Archive TRICKLE-L: file log9502, part 1/1, size 174683 bytes:

------------------------------ Cut here ------------------------------

Thanks for the note, Rodney, about sand and its impact on disk filters.

I happen to be giving a talk tomorrow at Salinas for a drip conference
there and one of the topics is disk and media filters. I have had
numerous people tell me the same thing about sand sticking between disks,
but the amazing thing is that these automatic disk filters are commonly
sold for installation on sandy wells, with the exclusive objective of
removing sand from the water. Interesting, isn't it????

Interesting thread on filtration. As District Manager for Netafim, I thought
I would throw in my 2 cents worth.

We handle 4 main types of filtration:screen, disc, media and centrifugal
seperator. Some types offer features of a combination of two types.

For drip irrigation, we seperate water sources into 2 general catagories;
well water and surface water. This does not apply to ALL situations,
naturally but covers most we run across. For this discussion, I'll write
about removal of physical particles, however treatment for chemical
contaminents is just as important of a topic.

We must keep in mind the original intent of filtration before making
recomendations. The whole idea in most ag applications is to remove anything
physical that may cause clogging problems in the system. Many types and
brands of drip emission devices and micro-sprinklers are available with a
wide variety of minimum flow path dimensions and "self-cleaning" features.
Sometimes it is better to consider more expensive "forgiving" emission
devices than to try to filter to the nth degree. As a rule of thumb, we
recommend filtering to 5 to 10 times smaller than the smallest dimension of
the emission device's flow-path. Irrigation manufacturers or CIT should be
able to provide you with this data.

Well Water: My experience is that physical particles may be easier to deal
with when using well water than the sometimes more complicated chemistry
issues.
Many times, we've found the best solution to pour well water into
an open canal and run it at least 660 feet (~200 meters). This reason for
this is to expose the water to oxygen before final filtration and for
settling of particles. Many times I have found this to be the ideal
solution. However, most times this method requires double pumping and higher
energy costs.

In our opinion, all filters currently on the market do not do a good job of
handling sand
concentrations of over 2 ppm.

We recommend that if the sand content of the well water is > or = to 2 ppm
that we must pre-filter the water by some method. We make a small seperator
that can be used in the field to estimate sand content and thismay be an
available service through your local Netafim dealer. Typically in my
experience, brand new wells clear up over time and older wells may deteriate
over time as new cavities are opened underground.

For prefiltering of sandy well water a sand seperator, if designed properly,
will handle large concentrations of heavier particles. The seperator works
as a centrifuge to "spin" the heavy particles out of the water. If the
particles are light weight, like clay or silt, seperators tend not to work as
well as settling ponds. Seperators tend to work more efficiently by
manifolding several small ones together rather than to use one large one.

Usually, disc or screen filters work well in series after the sand is
seperated out.

Surface Water:
Surface water can be more difficult. As noted by almost everyone on this
discussion list, some method of pre-filtration is usually necessary. It may
be as simple as a screen over the foot valve(for relatively clean water) to
as complicated as inclined-plane conveyer belts. Remember, one of the
primary
functions of a prefilter is to protect the pumping equipment from debris in
the water such as beer cans, plastic bags, fish, alligators, 2 x 4's etc. In
Florida, we used slotted pvc pipes with .030" slots in them. The idea is to
keep the water velocity very low over the individual slots. One negative
feature, however is that sometimes filamentous algae will grow over the
screen in a mat if it is exposed to sunlight. We found that by putting the
screen on
a winch and pulley system, it can be elevated out of the water for drying
purposes when not in use. This can be a complication for automated systems,
however.

Surface water usually requires 3 dimensional filtration. Screens are 2
dimensional (length x circumfrance, no depth).
We generally do not recommend screen filters for most surface water unless it
is very clean. All emission devices require at least 30 mesh filtration and
most dripperlines require 140 mesh or better. If screens are used in these
applications, organic material which is soft in nature will "extrude" (like
spaghetti) through the holes in the screen under relatively low pressure
differentials and may get into the system and clog drippers.

Media filters are commonly used as discussed in detail before in this thread
They have many advanteges but have several disadvantages when compared to
disc filters as well. Both types offfer 3 dimensional filtration. Media
filters are big heavy and bulky, require several men to install, and have a
lot of components. We are currently introducing a plastic, non corrosive
media filter to the market.

Disc filters have many advantages. They are lightweight, compact, come
pre-tested and with pre-assembled manifolds from the factory and are
available with stainless steel manifolds. The concept of disc filters is not
new. They were developed by Boieng Aircraft during WWII for aircraft engine
filters since screen filters often failed with debris. Our discs are made of
molded polypropelyne and have grooves molded in them. We offer discs ranging
from 40 to 600 mesh equivalent. The discs are stacked and compressed by a
screw-on cap and water pressure. The opposing faces of the discs are made
such that the grooves always point in opposing directions creating a "X"
criss-cross pattern. As the dirty water passes through the interface of the
disc "X's", debris is captured and held on and between the discs.

To backflush them, simply use clean water from another filter in the manifold
and run it backwards throught the discs. Our newest twist on this old idea,
is called Spin Klin technology. During backflush, a piston on the inside of
the disc cylinder is activated with water pressure to "seperate" the discs.
At the same time, clean, pressurized (50 psi) water is directed to a series
of internal, tangental nozzles which direct a high velocity "jet" of water
between the seperated discs to spin and clean them off. This backflush only
requires about 15 seconds per bank of filters (compared to 90 seconds per
media filter) resulting in much less backflush water being generated.

I have personal experience with these filters on Rio Grande, Colorado River,
and Florida surface canals. All of these waters are very high in organic
loading and are a challenge to any filter system. In all cases, the Disc
Klin filters have performed as well as or better than media filters. We have
growers that have used now both disc and media and when purchasing additional
units, have elected to use the Disk Klin.

Another advantage of these units is size and weight. A typical 1000 gpm unit
of media filters would require 4 - 48" tanks with 1300 lbs of sand and gravel
in each one. If you consider the weight of the media and the water in the
tanks, plus the fact that the tanks take so much room, they are difficult to
put on a trailer for portable units. A Star Battery 8 unit Spin Klin filter
to do the same 1000 gpm weighs 1100 lbs and only takes 16 square feet of
space.

I hope that this note is not too long, but filtration is a major topic and
can take a full day in a seminar to talk about. Any thoughts or questions,
please e-mail or call me.

Jim Brigham, District Manager
Netafim Irrigation, Inc.
Phone: 512-261-3007
Fax: 512-261-3402
Tx Gator@aol.com

I want to post a question for discussion here.
What is every ones opinion on the use of gypsum solution in buried drip or
above ground drip. We are currently evaluating the use of gypsum
solution to help in some water penetration problems we are having on some
clay ground.
I would appreciate any ideas on this subject.

I have enjoyed the discussion on filtration and I had posted a message but
I have not seen it come through so I will try again.
We use Netafim sand media tanks with Arkal disk backup filters. Most of
our water is surface water and we are required to take a designated amount
24 hrs a day. Thus we use small ponds to give us a reserve for set changes
and filter flushing. We have had very good results to date with this
combination.

Leslie

Jon,

Let me know what you need, and I can find out for you. My company builds
chemical feed equipment for the Water Treating Industry.

Jim Beshears
jimb1331@aol.com

Hi Roy
Saw your note about Gypsum. I have no experience but will ask around with
some of our people. Sounds like a great idea to help soils but I'm very
concerned about clogging. I assume that water pH would have a lot to do with
it, as well as water chemistry.

What particle size is available to you? May be a challenge to get the
particle through drippers even without chemical precipitant problems.

What do you grow, where and what kind of system do you have?
I appreciate your comments on filters and am glad to see you're using our
products.

Jim Brigham, District Manager
Netafim Irrigation
Austin, Tx

The following information is provided by

Freddie Lamm
Research Agricultural Engineer
Kansas State University
105 Experiment Farm Road
Colby, Kansas 67701-1697
flamm@oznet.ksu.edu
Phone: 913-462-6281
FAX: 913-462-2315
Proceedings Chair
5th International Microirrigation Congress

Please help publicize this event to your collagues that may have an
interest in microirrigation.

The Fifth International Microirrigation Congress truly will be an
international forum featuring 156 technical presentations
representing the work of 313 authors from 28 different countries
throughout the world. The strong participation by so many authors
from so many countries will greatly contributed to the success and
quality of the Congress. In addition to the Congress Proceedings
which will total 986 pages, ASAE will augment this effort with a
special commemorative compilation of microirrigation papers
published from 1985-1994 in the Transactions of the ASAE and
Applied Engineering in Agriculture.

An exposition of microirrigation products will be another major
component of the Congress featuring exhibits by over 35 companies. As
an important segment of the Congress, delegates are encouraged to
select from four optional post-conference tours. Delegates will
have the opportunity to observe the design, testing, and
manufacturing of microirrigation system components at 5
different manufacturing facilities located in central Florida. Tours
of large scale agricultural enterprises and commercial nurseries
using microirrigation for a wide variety of crop production systems
will also be available. One tour will include visits to Water
Conserv II, the largest agricultural irrigation reclaimed water
project of its type in the world, and to the Orlando
International Airport where microirrigation is used to irrigate
ornamental landscape areas throughout the vast complex. Delegates
could also get a firsthand behind-the-scenes look at how Disney
World uses microirrigation at EPCOT Center and the Land Pavillion.

The Congress will be held April 2-6 at the Hyatt Orlando Hotel, 6375
W. Irlo Bronson Memorial Highway, Kissimmee (Orlando) Flori- da 34747.
Phone 407-396-1234. Fax 407-396-3876. Conference room rates are
$99 for single or double occupancy (this does not include room taxes).
You are responsible for making your own reservations. MENTION that
you are a 5th International Microirri- gation Congress delegate. The
hotel cannot be included in registration. Plan to take a shuttle or
cab from airport at you own expense (??? amount).

Weather in the Orlando area in early April is generally very
pleasant. April is normally one of the driest months so skies usually
clear with very little significant rainfall occurring. However,
occasional thunderstorms are not uncommon. Daily high temperatures
are normally in the 80-85F (26-29C) range with low temperatures
averaging about 58-62F (14-17C).

