sought to characterize SW-GW interactions in three crop fields located in three different irrigated valleys in northern New Mexico by (1) estimating deep percolation (DP) below the root zone in flood-irrigated crop fields; and (2) characterizing shallow aquifer response to inputs from DP associated with irrigation. Detailed measurements of irrigation water application, soil water content fluctuations, crop field runoff, and weather data were used in the water budget calculations for each field. Shallow wells were used to monitor groundwater level response to DP inputs. The amount of DP was positively and significantly related to the total amount of irrigation water applied for the Rio Hondo and Alcalde sites, but not for the El Rito site.
    [Show full text]
  • Selecting an Irrigation System, You Need to Consider Both the Initial System Cost and the Op- Erating Costs of the System
    Sprinkler Irrigation Surface Irrigation Irrigation can be expensive. Before you install an irrigation system, it is very important to Sprinkler irrigation is a high pressure and high determine that increased yield and better crop flow irrigation system. Water is pumped and dis- quality will result in sufficient increase in income tributed through laterals and sprinkler heads. to offset the cost of installing and operating the This system is often used on small farms be- irrigation system. This starts with choosing the cause it is adaptable to a wide range of soil and right system. field conditions. Irrigation systems can be divided into four classes: Surface, Sprinkler, Drip and Subsurface. Before deciding what method of irrigation to use, it is important to know how much and the quality of water is available, the soil type and slope of your crop fields and what crops you plan to irrigate. Surface Irrigation, water is applied by flowing across the field in furrows. This is usually done where field slopes are flatter and the soils less sandy. The water must make it across the field without over-watering the up- per portions and without causing erosion. Sprinkler Irrigation Costs: When selecting an irrigation system, you need to consider both the initial system cost and the op- erating costs of the system. The exact cost can only be determined once a system is designed, but the following table can act as a guide: Well and Pump $5,000 to 10,000 each Traveling Gun $1,000 to $8,000/ ac Hand Move System: $2,000 to $3,000/ ac Drip System $2,000 to $4000/ ac Solid Set System: $4,000 to $8,000/ ac Subsurface $3,000 to $6,000/ ac Selecting an Irrigation System Selecting a System.
    [Show full text]
  • Dissertation Simulating the Fate And
    DISSERTATION SIMULATING THE FATE AND TRANSPORT OF SALINITY SPECIES IN A SEMI- ARID AGRICULTURAL GROUNDWATER SYSTEM: MODEL DEVELOPMENT AND APPLICATION Submitted by Saman Tavakoli Kivi Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering In partial fulfillment of the requirements For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Colorado State University Fort Collins, Colorado Summer 2018 Doctoral Committee: Advisor: Ryan T. Bailey Co-Advisor: Timothy K. Gates Michael J. Ronayne Aditi Bhaskar Copyright by Saman Tavakoli Kivi 2018 All Rights Reserved ABSTRACT SIMULATING THE FATE AND TRANSPORT OF SALINITY SPECIES IN A SEMI- ARID AGRICULTURAL GROUNDWATER SYSTEM: MODEL DEVELOPMENT AND APPLICATION Many irrigated agricultural areas worldwide suffer from salinization of soil, groundwater, and nearby river systems. Increased salinity concentrations, which can lead to decreased crop yield, are due principally to the presence of salt minerals and high rates of evapotranspiration. High groundwater salt loading to nearby river systems also affects downstream areas when saline river water is diverted for additional uses. Irrigation-induced salinity is the principal water quality problem in the semi-arid region of the western United States due to the extensive background quantities of salt in rocks and soils. Due to the importance of the problem and the complex hydro-chemical processes involved in salinity fate and transport, a physically-based spatially-distributed numerical model is needed to assess soil and groundwater salinity at the regional scale. Although several salinity transport models have been developed in recent decades, these models focus on salt species at the small scale (i.e. soil profile or field), and no attempts thus far have been made at simulating the fate, storage, and transport of individual interacting salt ions at the regional scale within a river basin.
