Download
deep percolation and groundwater level response following surface irrigation n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Deep Percolation and Groundwater Level Response Following Surface Irrigation PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Deep Percolation and Groundwater Level Response Following Surface Irrigation

Deep Percolation and Groundwater Level Response Following Surface Irrigation

192 Views Download Presentation
Download Presentation

Deep Percolation and Groundwater Level Response Following Surface Irrigation

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Deep Percolation and Groundwater Level Response Following Surface Irrigation Rio Grande Irrigation ditch Carlos Ochoa, Sam Fernald, Steve Guldan, Manoj Shukla Funding sources: USDA CSREES NRI, New Mexico Agriculture Experiment Station.

  2. Deep percolation from irrigation can provide a fair amount of water recharge to shallow aquifers. Valley scale Basin scale • USDA CSREES-funded study to determine seepage effects on Rio Grande flow in an irrigated valley in northern New Mexico (2004-2009). Farm scale NMSU-Sustainable Agriculture Science Center

  3. Previous study findings (2004-2007) – Deep percolation: • A 15-62%Dp in an alfalfa field with sandy-loam soil • A 14-42%Dp in an apple orchard with sandy-clay and clay soil • Rapid water level response and water level rise up to 35 cm Water level (m ASL) Soil moisture sensors Alfalfa field

  4. Study objectives: • Determine deep percolation following flood irrigation in two crop fields with different soil type. • Assess the performance of the Root Zone Water Quality Model in simulating deep percolation. 1 m Deep percolation • Characterize groundwater level fluctuations in response to deep percolation inputs. Shallow Aquifer

  5. Experimental design: • Two 100 m by 100 m fields • Two soils: Fruitland sandy-loam and Werlog clay-loam • Shallow water table (sandy-loam = 4 m and clay-loam = 2.8 m) • Surface (flood) irrigation • Cover crop (oats/grass mix) • Parameters: • Irrigation depth • Soil water content • Field runoff • Water level Sandy-loam Clay-loam NMSU-Sustainable Agriculture Science Center

  6. METHODS

  7. Measured and simulated deep percolation • A daily water balance method based on field measurements DP = SWCi + IRR + P - SWCfc – RO – ET • The Root Zone Water Quality Model – Hydrology component Input Output • Crop type • Rainfall data • Meteorological data • Soil horizons and properties • Water applied • Deep percolation

  8. Field data collection – Schematic of instrumentation N Propeller flow meter Water source Soil moisture station Flow 100 m Field runoff Driven point well 1m 100 m Slope Open channel-flow meter 100 m

  9. soil moisture station/well Outer well N

  10. Irrigation applied and field runoff • Irrigation applied • 12 irrigation events in each field (2008-2009) • Variable irrigation depth (4 to 22 cm) Propeller flow meter • Field runoff • Open channel S-M flume with pressure transducer S-M flow meter

  11. Soil water content and groundwater monitoring Soil moisture sensors 50 cm • Vertical nests of soil moisture sensors • Driven point wells equipped with water level loggers • Instrumentation installed and soil repacked 15 months prior to this experiment Well Sandy loam Clay loam

  12. RESULTS

  13. Fruitland sandy loam soil: • Deep percolation (DP) observed in 4 out of 12 irrigation events • DP ranged from 9 to 27 %

  14. Werlog clay loam soil: • When DP present, high antecedent soil moisture observed • DP ranged from 58 to 74 %

  15. Field-measured (DWBM) versus simulated (RZWQM) DP: • Regardless of soil type, preliminary simulated results with minimum input data show a fair agreement with field-measured based deep percolation.

  16. Water level response: Werlog clay-loam field • Water level rise of up to 16 cm observed following highest IRR. IRR = 23 cm

  17. Water level response: Fruitland sandy-loam field • Water level rise of up to 2 cm in the midfield well following highest IRR. IRR = 26.7 cm

  18. Water level response: Fruitland sandy-loam field • In general, muted water level response (0 to 2 cm) observed following IRR.

  19. Conclusions • Regardless of soil type, deep percolation was only observed during few irrigation events. • Higher antecedent soil moisture and shallower water table contributed to greater deep percolation and higher water table rise in the clay loam soil. • Fair agreement between simulated (RZWQM) and field-measurement (DWBM) DP. • In general, lower water level rise and longer time of response when compared to previous study results (Alfalfa and Apple fields).

  20. Water level response: Werlog clay-loam field • Water level rise of up to 8 cm in the midfield well following IRR = 23 cm.