If you would like to be included in future ASAE mailings about the
Congress send an Email request to Judy Brown at ASAE.

brown@asae.org Judy Brown, ASAE

Freddie Lamm
Research Agricultural Engineer
KSU Northwest Research-Extension Center
105 Experiment Farm Road, Colby, Kansas 67701-1697
Ph. 913-462-6281
FAX 913-462-2315

>Concerning filtration; what do you do with your flush water from sand media
>filters? Especially in a permanent crop situation. Any info will be
>helpful...
>
Our filters are next to the ranch with furrow irrigation. We run
the flush water down the tail drain. We manually flush so we are
sure not to put fertilizer down the drain. Others put it into
small pit with gravel. Depends if you have enough infiltration
capacity. One flush a day does it for us, but we have relativley
clean well water. A persistent myth is that you do not need to
filter well water. Not true. It is true you filter _less_ but
you do need to filter.

roll@freenet.calgary.ab.ca
I need to know the approx. current worldwide acreage of drip irrigation
for a local producer factsheet. If anyone can help it would be
appreciated. Thanks.

roll@freenet.calgary.ab.ca
My involvement with drip irrigation is primarily with local saskatoon
berry (Amelanchier alnifolia) growers. A number of growers here have
orchards varying from 5-25 acres with most of them using surface pressure
compensating emitters (Katif, Netafim), 0.5-1.0 gph. I have worked with
the extension/design/applied research end of things. My background and
education is in soils and on-farm irrigation systems. I was looking for
some information on global extent of drip irrigation (acres), so if
anyone has some good "approximate" figures, please let me know.

This story does'nt have anything to do with drip irrigation, BUT I thought it
was interesting anyway.

R. Mead
List owner

Residential water use on the rise

SACRAMENTO, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Feb. 3, 1995--Even with a six-year
drought and increased water conservation efforts, California's urban water
use, particularly inland per person use, is on the rise -- mainly because
its population continues to grow, according to the Department of Water
Resources' latest bulletin on urban water use.

"Although there are other factors involved, the primary reason for the
increase in per capita water use is population growth in the hotter inland
areas, where they use more water," said Ray Hart, chief of DWR's Statewide
Planning Branch.

Per capita use in inland regions reaches more than 300 gallons a day; while
in many coastal communities, per capita use is less than 200 gallons daily.

Figures from Bulletin 166-4 reveal that residential water use rose from 54%
in 1980 to 58% of total urban water use in 1990. At the same time, the
population grew from 23.8 to 30 million people.

Current urban water demands may increase more than 4.9 million acre-feet
(average year) as California's population is predicted to grow to nearly 50
million in the next 30 years. These increasing urban demands are the
primary cause of projected water shortages in California. Urban water use
now comprises about 11% of the State's total net water use; while irrigated
agriculture uses 42% and dedicated environmental use is 45%.

To help better determine future urban water use, DWR and the University of
California in Los Angeles developed a new water savings simulation program
to model the effects of increased conservation.

The Bulletin also indicates that commercial water use increased from 14% to
17%, largely in response to growth in tourism and service industries such as
retail, construction, transportation and communication. Industrial and
governmental water use have dropped from 14% to 8% and from 8% to 7%,
respectively. The reduction in industrial use can be attributed to tighter
waste discharge requirements and increased recycling within industrial
facilities.

Copies of Bulletin 166-4 can be obtained by calling Publications at
916/653-1097.

30--as/sf

As promised last week, I will discuss the injection of acid , chlorine and
polymers to prevent emitter clogging.

Water sources in arid areas can potentially have pH values of 7.0 or greater.
When ground and surface waters have a pH of 7.5 or higher, the potential for
calcium carbonate precipitation will occur. Bicarbonate levels of 100 to 150
ppm should heed a warning, especially when injecting calcium fertilizers such
as CAN-17. If combined levels of calcium and magnesium are higher than 50
ppm, calcium phosphates could precipitate and magnesium could form with
ammonium to create a magnesium-ammonium phosphate precipitate. Obviously
lowering the pH level of the water is the key to prevent such a phenomenon.
Acidifying the water to at least 7.0 is recommended and some people lower it
to 5.5. Even lowering it below 5.5 is practiced, yet one has to watch the
soil buffering capacity and crop sensitivity to toxicity of various
elements. In the past, sulfuric acid was commonly used, yet this is a rather
dangerous compound to handle. Research at our laboratory (Water Management
Research Lab - USDA/ARS) has shown that injecting phos-acid at 15 ppm-P help
eliminate root intrusion, but the irrigation water pH in the study was not
alkaline enough to benefit from acidification to prevent precipitation. The
common compound now used is N-phuric (made by UNOCAL). It is a combined
mixture of Urea and sulfuric acid and is easy to handle. UNOCAL reps can do a
water buffer curve to predict how much acid to inject to eliminate calcium
carbonate precipitation. Schwankl and Prichard found in two studies that a
grower paid $100/acre for N-phuric, yet $74 went to the benefit of N and S,
while the remaining $26 went to clogging prevention for the whole season.

Newer and possibly cheaper compounds are on the horizon. Polymers such as
polyphosphates, organo-phosphates, polymalaic acids and others are now being
investigated for carbonate solubility effectiveness. They are less expensive,
do not persist in the environment, approved by the EPA, and are safer to
handle than any acid. Growers in some studies have found polymers injection
increased distribution uniformity. Dosages as low as 1 - 2 ppm are good
enough for increasing carbonate solubility. Researchers believe that the high
electrical charge of the polymer molecule keeps potential precipitates in
solution and if a compound such as carbonate crystylizes in a polymer
environment, the crystal shape does not have sharp corners to give rise to
stacking and combining. Rather, the crystals have rounded corners and do
stack together at all. The accumulation of silt and clay is also prevented
due to the polymer's charge. While Schwankl and Prichard experimented with
N-phuric, they also researched a compound known as "ESI-50".
It was found that injecting ESI-50 continuously or in the last hours of
irrigation, clogging due to precipitation was dramatically reduced, yet at
the 10% level and not the 5% level, statistically.

Finally, chlorination is done to eliminate microbial problems. Chlorine is
usually found at 1 ppm in municipally treated water. Back in August of last
year I stated > that 1.0 ppm of free residual chlorine is sufficient to kill
almost all bacteria. This level is that which is left after the chlorine has
been injected. If chlorine reacts with sulfides, iron or slime bacteria,
enough must be injected into the system to meet the required reactions to
still leave 1.0 ppm Chlorine. Constant, automated, chlorination is often
recommended where the farm lacks personnel with specific skills needed to
safely handle chlorination on an intermittent basis. Intermittent treatments,
including shock treatments where clogging has already occurred, require that
some math calculations.
If you desire intermittent chlorination, a 10 to 20 ppm range is needed for a
period of 30 to 60 minutes. When emitters are partially plugged or clogged by
organic matter, superchlorination may be needed to clear the system.
Superchlorination treatment ranges from 20 to 50 ppm Cl. The highly
concentrated solution should stay within the system for 24 hours with the
system OFF. At the end of this period, flushing should be accomplished
through the mains, submains and laterals. As one subscriber already
suggested, test kits for swimming pools are available to measure "total"
chlorine or "free" chlorine. Chlorine gas and pellets are known methods of
introducing Cl into the irrigation system, yet I would strongly suggest
acidifying the system to allow more dissolution of Cl. Your wasting time and
$ if the pH is not lowered below 6.5 at least temporarily during
chlorination.

We are using a Regal gas chlorinator in our experiments down in Brawley
(Colorado river water). It is an attachment to a chlorine gas cylinder which
hooks up to the irrigation system. The system only delivers chlorine gas when
diverted water is flowing through the hooked-up apparatus. It must be noted
however, chlorine could be pushed/regulated out of existence for
environmental and safety concerns.

I would appreciate any comments, especially input concerning polymers.

Richard Mead
List Owner

I thought it would be a good idea to start a drip irrigation reference
database. Below are the references I used to establish discussion on
filtration and water treatment. Please add to the list a reference article
that you think is pertinent to the subject.

Adin A. Alon (1987) Clogging in irrigation systems reusing pond effluents and
its prevention. Water Sci Technol 19:323

Anonymous (1990) Reduction of Clogging In Buried Drip Systems. Irrigation
Journal: April pp. 18-21.

American Society of Agricultural Engineers (1990a) Design and installation of
microirrigation system, ASAE EP405.1. Standards, Engineering Practices and
Data, St. Joseph Michigan

Bucks, D.A., Nakayama F.S., Gilbert, R.G. (1977) Clogging research on drip
irrigation. Fourth International Drip Irrigation Assoc. Oct. 1976, Fresno,
California.

Bucks, D.A., Nakayama F.S (1979) Trickle irrigation water quality and
preventive maintenance. Agric. Water Management 2:149

Bucks, D.A., Nakayama F.S (1984) Problems to avoid with drip/trickle
irrigation systems. Proc Am Soc Civil Engin Specialty Conf Irrig and Drainage
Div 24-26 July, Flagstaff, Arizona

Daudet, G. (1993) Low-Flow Irrigation: System Maintenance From The Inside
Out. Irrigation Journal: Nov/Dec pp. 18-22.

Farrell, M. D. (1989) Filtration: The key to successful microirrigation
systems. Irrigation Journal: Nov/Dec pp 8-14.

James, L.G. Shannon, W.M. (1986) Flow measurement and system maintenance. In:
Nakayama F.S., Bucks, D.A. (eds) Trickle irrigation -design, operation and
management. Elsevier, Amsterdam

Meyer J.L., Snyder J.J., Valenzuela L.H., Harris A. Strohman R (1991). Liquid
polymers keep drip irrigation lines from clogging. Calif Agric. 45:24

Phillips, K.P. (1993) Filtration's Role in Water Quality: Polishing Water for
Low-Volume Irrigation. Irrigation Journal: May/June pp.8-12

Excellent regference material.

One note of caution, use either chlorine gas with a vacuum demand regulator
(like the 'Regal) or Sodium Hypochlorate, not Calcium Hypochlorite (HTH).

