Survey of Irrigation Methods in California in 2010

Tindula, Gwen N.; Orang, M.; Snyder, Richard L.

doi:10.1061/(asce)ir.1943-4774.0000538

Cited by 58 publications

(49 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…More recent spatial surveys (i.e., with individual field data) of irrigation type are not available, but larger-scale data and surveys indicate a shift to microirrigation and sprinklers statewide and in the study area. A California-wide irrigation survey (Tindula et al 2013) indicated that by 2010, microirrigation accounted for nearly 40% of the state's cropland, with 15% on sprinklers and 43% surface irrigated.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other surveys indicate that close to 80% of citrus, and a large proportion of nut crops (71% of almonds and pistachios [Pistacia vera], 40% of other nuts) and vegetables (49%) have in recent years been converted to drip and microsprinkler systems (Lopus et al 2010;Dzurella et al 2012;Tindula et al 2013). It seems likely that this conversion has resulted in a decrease in the land area that would be rated as vulnerable to NO 3 leaching (HI > 20).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…More than 70% of the area in almonds was microirrigated at the time of the surveys, but because almonds tend to be grown on higher risk soils (89%) and occupy a large area, the remaining 30% of furrow irrigated almonds considerably impacts the overall vulnerability of the study area. Since the DWR land use data were collected, continued conversion of annual crop fields, especially field crops, to permanent crops (particularly almonds, pistachios, and grapes) has further increased the proportion of land under microirrigation (Orang et al 2008;Viers et al 2012;Tindula et al 2013).…”

Section: Legendmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Potential to assess nitrate leaching vulnerability of irrigated cropland

Dzurella¹,

Pettygrove²,

Fryjoff-Hung³

et al. 2015

Journal of Soil and Water Conservation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Irrigated cropland represents the largest source of groundwater nitrate (NO 3 ) pollution in the Central Valley (CV) of California. Mitigation, through the use of best management practices that maximize crop nitrogen use efficiency (NUE), will be most effective in reducing pollution if used where the risk of NO 3 leaching loss is greatest. The University of California's Nitrate Groundwater Pollution Hazard Index (HI) tool was used to map the risk of NO 3 leaching below the rootzone in irrigated fields in a portion of the CV. The HI is an expert system that calculates an index value based on soil properties, crop characteristics, and type of irrigation system in use. Depth to groundwater, aquifer recharge rate, and actual farm management practices (e.g., rate of nitrogen [N] fertilizer applied) are not considered in the calculation. Application of the HI to 1,318,000 ha (3,256,848 ac) of irrigated cropland in the four southernmost counties of the CV revealed that 31% of the area is at high risk of NO 3 leaching loss if not managed carefully. Adoption of drip or microsprinkler irrigation on all orchards, vineyards, and vegetable fields would decrease the area rated as most vulnerable from 31% to 20% of the area analyzed. Crop fields on permeable soils and/or irrigated by surface gravity methods contributed the most to the area at high risk. The HI can help the USDA, regulatory agencies, and Cooperative Extension target regulatory, research, and education efforts.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Legendmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Potential to assess nitrate leaching vulnerability of irrigated cropland

Dzurella¹,

Pettygrove²,

Fryjoff-Hung³

et al. 2015

Journal of Soil and Water Conservation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…First, over the past two decades, irrigation technologies have significantly improved water use efficiencies (Canessa et al 2011;Howell 2001;Orang et al 2008;Tindula et al 2013;Ward and PulidoVelazquez 2008). Where surface water is used for irrigation, a consequence of applying less water is that groundwater recharge is diminished because of a reduction in deep percolation of excess water.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Soil suitability index identifies potential areas for groundwater banking on agricultural lands

O’Geen¹,

Saal²,

Dahlke³

et al. 2015

Cal Ag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Groundwater pumping chronically exceeds natural recharge in many agricultural regions in California. A common method of recharging groundwater -when surface water is available -is to deliberately flood an open area, allowing water to percolate into an aquifer. However, open land suitable for this type of recharge is scarce. Flooding agricultural land during fallow or dormant periods has the potential to increase groundwater recharge substantially, but this approach has not been well studied. Using data on soils, topography and crop type, we developed a spatially explicit index of the suitability for groundwater recharge of land in all agricultural regions in California. We identified 3.6 million acres of agricultural land statewide as having Excellent or Good potential for groundwater recharge. The index provides preliminary guidance about the locations where groundwater recharge on agricultural land is likely to be feasible. A variety of institutional, infrastructure and other issues must also be addressed before this practice can be implemented widely.

show abstract

“…However, in many cases growers expanded crop acreages and converted from annual to perennial crops (with similar and higher water requirements) to maximize net farm profits (cfr. [6]), taking further advantage of financial subsidies. This has led either to no reduction or even to increases of overall on-farm water usage.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the Viability of Sub-Surface Drip Irrigation for Resource-Efficient Alfalfa Production in Central and Southern California

Zaccaria

Carrillo-Cobo²,

Montazar

et al. 2017

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:In California, alfalfa is grown on a large area ranging between 325,000 and 410,000 hectares and ranks among the thirstiest crops. While the hay production industry is often scrutinized for the large usage of the state's agricultural water, alfalfa is a crucial feed-supplier for the livestock and dairy sectors, which rank among the most profitable commodity groups in the state. Sub-surface drip irrigation (SDI), although only practiced on approximately 2% of the alfalfa production area in California, is claimed to have the potential to significantly increase hay yield (HY) and water productivity (WP) compared with surface irrigation (SI). In 2014-2016 we interviewed a number of growers pioneering SDI for alfalfa production in Central and Southern California who reported that yield improvements in the order of 10-30% and water saving of about 20-30% are achievable in SDI-irrigated fields compared with SI, according to their records and perceptions collected over few years of experience. Results from our research on SDI at the University of California, Davis, revealed significantly smaller yield gain (~5%) and a slight increase of water use (~2-3%) that are similar to findings from earlier research studies. We found that most of the interviewed alfalfa producers are generally satisfied with their SDI systems, yet face some challenges that call for additional research and educational efforts. Key limitations of SDI include high investment costs, use of energy to pressurize water, the need for more advanced irrigation management skills, and better understanding of soil-water dynamics by farm personnel. SDI-irrigated fields also need accurate water monitoring and control, attentive prevention and repair of rodent damages, and careful salinity management in the root zone. In this paper we attempt to evaluate the viability of the SDI technology for alfalfa production on the basis of preliminary results of our research and extension activities, with focus on its water and energy footprints within the context of resource efficiency.

show abstract

Survey of Irrigation Methods in California in 2010

Cited by 58 publications

References 2 publications

Potential to assess nitrate leaching vulnerability of irrigated cropland

Potential to assess nitrate leaching vulnerability of irrigated cropland

Soil suitability index identifies potential areas for groundwater banking on agricultural lands

Assessing the Viability of Sub-Surface Drip Irrigation for Resource-Efficient Alfalfa Production in Central and Southern California

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About