    [Show full text]
  • A Method for Estimating Ground-Water Return Flow
    A METHOD FOR ESTIMATING GROUND-WATER RETURN FLOW TO THE COLORADO RIVER IN THE PARKER AREA, ARIZONA AND* CALIFORNIA By S. A. Leake U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water-Resources Investigations Report 84-4229 Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION Tucson, Arizona September 1984 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR WILLIAM P. CLARK, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director For additional information Copies of this report can be write to: purchased from: District Chief Open-File Services Section U.S. Geological Survey Western Distribution Branch Box FB-44 U.S. Geological Survey Federal Building Box 25425, Federal Center 301 West Congress Street Denver, Colorado 80225 Tucson, Arizona 85701 Telephone: (303) 236-7476 CONTENTS Page Abstract ........................................................... 1 I introduction ........................................................ 1 Purpose and scope ............................................ 2 Relation to other reports ...................................... 2 Acknowledgments .............................................. 6 Hydrology.......................................................... 6 The Colorado River ........................................... 6 The flood plain and underlying alluvial aquifer ................ 8 Method ............................................................. 14 Step 1 Delineate subareas of ground-water drainage .......... 14 Step 2 Estimate diversions to irrigated land .................. 18 Step 3 Estimate consumptive use .............................
    [Show full text]
  • Effects of Irrigation Performance on Water Balance: Krueng Baro Irri- Gation Scheme (Aceh-Indonesia) As a Case Study
    DOI: 10.2478/jwld-2019-0040 © Polish Academy of Sciences (PAN), Committee on Agronomic Sciences JOURNAL OF WATER AND LAND DEVELOPMENT Section of Land Reclamation and Environmental Engineering in Agriculture, 2019 2019, No. 42 (VII–IX): 12–20 © Institute of Technology and Life Sciences (ITP), 2019 PL ISSN 1429–7426, e-ISSN 2083-4535 Available (PDF): http://www.itp.edu.pl/wydawnictwo/journal; http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/jwld; http://journals.pan.pl/jwld Received 07.12.2018 Reviewed 05.03.2019 Accepted 07.03.2019 Effects of irrigation performance on water balance: A – study design B – data collection Krueng Baro Irrigation Scheme (Aceh-Indonesia) C – statistical analysis D – data interpretation E – manuscript preparation as a case study F – literature search Azmeri AZMERI1) ABCDEF , Alfiansyah YULIANUR2) AD, Uli ZAHRATI3) BC, Imam FAUDLI4) BC 1) orcid.org/0000-0002-3552-036X; Universitas Syiah Kuala, Faculty of Engineering, Civil Engineering Department Jl. Tgk. Syeh Abdul Rauf No. 7, Darussalam – Banda Aceh 23111, Indonesia; e-mail: [email protected] 2) orcid.org/0000-0002-8679-1792; Universitas Syiah Kuala, Faculty of Engineering, Civil Engineering Department, Banda Aceh, Indonesia; e-mail: [email protected] 3) orcid.org/0000-0001-8665-8193; Office of River Region of Sumatra-I, Lueng Bata, Banda Aceh, Indonesia; e-mail: [email protected] 4) orcid.org/0000-0002-4944-3449; Hydrology and hydraulics consultant; e-mail: [email protected] For citation: Azmeri A., Yulianur A., Zahrati U., Faudli I. 2019. Effects of irrigation performance on water balance: Krueng Baro Irri- gation Scheme (Aceh-Indonesia) as a case study.
    [Show full text]
  • 7. Design and Evaluation of Surface Irrigation Methods in Southern Gujarat Using Surdev (Gau)
    Joint Completion Report on IDNP Redt# 3 "Computer Modeling in Irrigation and Drainage" 7. DESIGN AND EVALUATION OF SURFACE IRRIGATION METHODS IN SOUTHERN GUJARAT USING SURDEV (GAU) 7.1 Introduction The study area is located in the central western coast of India in the Southern Gujarat. South Gujarat comprises of the Valsad, the Navsari, the Dang, the Surat and the Bharuch districts with rainfall varying from about 850 mm to 2000 mm. The general topography of the area is flat. The soils of the area are clayey while some parts also have clay loamsoils. The main crops of the South Gujarat are sugarcane, paddy and fruit crops. Paddy is taken both during khavifand summer seasons. Sugarcane crop occupies more than 50% of the culturable command area in South Gujarat and it is mostly irrigated with furrow method of irrigation. Furrow method of irrigation is also adopted for many other vegetable crops of this area. Paddy and fruit crops like banana, mango, and papaya are irrigated using basin irrigation method. In fruit crops, ring basin method of irrigation is adopted. In paddy, farmers adopt field to field irrigation. The area, in addition to heavy rainfall, receives canal water throughout the year. The region has many streams flowing from eastern side and draining into the Arabian Sea. Farmers of the region, due to easy availability of water, knowingly or unknowingly apply more water, especially in the upper reaches of the canal. On the other hand, in mid and tail reaches of canal command and in well-irrigated areas, the water application is less than the demand and is non-uniform.
    [Show full text]