Based on a paper to be presented at the 5th International
Microirrigation Congress (Orlando, Florida, April 2-6, 1995), the
1991 International Commission on Irrigation and Drainage (ICID)
survey estimated 1.8 Million Hectares. A projected 3 million
Hectares by 2000.

Freddie Lamm

Date sent: 03-Feb-1995 21:02:19 -0600
Send reply to: trickle-l@unl.edu
From: trickle-l@unl.edu
To: trickle-l@unl.edu (Multiple recipients of list)
Subject: Hello..and help

roll@freenet.calgary.ab.ca
I need to know the approx. current worldwide acreage of drip irrigation
for a local producer factsheet. If anyone can help it would be
appreciated. Thanks.

Freddie Lamm
Research Agricultural Engineer
KSU Northwest Research-Extension Center
105 Experiment Farm Road, Colby, Kansas 67701-1697
Ph. 913-462-6281
FAX 913-462-2315

Excellent idea for references which I don't have time to respond to
right now, but there will be 10 papers touching the subject of
filtration presented at the 5th International Microirrigation
Congress. These papers will be published in the
Proceedings which are free to registered delegates and will
probably be for sale from ASAE after the Congress. Filtration
continues to be an important and not totally solved topic.

Freddie Lamm

Freddie Lamm
Research Agricultural Engineer
KSU Northwest Research-Extension Center
105 Experiment Farm Road, Colby, Kansas 67701-1697
Ph. 913-462-6281
FAX 913-462-2315

In response to Roy about the injection of gypsum:

It is standard practice in the San Joaquin Valley for growers to apply
gypsum through subsurface drip systems. If you have a wide flow path long
path turbulent flow emitter and follow the correct procedures you will have
no difficulty. If perchance you have pressure compensating emitters with
black rubber diaphragms you may have to be more careful. For detailed
advice I suggest that you contact:
Soil Solutions Corporation
8000 West Doe Ave., Ste E,
Visalia, CA 93291
Tel: 209 651-4100 Fax: 209 651-4109
They have "the AG Solution Master machine which dissolves and injects gypsum."

If you wish to talk to an irrigation dealer and grower who both injects
gypsum into his own system and has many customers who do the same, then
'phone:
Stephen J. Borra
Lodi Irrigation Inc.
1301 East Armstrong Rd.
Lodi CA 95242
209 368-5082 Fax: 369-5116

Good luck,

Rodney

roll@freenet.calgary.ab.ca

Thank you to Fred Lamm for the info. I estimated the present global drip
irrigation acreage at about 2 million hectares so am too far off. This is
a great system!

Back in mid January I brought to attention a recently published paper in the
Journal of Environmental Quality (24:79-86). The paper was entitled
"Concurrent Evaluation of Agronomic, Economic, and Environmental Aspects of
Trickle-Irrigated Watermelon Production". The research findings involved in
this paper can also be found in the newest edition of the Journal of Soil
Science Society of America 59:145-150 (1995). The title of this paper is
"Nitrogen and Water Interactions in Trickle-Irrigated Watermelon". Both
papers were senior authored by Jerome Pier, one of the instigators of
Trickle-L.
If anyone wants a copy of my original review of the first paper, let me know
at this address. I'll let Jerome comment on the basic differences between the
two papers.

Richard Mead
List owner

The California Department of Water Resources (DWR) has a new World
Wide Web (WWW) Home Page on-line -- it is called the "California Water
Page." This information site is managed by DWR's Office of Water Education
and is intended to be the entry point for inquiries to the Department.

The WWW address is: http://wwwdwr.water.ca.gov

Information topics included on the page are:

- General Information (DWR mission, services, misc related info)
- Organizations (DWR division and office organizations)
- What's New? (recent news releases, speeches, calendar of events)
- Water conditions (snow survey info, flood info, reservoir info)
- Programs (various operational programs of DWR)
- State Water Project (overview of SWP, facilities, other info)

There are hyperlinks here to other DWR home pages, to CERES, to the
Bureau of Reclamation, the Corps of Engineers, and other WWW sites.

The California Water Page is still under construction and we expect
to be putting more information on-line soon.

Questions and suggestions about content can be directed to Anita
Garcia-Fante, Chief of the Office of Water Education, at:
anita@water.ca.gov.

Comments about the page format should be directed to Larry Filby at:
larry@water.ca.gov.

- - - - - -

>>Concerning filtration; what do you do with your flush water from sand media
>>filters? Especially in a permanent crop situation. Any info will be
>>helpful...
>>
>Our filters are next to the ranch with furrow irrigation. We run
>the flush water down the tail drain. We manually flush so we are
>sure not to put fertilizer down the drain. Others put it into
>small pit with gravel. Depends if you have enough infiltration
>capacity. One flush a day does it for us, but we have relativley
>clean well water.

Two other options I have seen used:

1) Harris Farms in San Joaquin Valley, California - They set up a tank next
to the filter station that collects backflush water. The size they used
was a 5,000 gallon (polyethylene) tank. A filter and small booster pump were
installed to recycle the backflush water back to the pump station. The
filter was a small rotating screen type installed inside the tank. The farm
also has the water trucks use these tanks as a water supply when doing dust
control.

2) Other farms have the water trucks connect up directly to the backflush
piping at the filter station. This seems to work if the water source is
not very dirty and the backflush is not automated.

I am currently doing some research on disposal of household waste water
using trickle irrigation absorption beds. I would be most interested if
anyone on the list has had experience with this.

The primary problems appear to be filtering, ph buffering, and root
infiltration. Currently I am planning to filter through a "grease trap"
which will seperate fats and oils, then a sand bed filter, and buffer
through ground oyster shells. Root growth from what will be high nutrient
carrying water poses another problem.

Depending on our local government regulations, the waste water will be used
to trickle irrigate a commercial raspberry crop, orchard irrigation, or
domestic gardens (if the water quality is not sufficient for commercial use).

Any comments or advice would be appreciated.

Thanks

Steve
--
_______________________________________________________________________
Steve Campbell University of New England
Project Office Manager Armidale NSW 2350
Information Technology Services Australia

Phone; 067 73 3463 E-mail:scampbe1@metz.une.edu.au
FAX; 067 73 3390 Note: This ^ is the figure one.
_______________________________________________________________________

My company solicits soil and water problems and has worked in this field for
twenty-plus years.
I have recently developed a process for producing potassium hypochlorite
with a low cost on site electrochemical cell.
Potassium hypochlorite will provide all of those values of chlorine to
include control of disease pathogens such as pythium and phytophera, iron
deposits, manganese scale, biofilms, etc.
Potassium hypochlorite is safe to handle, cheap tp produce, and on site
generation eliminates freight on goods. It does its job then returns to
its natural state to provide plant nutrition. Potassium hypochlorite can be
used as a sanitizing agent for many purposes such as dump tank treatment for
fruit and vegetable processing and disinfection of diseased plants in the
field. (I might add that EPA registration is being applied for so other
claims can be made.
We will have this product and processes in the marketplace within the next
few months.

In response to Steve's questions about greywater and subsurface drip.
Our company specializes in this particular field of wastewater disposal
through subsurface drip irrigation. We manufacture a wide flow path
turbulent flow emitter with Treflan (trifluralin) fused into the polymer to
provide guaranteed protection of the system from root intrusion for 20
years. We also incorporate a bactericide (OBPA) on the inside wall of the
tube to inhibit bacterial slime.
Because I do not believe that the Internet should be used for free
advertising I will send you a private message with more information
including the names of our representatives in your region.
Rodney

Three questions concerning Potassium hypochlorite:
1) Is it a liquid?
2) Can it be mixed with any fertilizer solution? (are there limits?)
3) Any research papers sited?

Thanks

RM
list owner

Just a short note to indicate that there will be 7 presentations at
least touching the use of wastewater for microirrigation at the 5th
Microirrigation Congress, April 2-6, 1995, Orlando, Florida. Some of
the papers are more specific about the topic than others. The number
7 is based on the subject index of the Proceedings.

Freddie Lamm

Freddie Lamm
Research Agricultural Engineer
KSU Northwest Research-Extension Center
105 Experiment Farm Road, Colby, Kansas 67701-1697
Ph. 913-462-6281
FAX 913-462-2315

Use a sump and settle matter and recycle with small booster, effective if
sump management is good.

Best knowledge WAI Eng. Hawaii. Richard Loero,

As stated on a previous posting, I plan to start a database of all
articles/papers written on drip irrigation. Segmenting them into categories
probably would be the most efficient way of finding certain types of
information. Individuals could add to the database at anytime if articles
have been missed by official postings. The database will be accessed either
through an FTP site, WWW home page or just the through monthly list
log/archives. The following categories will be set up for the drip
irrigation database.
*****************************************************************
1) Crop responses to trickle/drip irrigation

2) Installation of SDI

3) Filtration

4) Fertigation

5) Uniformity of drip systems

6) Water treatment/water quality
*****************************************************************
Note that surface and subsurface drip will be lumped together (w/ the
exception of category 2) at least at the beginning.

Please comment on the above category selection. Post your request for another
category if I have neglected a topic of interest.

R. Mead
List owner

Drip chemigation (pesticides)would be a useful addition to this list.
Otherwise, excellent choices.

Aziz Baameur
azbaameur@ucdavis.edu

Drip chemigation(pesticides/others)would be a useful addition to this list.
Otherwise, excellent choices.

Aziz Baameur
azbaameur@ucdavis.edu

Dear Steve:

I'm an irrigation contractor in Western Washington. I have not used gray
water, but as far as root infiltration there is a produt out there that is
suppose to solve this problem. It's called GEO Line, if you heard of Toro
Netafim it's basicly the same stuff but has an anti rooot infiltration.

I hope I was of some help I can get you more info if necessary.

Carl Taylor
Sure Shot Irrigation

Dear Dr. Mead,

A database of articles/papers written on drip irrigation is an excellent
idea. My suggestion for another category is OPERATIONAL
PROBLEMS/MAINTENANCE OF DRIP SYSTEM.

Ragards.

Basant Maheshwari

________________________________________________________________
Dr. B.L. Maheshwari Email
b.maheshwari@uws.edu.au
School of Agri. & Rural Development Tel. (61+45) 701 235
or 885 652
University of Western Sydney Fax (61+45) 885 538
Richmond, NSW 2753, AUSTRALIA
________________________________________________________________

The following I found on AOL regarding wastewater/greywater.

WASTEWATER CAN BE USEFUL FOR REPLACING DEPLETED GROUND WATER

WASHINGTON (Sept 8, 1994) -- As competition for ground-water resources
increases, particularly in the western United States, so does the need for
innovative ways to manage water efficiently. A new report from a committee
of the National Research Council concludes that in some cases waters of
less-than-ideal quality, such as treated municipal wastewater and urban
stormwater runoff, can be used to "recharge" depleted aquifers, even those
used to supply drinking water. However, due to uncertainties and possible
health risks, these sources should be considered for potable purposes only
when better- quality water is unavailable.

Artificial recharge using treated wastewater is a sound option for preventing
saltwater from infiltrating freshwater aquifers, reducing land subsidence,
and maintaining stream flows, the committee said. It is particularly
well-suited for non-potable uses such as landscape irrigation because health
risks are minimal and public acceptance is high.

Of the three main types of water sources the report evaluates -- treated
municipal wastewater, stormwater runoff, and irrigation return flow -- the
committee found treated municipal wastewater to be the most consistent in
terms of quality and quantity. The report also examines pre-treatment and
recharge technologies, the changes water undergoes as it flows through soils
and aquifers, the economic feasibility of artificial recharge, and legal and
institutional considerations. It includes descriptions of seven recharge
projects -- in Orange County, Calif.; Los Angeles; Phoenix; El Paso, Texas;
Long Island, N.Y; Orlando, Fla.; and Tel Aviv, Israel -- and recommends
strategies for using artificial recharge in water-short areas.

The study was sponsored by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Environmental
Protection Agency, West Basin Municipal Water District, Water Replenishment
District of Southern Calif., Orange County Water District, and National Water
Research Institute. The National Research Council is the principal operating
arm of the National Academies of Sciences and Engineering. It provides
independent advice on science and technology issues under a congressional
charter. A committee roster is below.

The committee's report, GROUND-WATER RECHARGE USING WATERS OF IMPAIRED
QUALITY, is available from the National Academy Press in the Bookstore
section of NAS Online.

# # #

NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL
COMMISSION ON GEOSCIENCES, ENVIRONMENT, AND RESOURCES
WATER SCIENCES AND TECHNOLOGY BOARD

COMMITTEE ON GROUND WATER RECHARGE

JULIAN ANDELMAN (chair)
Professor of Environmental Health
Graduate School of Public Health
University of Pittsburgh
Pittsburgh

HERMAN BOUWER
Director
Water Conservation Laboratory
U.S. Department of Agriculture
Phoenix

RANDALL CHARBENEAU
Director
Center for Research in Water Resources
University of Texas
Austin

RUSSELL CHRISTMAN
Professor of Environmental Science
Department of Environmental Science and Engineering
University of North Carolina
Chapel Hill

JAMES CROOK
Director
Water Reuse
Black and Veatch
Cambridge, Mass.

ANNA FAN
Chief
Pesticide and Environmental Toxicology Section
Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
California Environmental Protection Agency
Berkeley

DENISE FORT
Director
Water Resources Administration
University of New Mexico
Albuquerque

WILFORD GARDNER (1)
Dean (retired)
College of Natural Resources
University of California
Berkeley

WILLIAM JURY
Professor
Department of Soil and Environmental Sciences
University of California
Riverside

DAVID MILLER
Partner
Geraghty & Miller Inc.
Plainesville, N.Y.

ROBERT PITT
Assistant Professor
Department of Civil Engineering
School of Engineering
University of Alabama
Birmingham

GORDON ROBECK (2), (3)
Consultant
Laguna Hills, Calif.

HENRY VAUX JR.
Professor of Resource Economics
Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources
University of California Riverside

JOHN VECCHIOLI
Geologist, Hydrologist
Water Resources Division
U.S. Geological Survey
Tallahassee, Fla.

MARYLYNN YATES
Research Associate
Department of Soil and Environmental Sciences
University of California
Riverside

This does'nt deal directly with trickle/drip irrigation, but it is related to
the greywater subject previously discussed.

R. Mead
List owner

The following I found on AOL (via NAS) regarding farm productivity vs the
environment. Many of the issues discussed I think drip irrigation could and
should address.

R. Mead
List owner

MEASURES NEEDED NOW TO PROTECT ENVIRONMENT, FARM PRODUCTIVITY

WASHINGTON (Nov. 17, 1993) -- New national policies and new approaches to
farming are needed to address soil and water problems attributed to farming
practices, concludes a report released today by a committee of the National
Research Council's Board on Agriculture. The report says that efforts to
protect soil quality deserve the same attention as those for air and water.
Protecting soil quality should be a fundamental environmental goal for the
nation, with increased attention to the prevention of surface and ground
water pollution through more effective use of fertilizers, pesticides, and
irrigation.

"Soil and water quality problems are as important as other environmental
problems we face," said committee chair Sandra S. Batie, Elton R. Smith
Professor of Food and Agricultural Policy at Michigan State University, East
Lansing. "The nation should look to new agricultural practices that will
both protect the environment and help farm productivity."

The U.S. Department of Agriculture, Environmental Protection Agency, and
Congress should undertake a coordinated effort to identify regions that
should be highest priority for federal, state, and local programs to improve
soil and water quality, the committee recommended. Technical assistance,
educational programs, financial resources, and government regulations should
be directed at regions where degraded soils and polluted water are most
severe, and at farms that cause a disproportionate amount of environmental
problems.

Targeting measures now to prevent soil degradation and water pollution may
allow U.S. agricultural producers avoid high-cost solutions in the future.
But time for low-cost solutions could be running out. "In some regions,
soil degradation and water pollution may already be serious enough that
solutions will entail economic losses to the agricultural sector," the
committee cautioned. "Concerted action now is needed to prevent the list of
such regions from getting longer."

PROBLEM-SOLVING STRATEGIES

The committee defined four interrelated strategies for national policy that
hold the most promise of preventing soil and water problems while sustaining
farm profits. Emphasis on one strategy to the exclusion of others could
exacerbate one environmental problem while solving another.

1) Broadening the approach to protecting soil quality. "National policies to
protect soil resources are too narrowly focused on controlling erosion and
conserving soil productivity," the committee said. Other important and often
irreversible threats to soil include salinization, compaction, acidification,
and loss of biological activity. Soil is a living, dynamic substance that
acts as the interface between agriculture and the environment. High-quality
soils, for example, prevent water pollution by absorbing and partitioning
rainfall and by breaking down agricultural chemicals, wastes, and other
potential pollutants.

2) Increasing efficiency in the use of fertilizers, pesticides, and
irrigation methods. Improving the way fertilizers, pesticides, and
irrigation water are used can prevent pollution at its source. New programs
are needed that reduce the amount of those potential pollutants produced as a
by-product of farming. Many technologies and management methods are already
available for more efficient use of fertilizers, pesticides, and irrigation
water, but they need to be more widely implemented, the committee said.

3) Reducing farm erosion and runoff. Many different conservation systems
such as reduced tillage, crop rotation, and use of cover crops have proven
potential to reduce erosion and runoff. But today, only 30 percent of U.S.
croplands are farmed using reduced tillage methods, for example. In many
regions, increased use of these techniques on lands that are most vulnerable
to degradation of soil quality or that most contribute to water pollution
could result in dramatic decreases in erosion and runoff.

4) Creating and protecting "buffer zones." In many watersheds,
"field-by-field" efforts to conserve soil quality, increase efficiency, and
reduce erosion and runoff will not be enough to protect the environment.
Buffer zones, such as vegetation along streams, strategically-planted grass
strips, and sophisticated, artificially constructed wetlands, can help
intercept or immobilize pollutants and reduce runoff, the committee said.
These zones can augment, though not replace, efforts to improve farm
management. "Managing the landscape by creating or restoring buffer zones is
a promising way to increase the effectiveness and lower the cost of programs
to protect soil and water quality," the committee said.

NEW POLICIES NEEDED

The committee concluded that traditional, voluntary approaches to improve
soil and water quality need to incorporate modern market-based incentives and
enlist support from the private sector -- including seed, chemical, and
equipment manufacturers -- to improve farming practices. The committee noted
that involuntary approaches might be needed in areas where environmental
problems are severe and where farm owners and managers are "unacceptably
slow" in implementing improved farming techniques.

"Best management practices" recommended to farmers by public agencies need to
be integrated into comprehensive farming plans. Implementation of such a
plan, rather than adoption of a single isolated practice, should be the basis
on which farmers receive technical or financial assistance or are judged to
meet the requirements of regulatory programs.

The federal government should invest in research and development of new
agricultural production technologies and management methods, the committee
said. "Much greater progress could be made if producers had better tools and
information to refine the management of their farming systems."

State and federal laws should clarify the legal responsibilities of
landowners and land users to manage land in ways that protect soil and water
quality, the committee recommended. Permanent, publicly funded soil and
water quality gains are impeded by inconsistencies in the legal definition of
the rights and responsibilities of landowners and users.

Some croplands cannot be profitably farmed without causing soil degradation
or water pollution. Other lands could help improve soil and water quality if
maintained as buffer zones or wetlands. A program to purchase use rights
from landowners through long-term easements should be developed to protect
these environmentally sensitive lands, the committee said.

The National Research Council is the principal operating agency of the
National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering. It is
a private, non-profit institution that provides science and technology advice
under a congressional charter.

The study was sponsored by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the
Environmental Protection Agency. A committee roster is below.

The committee's report, SOIL AND WATER QUALITY: AN AGENDA FOR AGRICULTURE,
is available from the National Academy Press in the Bookstore section of NAS
Online.

# # #

NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL
BOARD ON AGRICULTURE

COMMITTEE ON LONG-RANGE SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION POLICY

SANDRA S. BATIE (Chair)
Elton R. Smith Professor in Food and Agricultural Policy
Department of Agricultural Economics
Michigan State University
East Lansing

J. WENDELL GILLIAM
Professor of Soil Science
North Carolina State University
Raleigh

PETER MARK GROFFMAN
Associate Scientist
Institute of Ecosystem Studies
Millbrook, N.Y.

GEORGE R. HALLBERG
Chief of Environmental Geology
Geological Survey Bureau
Iowa Department of Natural Resources
Iowa City

NEIL D. HAMILTON
Ellis and Nelle Levitt Distinguished Professor of Law and Director
Agricultural Law Center
Drake University Law School
Des Moines, Iowa

WILLIAM E. LARSON
Professor of Soil Science (retired)
University of Minnesota
St. Paul

LINDA K. LEE
Visiting Associate Professor of Agricultural Economics
University of Connecticut
Storrs

PETER J. NOWAK
Associate Professor, Rural Sociology
University of Wisconsin
Madison

KENNETH G. RENARD
Hydraulic Engineer
Southwestern Watershed Research Center
U.S. Department of Agriculture
Tucson, Ariz.

RICHARD E. ROMINGER
Deputy Secretary
U.S. Department of Agriculture
Washington, D.C.

B.A. STEWART
Distinguished Professor of Soil Science and Director
Dryland Agriculture Institute
West Texas A&M University
Canyon

KENNETH K. TANJI
Professor of Hydrologic Science
Department of Land, Air, and Water Resources
University of California
Davis

JAN VAN SCHILFGAARDE (*)
Associate Deputy Administrator for Natural Resources and Systems
Agricultural Research Service
U.S. Department of Agriculture
Beltsville, Md.

R.J. WAGENET
Professor and Chair
Department of Soil, Crop, and Atmospheric Sciences
Cornell University
Ithaca, N.Y.

DOUGLAS L. YOUNG
Professor and Agricultural Economist
Washington State University
Pullman

RESEARCH COUNCIL STAFF

CRAIG A. COX
Project Director

(*) Member, National Academy of Engineering

Transmitted: 94-11-14 09:33:32 EST

I am working in INIA (National
Research Institute of Agriculture) at the Soil, Water and
Climate Department. The mainly crops that we work are pear,
apple, onion, allium and strawberries. I started to work in
INIA 4 years ago. Uruguay is between Brasil and Argentina
(South America). We have not tradition in irrigation. Only
Sugar Cane in the north of the country (4000 has) and the rice
crop in the east (about 15000 has). Six or Seven years ago, it
incorpored irrigation equipment in vegetables crops in the
south and north of the country. The major problem that I can
found in the equipment is a poor constrution. The uniformity
of the system evaluated are poor or innaceptable. We are
working to improve this situacion. I going to present a paper
with this dates at the 5 International Congress of
Microirrigation in Orlando next april.
I am very interested in this type of discussion group.Thank
you again for your welcome.
Tomorrow I going on vacation until February 28.
Sincerely,

Claudio Garc!a
---
Ing.Agr. Claudio Garcia
cgarcia@inialb.org.uy

Fellow readers

Here is a problem I have been trying to solve in vain in the past months.
I am interested in combining distribution uniformity and application efficiency
terms. However, the former is a statistical distribution and the latter a
ratio. How does one convert from a ratio to a distribution?

Any ideas or references will be highly appreciated.

Thank you.

Neba Ambe
Agric. Engr. Department
Michigan State University
East Lansing, MI 48824

ambebihn@student.msu.edu
517:355-4496

>As stated on a previous posting, I plan to start a database of all
>articles/papers written on drip irrigation. Segmenting them into categories
>probably would be the most efficient way of finding certain types of
>information. Individuals could add to the database at anytime if articles
>have been missed by official postings. The database will be accessed either
>through an FTP site, WWW home page or just the through monthly list
>log/archives. The following categories will be set up for the drip
>irrigation database.
>*****************************************************************
>1) Crop responses to trickle/drip irrigation
>
>2) Installation of SDI
>
>3) Filtration
>
>4) Fertigation
>
>5) Uniformity of drip systems
>
>6) Water treatment/water quality
>*****************************************************************
>Note that surface and subsurface drip will be lumped together (w/ the
>exception of category 2) at least at the beginning.
>
>Please comment on the above category selection. Post your request for another
>category if I have neglected a topic of interest.
>
>R. Mead
>List owner

I suggest the additional:

1. General (this would cover books which include multiple topics)
2. Hardware (hoses, pressure regulators, fittings, emitters, etc.)

For info

Cheers
Tony M :-)
******************************************************
* Tony Meissner *
* Senior Research Scientist (Soils) *
* SA Research & Development Institute *
* PO Box 411, Loxton SA, Australia 5333 *
* Tel. 085 85 9146 *
* Fax: 085 85 9199 *
* email Meissner.Tony@pi.sa.gov.au *
*****************************************************
Date: 2/14/1995 11:58 am (Tuesday)
From: TONY MEISSNER
To: ORGANIX:TAMARIX:OFF40:PISA.SMTP40:"ambebihn@student.msu.edu"
Subject: help - Reply

Nebe,
I may have the answer for you.

Field application efficiency can be defined as ea = 100 * Um/Uf
where Um = mean depth of water needed to avoid undesriable plant
stress and Uf = mean depth applied. If a normal distribution is
assumed then the target efficiency for non-uniformly distributed
water application can be defined as:
ea = 100 Um/(Um + s.Tp) where
Um = mean depth of water needed to avoid plant stress, s =
standard deviation, and Tp = value that is exceeded by a random
variable , normally distributed with mean zero and SD unit with
probablity P. (TP values sa a function of P can be read from
statistical Tables )

The refernce is
Till, MR and Bos, MG (1985) The influence of uniformity and
leaching on the field application efficiency ICID Bulletin v34 pp
32-36, 60)

Hope this helps

Cheers
Tony M :-)
******************************************************
* Tony Meissner *
* Senior Research Scientist (Soils) *
* SA Research & Development Institute *
* PO Box 411, Loxton SA, Australia 5333 *
* Tel. 085 85 9146 *
* Fax: 085 85 9199 *
* email Meissner.Tony@pi.sa.gov.au *
*****************************************************

Good suggestions, I'll add them to my list.
Thanks!!

rm

SET trickle-l DIGESTS

set trickle-l digests

You should consider a section for irrigation scheduling techniques and
equipment. Mike Glenn USDA-ARS Kearneysville, WV

Hello All. About three weeks ago, I sent my introduction to this list
and included several questions that I had about the industry. To date I
have received only three replies; therefore, I am re-introducing my
questions in the hope of more information. For the first four questions,
I am seeking answers which deal with individual farms or specific areas.
I am still planning to spend time summarizing the responses, and I will
report back to the list with whatever information I receive. Responses
may be sent directly to my email address, apeacock@elinet1.dowelanco.com ,
or to the list for discussion.

My questions are:

1)In what area of the world are you using drip irrigation? From what
little information I have been able to gather, drip irrigation seems
to be confined to very specific geographic regions such as valleys.
Is this impression correct for your area?

2)On what crops are you using drip irrigation? Is there only one
crop grown in your geographic area, or is there a variety?

3)What soil types lend themselves to drip irrigation? What soil
types are problematic?

4)Is only one type of drip (surface or subsurface) used in your area,
or are both used?

5)For the researchers among you, are there any computer models which
can be used to describe the movement of chemicals emitted from a
drip irrigation system?

6)Where can I learn more about this practice?

Thank You!

Alan Peacock
apeacock@elinet1.dowelanco.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The thoughts presented in the above message do not necessarily represent
those of my employer.

Good luck on your problem from a farmer in California. I do have one thing
to say. GO BLUE. I am also an ex jock who played for Bo at U of M.

Speaking to question 5 on models to simulate movement due to drip,
probably 2dsoil would be suitable although only soybean and potato
crop models are implemented in it.

Tom Hodges Cropping Systems Modeler ___ ___
USDA-ARS / \_/ \
Rt. 2, Box 2953-A Telephone: 509-786-9207 | |
Prosser, WA 99350 Fax: 509-786-9370 \______/^\/
USA potato tuber
============= thodges@beta.tricity.wsu.edu ========================
...photosynthesis makes the world go around... Mr. Potato Head

On Tue, 14 Feb 1995, ALAN PEACOCK wrote:

> 5)For the researchers among you, are there any computer models which
> can be used to describe the movement of chemicals emitted from a
> drip irrigation system?
>

very interesting. Please send any available literature to
Jim Brigham, District Manager
Netafim Irrigation
FAX 512-261-3007
Thanks
tx gator@aol.com

Hi, I am Robin Franks with Netafim. Drip is applied to large variety of crops
by self ; from tropical , to sub tropical and certainly not confined to
valleys. Am happy to respond to all requests for info. based on global exp.
20 yrs drip. You can also write c/o 7417 Heathrow Way, Hughson Ca. 95326 USA.
for detail or specificics.
RWFF.

Richard, I am not sure how to reply on the Internet. Are questions directed
to the person who asked or to all? I also noticed a comment about advertising
on the net and I don't want to abuse the system by talking about my products,
so I hope I am doing this right. Concerning Potassium
Hypochlorite; It is a liquid that is produced on site . It does not have a
solid form like other hypochlorites. We produce a potassium
chloride/potassium hypochlorite solution to provide nutrient and line cleaner
values depending upon grower needs.
Fertilizer mixes? There are many solutions made I wouldn't say it would mix
with all of them. What are growers doing currently with sodium hypo?
Research Papers? Chemical Abstracts list only 167 total references to
Potassium Hypochlorite. We have just completed patents for production and
use. The E.P.A. and state agencies don't really know what to do with us
because we don't sell Hypochlorite, we sell the machine and inputs. Initial
claims from farm test plots by the grower about controling bacterial wilt and
other disease pathogens and greenhouse trials relating to pythium and
phytophera are great but who is going to label the product? Our goal was to
provide a system of potassium nutrition through microirrigation the oxidation
was necessary to address water chemistry. We want to provide low cost tools
for agriculture, if we make claims and get the E..P.A envolved the systems
might not ever get to market. All this to say we can not share initial
research and will address issues of fertility first. We are pursuing the post
harvest treatment industry and hope to address all research moneys to that
area. Potassium Hypochlorite is very effective as a disinfectant and our
electrolytic cells provide for the oxidation of some chemicals and organic
load in process waters. The use in these processes helps meet wastewater
discharge standards saves water eliminates the hazards of chlorine and
chlorine dioxide, and so on , so we will spend our independant research funds
on this market. I have been on the road all week and this is a hodgepodge
answer to your questions, I'll do better next time. Richard I can't thank
you enough for introducing me to the Internet. I dont understand how it works
but it is the most incredible educational tool I have ever seen. Thanks ,Jim

Dear Subscribers!

The Water Management Research Laboratory in Fresno, CA started
last week their own WorldWibe Web pages. The WorldWide Web (WWW)
is one of the latest features of the Internet. It allows us to
prepare documents where text and images are both available for
people who visit our site.

The pages that have been developed for the Water Management site
will make research, done at the WMRL, more accessible to others.
Another aim of the pages is to support discussions held at the
TRICKLE-L distribution list.

Currently there is information about the research sites of the WMRL,
a start of a bibliography by topic concerning drip-related articles
and books (we will build this out in the coming months), a list of
articles written by WMRL staff (articles are available on request in
the old-fashioned on-paper style) and a collection of drip-related
research descriptions from the progress report '93 of the WMRL.

A rough version of the FAQ for Trickle-l is scheduled to appear
somewhere end next week, and the progress report of 1994 is also
coming soon. By the way, the FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions) will
contain a summary of discussions held since the beginning of Trickle-l
sorted by topic.

For the experienced www-users: The URL to start is
http://asset.arsusda.gov/wmrl.html
(Please be patient with the images. They exist, but don't always follow
the rules of the WWW :-) )

The less experienced users who don't have access to the fancy browsers
can still obtain the information. However, they have to use a mailserver
(like the listserver, but then for WWW. The difference is that you cannot
subscribe to this service). To use the mailserver, send an email to
Agora@mail.w3.org
and write in the message
http://asset.arsusda.gov/wmrl.html

To follow links (you'll find out what that is when you see it), reply to
the message you'll receive with the numbers in the text you received.
For more information about this server, send mail to the same address,
but write
WWW
in the message. Help will return soon (all automated).

The bad news is that the mailserver does not allow images to be transfered.

And when you are experimenting with the e-mail server, don't forget to
check out the Virtual Library (maintained by Thomas-M. Stein).
the URL (address) for the Virtual Library for Irrigation is:
http://www.wiz.uni-kassel.de/kww/projekte/irrig/irrig_i.html

For questions or comments, contact either Richard Mead
(RMEAD@ASRR.ARSUSDA.GOV & MEAD2513@AOL.COM) or me,

Richard Soppe
RSOPPE@ASRR.ARSUSDA.GOV
RSOPPE@CATI.CSUFRESNO.EDU

Re:>Richard, I am not sure how to reply on the Internet. Are questions
directed
to the person who asked or to all?<

Jim, you did just great!! If you want to post anything you wish people to
see, send it to the Trickle-L address as you did this last posting. As for
advertising, as long as it is discreet and not overbearing, I don't mind a
bit.

Re:> There are many solutions made I wouldn't say it would mix
with all of them.< Is potassium more available if solution of the pH is
altered, presumably below 7.0 ?

Re:> Chemical Abstracts list only 167 total references to
Potassium Hypochlorite.< Do you have these references, especially related to
irrigation practices?? I could add these to our database!!

Jim, do you think hypochlorite could effectively replace chlorine gas as a
disinfectant in drip systems?? Do you have any information on K uptake via
potassium hypochlorite in high K consuming crops such as bananas,
tomatoes/potatoes???

Enough questions for now. Hope this is as interesting to people on Trickle-L
as it is for me.

R. Mead
List owner

RE:> Potassium Hypochlorite availability@pH
Other products we are making with the electrolytic cells to achieve oxidizing
solutions of N-P-K are peroxydisulfates which hydrolyze to hydrogen
peroxide(H2O2). These solutions have a much greater effacacy because of pH
effects. However they are some time away from market. Currently potassium
availability is not affected by pH as much as the pHc. Where acidification is
necessary everything works better, as a general rule.
Re:> Chem.Abs. availability. I will be glad to send you the search however
only Ten references to water treatment are made and none provide any detail.
No one to my knowledge produces potassium hypochlorite so little is
published.
Will Potassium Hypochlorite replace Chlorine gas. Definitely Potassium is
needed anway. By electrolyzing a KCL solution we produce the hypo. On site.
No Freight No Middleman Solar powered systems use no electricity, have no
moving parts and produce a .8% hypochlorite solution from a 3% KCL. . In
acuality the ratio of KCL to hypo is determined by the growers needs. But
again we do not sell Potassium Hypochlorite We sell the systems that make it.
K uptake by hypochlorite? Many factors affect water effacacy. Soils that
remain wet can reduce[ORP] or simply lose their energy.Potassium Hypochlorite
will lose its charge and return to its natural state of KCL, if a great deal
of hypo was used in water treatment it will oxidize immediately in the
soil.This might be a substantial benefit to some of the soils I have worked
with on bananas,otherwise its just KCL.
Tomatoes growers are sceptical of chlorides and oddly enough that is where
some of our most dramatic results are coming from, but test are ongoing. We
hope to begin independent test soon , because I belive very little of
products that do not benefit research and less of performance claims by
companies who sell miracles and more.We have nearly a whole new field of
chemistry to explore with these processes. We can add elements to the
solutions that are "spectator ions" they are there but do not participate in
the reaction that allow us to make some very interesting products for onsite
agriculture but I doubt if they will make it to market in my lifetime. All
this again to say Richard, apoligies for little research What little there is
has been done by me and it would not be right to make claims.
THANKS, JIM

Fertilizer grade materials are by far the best long term solution to Drip
management. Your work is most interesting. Grobblar in South Africa was
looking in this direction in the 70's.

drip fertigation.

That WMRL homepage is really nice. As an organic farmer I know we have
to water a little different. I find myself water more frequently and
only deep some of the time. I feel we have to keep the soil and all its
life moist and alive not just feed the plants. Watering for me is very
important and I would like to know if any one has any ideas on how a
organic farmer (for lack of a better word)or someone thats counting
heavly on soils life to make farming work should be watering?

Sal Schettino,Organic Farmer,don't panic eat organic,sals@rain.org
or check out my homepage: http://www.rain.org/~sals/my.html

Spring planting to be slow in south US; cool summer for Midwest

Knight-Ridder

Kansas City--Feb 16--Spring planting in the southern US may be slow this
year if the US National Weather Service is correct in its latest series of
long-range weather outlooks.

Above-average precipitation is predicted through mid-spring for the
southern Great Plains and a large portion of the southeastern US, including
the lower Mississippi River Valley. Such conditions will delay corn, cotton
and some soybean planting.

Much of the southeastern US already is saturated, and the potential for
additional, greater-than-usual rainfall may lead to flooding.

The southeastern US will turn drier in the late spring, but rainy weather
is expected to persist in the Southern Plains, with a brief expansion of the
wet conditions north to Iowa and the lower Ohio River Valley in May and
early June.

For a brief period of time, the heart of the US Midwest--Iowa through
Ohio--will be drier than usual this spring. The most favored period for such
conditions will be in April and early May, which would support ideal
planting conditions for corn and early soybeans. The dryness is predicted to
be short-lived, with no high probability for abnormal precipitation the rest
of spring or early summer.

Temperatures this spring will be cooler than usual from the southern
Rocky Mountains across the Southern Plains to much of the southeastern US.
Much of the cool weather will be the result of above-average precipitation
and may slow plant growth rates slightly.

Predominantly warmer-than-usual weather is expected in eastern parts of
the nation this spring. The highest probabilities for warmer-than-usual
weather are projected in the east-central and southeastern US, including the
easternmost Corn Belt.

Warm weather also is expected in the westernmost US this spring, which
will last through much of the summer. Such a persistence of warm weather
would imply higher evaporative moisture losses, which could lead to moisture
stress to some crop areas late in the summer.

However, the National Weather Service is predicting a wetter- than-usual
late spring and early summer in the Pacific Northwest, which should support
good wheat development without crops having a high degree of dependency on
irrigation.

A mid-summer rainy pattern is expected to form over the Great Lakes
region and then expand southwest through the lower Mississippi River Basin
by early autumn. The wet weather, which apparently reaches a peak in
mid-autumn, suggests a slow harvest for Midwest corn and soybean regions, as
well as slow planting of 1996's winter wheat crop.

A rainy harvest is not all that the Midwest corn and soybean belt will
have to contend with this summer and autumn. Temperatures are predicted to
be cooler than usual, beginning in the early summer and persisting through
the entire autumn season.

The cool weather would suggest a slower-than-usual this spring.

Following a cool summer and autumn, most of the US Midwest will spend the
winter of 1995-96 a little warmer than usual. End

To: Richard Mead.

The following may by useful

REFERENCES IN THE GEOFLOW LIBRARY
*
California Agriculture,
March-April 1991, Volume 45, Number 2, Can Farmers Use Water More
Effectively? Irrigation Systems Compared.
Ag
*
Underground System Helps Produce Record Harvest.
IA News, Feb 1988.
Ag
*Alam, Mahbub-ul.
Leaky Tubing for Subsurface Irrigation,
Paper Number 912158, an ASAE Meeting presentation with Micro-Irrigation,
Albuquerque, NM, June, 1991.
Ag
cantaloupes and apples*Bar Yosef, B., Sagiv, B., and Markovitch, T.
Sweet Corn Response to Surface and Subsurface Trickle Phosphorus Fertigation,
Reprinted from Agronomy Journal, Vol. 81, No. 3.
Ag
*Beer, Bill.
Subsurface Drip in Santa Maria,
Netafim Seminar.
Ag
*Bisconer, Inge, Technical Services Manager, Hardie Irrigation, El Cajon, CA.
Sub-surface Micro-Irrigation of Potatoes in Colorado,
paper no. 87-2033, ASAE, 1987.
Ag
*Boyd, Vicky, Assistant Editor.
Red Bluff orchardist installed drip system before planting trees,
Ag Alert, September, 1994.
Ag
*Bui, W.
Performance of "Turbo Model" Drip Irrigation Tubes,
Visions of the Future, Proceedings of the Third National Irrigation
Symposium, ASAE, 1990, Phoenix, AZ.
Ag
sugarcane
*Bui, Win, Associate Agricultural Engineer, Hawaiian Sugar Planters'
Association, Aiea, Hawaii.
Designing Drip Irrigation Tubes for Row Crops,
Paper No. 932131, The American Society and Canadian Society of Agricultural
Engineers, Spokane, WA, June 1993.
Ag
sugar
*Burnham, T.J.
Underground drip waters vegetables,
California-Arizona Farm press, Saturday, July 18, 1992
Ag
vegetables*Burt, Charles, Dr., Lehmkuhl, Mike, and Walker, Robert.
Porous Irrigation Pipe Analysis,
Irrigation Training and Research Center, California Polytechnic State
University, San Luis Obispo, CA, April, 1993, CEC program for energ-saving
agricultural applications.
Ag
*Camp, C.R., Sadler, E.J., and Busscher, W.J.
Subsurface and Alternate-Middle Micro Irrigation for the Southeastern
Coastal Plain,
reprinted from the Transactions of the ASAE, Vol. 32, No. 2, pp. 451-456, 1989.
Ag
*Certain, Geni, Managing editor.
'Fizzwater',
First Pick, Cotton Grower.
Ag
*Conrad, Mike, Golden State Irrigation Services.
Field Applications,
Netafim Seminar.
Ag
*Davis, K.R., Phene, C.J., McCormick, R.L., Hutmacher, R.B., and Meek, D.W.
Trickle Frequency and Installation Depth Effects on Tomatoes,
1984.
Ag
*DeTar, W.R. and Phene, C.J.
Subsurface Drip Irrigation vs. Furrow Irrigation of Cotton,
California Irrigation Institute 29th Annual meeting, January, 1991,
Sacramento, CA.
Ag
*Duncan, Jeanne, Contributing Writer
Buried Drip Gains More Ground,
Grape Grower, April 1993
Ag
grapes, Murphy-Goode Vineyards*Dyer, Alice, Department of Water Resources.
Grower Doubles Profit, Production with Subsurface Drip Irrigation,
Water Conservation News, January, 1992.
Ag
*Ferrell, J.E.
Less Water, More Crops
San Francisco Chronicle, March 11, 1990.
Ag
raisin grapes*Gardner, Walter H.
How Water Moves in the Soil,
Five pages of photographs reveal the great diversity in one of the most
commonplace phenomena in agriculture
Ag
*Goldhammer, D.A., Dept. of Land, Air, and Water Resources, University of
California, Davis; MacDonald, J.D., Department of Plant Pathology,
University of California, Davis; Beede, R., Kings County Farm Advisor; and
Katayama, Don, Kearney Ag Center.
Effects of Irrigation Method on the Incidence of Verticillium Wilt in a
High Inoculum Soil: A Progress Report,
XXX
Ag
Keywords: Pistachios*Hall, Richard D.
Idea Man,
Raisin Grower, Lee Simpson, California Farmer, August 1992.
Ag
grapes
*Harper, Richard K.
Washington Grower Tries Drip in Vines,
Grape Grower, May 1994.
Ag
grapes
*Hiaring, Philip E.
Murphy-Goode Vineyard in Alexander Valley, Going Underground with Drip,
Wines & Vines, January 1987
Ag
grapes
*Hutmacher, R.B., Phene, C.J., Mead, R.M., Clark, D., Shouse, P., Vail,
S.S., Swain, R., van Genuchten, M., Donovan, T., Jobes, J.
Subsurface Drip Irrigation of Alfalfa in the Imperial Valley,
XXX
Ag
Keywords: alfalfa, furrow irrigation, salinity, water conservation, water
requirement, evapotranspiration.*Klassen, Parry.
Garlic Thrives on Subsurface Drip
Christopher Ranch, American Vegetable Grower, Feb 1993.
Ag
*Lorenzen, B., Graduate Student and Coates, W.E., Associate Professor.
An Implement for Extracting Subsurface Irrigation Laterals,
Agricultural Engineering Department, University of AZ, Tucson, AZ, ASAE,
Paper No. PR 87-110, March 1987.
Ag
*Malcolm, Dan.
Grape Growers Experience Success Under Ground, Subsurface Drip Irrigation
Taking Hold,
American Vineyard, November 1993.
Ag
*McDonald, Jerry.
Subsurface Drip,
Netafim Seminar.
Ag
*McGill, Steve.
Buried Drip For Alfalfa?,
The Furrow.
Ag
*Mitchell, W. H. and Sparks, D.L.
Influence of Subsurface Irrigation and Organic Additions on Top and Root
Growth of Field Corn,
reprinted from Agronomy Journal, Nov-Dec, 1982.
Ag
*Mitchell, W.H.
Subsurface Irrigation and Fertilization of Field Corn,
reprinted from Agronomy Journal, Vol. 73, Nov-Dec, 1981.
Ag
*Oltman, David.
Root of the Problem,
grapes and phylloxera, California Farmer, September, 1991.
Ag
*Oltman, David.
Savings and Loan,
California Farmer, November 1993.
Ag
*Oron, G., DeMalach, J., and Hoffman, Z.
Sub-Surface Trickle Irrigation of Field Crops with Domestic Effluent,
Agritech, Israel, 5th International Conference on Irrigation Proceedings,
March, 1990.
Ag
*Phene, C.J., Davis, K.R., McCormick, R.L., Pincot, A., Meek, D.W., and
Heinrich, D.R.
Evapotranspiration and Crop Coefficient for Cantaloupes,
Water Management Research Laboratory, USDA-ARS, Fresno, CA.
Ag
*Phene, C.J., USDA-ARS.
Subsurface Drip Irrigation Offers Management Advantages,
IA News, Drip/Micro-Irrigation: Doing more with less
Ag
field and vegetable crops*Phene, C.J., Davis, K.R., McCormick, R.L.,
Hutmacher, R.B., and Pierro, J.D.
Water-Fertility Management for Subsurface Drip Irrigated Tomatoes,
USDA-ARS, Fresno, CA.
Ag
*Ptacek, Lanny R., Agricultural Supply Company, Chula Vista, CA.
Subsurface Irrigation and the Use of Chemicals,
IA News.
Ag
*Schwankl, Larry J. and Prichard, Terry L.
Clogging of buried drip irrigation systems,
California Agriculture, Volume 44, Number 1.
Ag
*Striegler, Keith R., research scientist, Viticulture and Enology Research
Center, California State University, Fresno.
Application of Subsurface Drip Irrigation Technology in Vineyards and
Irrigation Scheduling,
Lodi-Woodbridge Wine Seminar, Grape Commission, Lodi, CA, March 1994
Ag
Vines
*Subsurface Irrigation Systems, Inc.
Dual Pipe Subsurface Irrigation,
Agriculturally Test Proven "The Best" (on Corn), Overland Park, Kansas.
Ag
*Tollefson, Scott, Sundance Farms, Coolidge, Arizona.
Commercial Products of Field and Vegetable Crops with Subsurface Drip
Irrigation,
IA Technical Conference, Las Vegas, 1988.
Ag
*Wood, Jim.
Their Drip Irrigation Bears Fruit - Murphy-Goode's site-specific growing
releases full potential of vines,
San Francisco Examiner, Wednesday, July 10, 1991
Ag
grapes
*Wuertz, Howard, Managing Partner and Tollefson, Scott, M.S.
Agronomy-Entomology.
Subsurface Drip Irrigation on Sundance Farms, Ltd, Coolidge, AZ,
Netafim Seminar.
Ag
Geoflow Subsurface Irrigation Systems as Applied To On-site Effluent
Disposal of Wastewater - Design and Installation Manual,
Geoflow, Inc, June 1994
*CIT.
Subsurface Drip Irrigation For Turfgrass: Emitter Observations,
The California State University, School of Agricultural Science and
Technology, June 1994
CIT
Turf
*CIT.
Turf Trials advance subsurface data,
California State University, Fresno, CIT Newslatter, Spring 1992
CIT
Turf*CIT.
What's New in Subsurface Drip?
Water Conservation News, California Department of Water Resources, July 1992.
CIT
*Jorgensen, Greg, CIT, Fresno, CA.
Preseason Tune-up for Micro-irrigation Systems,
Netafim Seminar.
CIT
*Jorgenson, Greg and Solomon, Kenneth H.
Subsurface Drip Irrigation of Turfgrass: 1991 Update,
Center For Irrigation Technology, California State University, Fresno, 1991.
CIT
*Soloman, Kenneth H. and Jorgensen, Greg, CIT, California State
University, Fresno.
Subsurface Drip Irrigation, Preventing turfgrass root intrusion into
subsurface irrigation lines,
Turf & Recreation, Jan/Feb 1994.
CIT
*Zoldoske, David F.
The Future of Irrigation is Buried.
XXX
CIT
*Bressan, Tom, The Urban Farmer Store.
The Use of Emitter Lines in Landscape Irrigation,
Water Efficient Landscaping Conference, Oakland, Feb 1992
Ls
*Bressan, Tom.
Landscape Borrows from Agriculture: Drip Goes Underground,
California Landscaping, June/July 1993.
Ls
*Ferguson, Karen Ruskin
The Application of Subsurface Drip Irrigation To Playing Fields,
Presented at the 1994 IA meeting in Atlanta, GA
Ls
playing fields*Geoflow, Inc.
Lawn Watering Guide For Subsurface Irrigation,
XXX
Ls
lawns and grass*Goble, Ron.
Subsurface Drip Goes City,
Buddy Pond interview, July 1994.
Ls
SSDI, Madera*Hazinski, Michael.
Water Efficient Subsurface Drip Irrigation of Narrow Lawn Strips,
Industrial Research Report, SFSU, Dept of Design and Industry, Instructor:
Dr. John Dierke, December, 1989.
Ls
*Kenig, A., Peleg, R.,(MIAM), and Malchi, I., Netafim.
Subsurface Irrigation of Turf Grass by Drip - Prevention of Clogging by use
of Herbicides,
The Israeli Center for Water Management Device, publication no. PR-86374,
August 1974, Netafim Seminar.
Ls
*Knoche, Linda, KPR Associates, Fallbrook, CA.
Technology Brings Subsurface Irrigation To Turf,
Irrigation News, Lawn & Landscape Maintenance, April 1993
Ls
Landscape*Kourik, Robert
Drip Irrigation for Lawns,
Landscape Architecture, March 1994
Ls
*Pearce, Vaughan, BE (Agriculture).
Subsurface drip Irrigation in Landscape & Turf Applications,
Netafim, Australia, presented at the Australia Irrigation Association
meeting, 1994
Ls
*Submatic
Sub-surface Irrigation: A Better Way to Water Athletic Fields.
XXX
Ls
Turf*Vinchesi, Brian
Streetscape Installations Challenge Contractors,
Lawn & Landscape Maintenance, April 1994
Ls
*Battelle.
Biobarrier Protection for Buried Drip Irrigation Systems,
Battelle Flyer
Rg
*Bui, W. and Clark, E.L. and Heinz, D.J., Administration.
Irrigation Report 101: Root Intrusion Comparison of Five Drip Irrigation Tubes,
Experiment Station, HSPA, September 1992.
Rg
drip irrigation tubes, root intrusion, and trifluralin
*Bui, W.
Irrigation Report 99,
Experiment Station, HSPA, May, 1990, Netafim Seminar.
Rg
drip irrigation, root intrusion, and trifluralin effectiveness
*Bui, Win.
Root Intrusion and Clogging in Subsurface Irrigation. Are These Real Problems?
XXX
Rg
Ag and ww
*Cassidy, Robert, Editor-in-Chief, R&D magazine.
The Blood, Sweat, and Years of Developing a Product: How researchers at
Battelle's Northwest lab waged war to bring a seemingly hopeless idea to
market,
Research & Development, September 1989.
Rg
*Cataldo, Dominic A., Ph.D. and Van Voris, Peter, Ph.D.
A Study of Product Performance and Environmental Concerns with Irrigation
Devices Containing Treflan,
completed by Battelle, Richland, WA, Dec, 1988.
Rg
*Cross, Barrington, Editor, American Cyanamid and Scher, Herbert B.,
Editor, ICI Americas.
Long-Term Controlled Release of Herbicides - Root Growth Inhibition.
Pesticide Formulations, Innovations and Developments,ACS Symposium Series
371, New Orleans, LA, 1987.
Rg
*Dow Elanco
Clean Fields. Clean Water., A look at Treflan Herbicide And The Environment,
XXX
Rg
*Dow Elanco, Indianapolis, IN.
Supplemental Labeling - Trifluralin Technical (EPA Reg. No. 62719-99),
Treflan for Inhibition of Plant Root Encroachment
Rg
*Elanco.
Material Safety Data Sheet.
XXX
Rg
Trifluralin Technical 95%*Elanco.
Specimen Label - Treflan Herbicide,
EPA Reg. No. 1471-35
Rg
*Geoflow, Inc.
Environmental Concerns of Geoflow Rootguard Products,
1992
Rg
*Agricultural Engineering, Annual AE 50 Award Winners, Outstanding
Innovations for 1991,
Subsurface Drip System Protects Root Intrusion,
p. AE 50/10.
SSDI
*Ruskin, Rodney, Geoflow, Inc.
Factors in the Selection of a Drip Emitter for Subsurface Drip Irrigation,
XXX
SSDI
root intrusion and type of emitter.
*Sanjines, A.
Rate of Return on Investment of Subsurface Drip Compared with a Typical
Spray Head System.
XXX
SSDI
*Shani, U., Warrick, A.W., Russo, D., Yitayew, M., and Gordin-Katz, R.
Subsurface Drip Irrigation Uniformity under Spatially Variable Conditions,
Netafim Seminar.
SSDI
*Smajstrla, Allen G., Agricultural Engineering Dept, IFAS, University of
Florida, Gainesville, FL.
Field Studies of Porous Pipe Microirrigation Laterals,
ASAE, Paper No. 94-2172
SSDI
Keywords: subsurface irrigation, drip irrigation, flow control
valves.*Carlile, B.L.
Resume,
Title, education, registrations, experience, technical presentation,
consulting, clients and activities, expert testimonial court cases,
professional and scientific activities, demonstration and research grants,
selected publications
Ww
*Carlile, Dr. B.L., Cert. Prof. Soil Scientist, Sanjines, Dr. A., Mech.
E., Geoflow, Inc.
Subsurface Trickle Irrigation System For On-site Wastewater Disposal and Reuse,
XXX
Ww
*Culotta, Nancy J., NSF International Program Manager
Official Listing of All Standard 40 Class I and Class II Individual Home
Aeration Treatment Plants,
November 1991 Memo to Onsite Wastewater Regulatory Officials Joint
Committee on Wastewater Treatment Devices and Wastewater Program
Participants
Ww
NSF I
*Farrell, Michael D. and Gushiken, Elson C.
Drip Systems Elevate Slope Irrigation Efficiency,
ITC Water Management, Landscape & Irrigation, January, 1994.
Ww
*Grynberg, Harry, Melbourne and Riddell, Peter, Auckland.
Re-Use of Wastewater,
Woodward-Clyde International, Waste Management and Environment, October 1992.
Ww
*Gushiken, Elson C., ITC Water Management.
Effluent Disposal Through Subsurface Drip Irrigation Systems.
XXX
Ww
*Gushiken, Elson C., ITC Water Management.
Nonpotable Subsurface Drip Irrigation System at Holoholokai Beach Park.
XXX
Ww
*Harivandi, Dr. Ali, University of California Cooperative Extension.
Effluent Water for Turfgrass Irrigation,
Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources, leaflet 21500
Ww
*Ingham, Daniel.
Turning Gray Into Green,
California Landscaping, May 1994.
Ww
*Oron, Gideon, Member ASCE, DeMalach, Joel, Hoffman, Zafrir, and Cibotaru,
Rodica.
Subsurface Microirrigation with Effluent,
XXX
Ww
field crops, such as cotton, wheat, corn, and peas.
*Phene, C.J. and Ruskin, R.
Potential of Subsurface Drip Irrigation For Management of Nitrate In Wastewater,
Second printing of Nitrate abstract, December, 1994
Ww
nitrates
*Sanjines, Alvaro, Geoflow, Inc and Carlile, B.L., Carlile & Associates,
Inc. College Station, TX.
Residential Greywater Treatment and Use By Subsurface Irrigation Systems,
XXX
Ww
greywater*Siemak, Robert C., Arber, Richard P., Asano, Takashi, and Crook,
James
National Guidelines for Water Reuse: Pros and Cons
Conserv '90, Phoenix, August 1990.
Ww
Agricultural irrigation, landscape irrigation, industrial reuse,
groundwater recharge, recreational/environmental use, non-potable urban
use, and direct potable reuse

Ruskin, R., P. Van Voris and D.A. Cataldo. 1990. Root Intrusion Protection
of Buried Drip Irrigation Devices with Slow Release Herbicides. Proceedings
of the Third Int. Irri. Symp., Albury-Wadonga, Australia. IA-ASAE pp
211-216.

Sanjines, A and R. Ruskin, 1991. Root Intrusion Protection for Subsurface
Drip Emitters. ASAE Paper No. 91-2047 Am. Soc. Ag. Eng., St. Joseph, MI .

Ruskin, R., A. Sanjines, B.L. Carlile, 1991. Treated Wastewater Subsurface
Irrigation Systems. Proceedings from the Irr. Assoc. 1991 Int. Expo. &
Tech. Conf.

Ruskin, R., 1992. Reclaimed Water and Subsurface Irrigation. ASAE Paper No.
92-2578 Amer. Soc. Ag. Eng.., St. Joseph, MI 49085.

Ruskin, R., 1993 Subsurface Drip Irrigation for Erosion Control. Preserving
the Environment - Proceedings of the 24th Annual Conf. of the Int. Erosion
Control Assoc. Indianapolis, IN, 1993

Ruskin, R. 1993. Underground Irrigation, Agricultural Engineering, March
1993, Urban Agriculture

Ruskin, R., 1993 Subsurface Drip Irrigation can Reduce Pollution Am. Soc.
Civil Eng. Conference July 21-23, 1993 at Park City, Utah

Ruskin, R., 1993 Subsurface Drip Irrigation in Vineyards 1993 Technical
Abstracts of the American Society for Enology and Viticulture, June 23-25,
1993, Sacramento, CA.

Ruskin, R., 1994, Treated Wastewater Subsurface Drip Irrigation Systems,
Australian Water Works Association Conference. May 19 -20, 1994, Sydney,
Australia.

Phene C. J. and R. Ruskin, Nitrate Management with Subsurface Drip
Irrigation, Clean Water-Clean Environment-21st Century, Am. Soc. Ag. Eng.
Conference, Kansas City, Missouri, March 5-8, 1995

Other References:

1. Pettygrove, G.S. Asano, T. editors. Irrigation with reclaimed municipal
wastewater- A guidance manual, Lewis Publishers, Inc.
2. Bui, W. Performance of turbo model drip irrigation tubes. Proceedings of
the third national irrigation symposium. ASAE, November 1990 pp. 198-203.
3. Fowler, Lloyd C. Water reuse for the landscape. Goleta Water District.
Goleta, CA.
4. Irwin, John. On-site wastewater reclamation and recycling. Proceedings
of CONSERV90 Conference AWWA, AWRA,ASCE August 1990 pp107-111
5. Jackson, J. D. Aquatic macrophite treatment systems for water reuse.
Proceedings of CONSERV90 Conference AWWA, AWRA,ASCE August 1990 pp101-105
6. Gross, Mark .A. et al. Onsite treatment for reuse of domestic septic
tank effluent in an artificially drained soil. Proceedings of CONSERV90
Conference AWWA, AWRA,ASCE August 1990 pp95-97.
7. Venhuizen, David. Low cost, low maintenance on-site small scale
wastewater treatment and reuse. Proceedings of CONSERV90 Conference AWWA,
AWRA,ASCE August 1990 pp1289-90.
8. Farwell, Larry. Grey Water reuse. Goleta, Water District, Goleta, CA.
Proceedings of CONSERV90 Conference AWWA, AWRA,ASCE August 1990 pp1065-66
9. English, Stephen. Filtration and water treatment for micro irrigation.
Proceedings of the 3rd International drip irrigation congress, Fresno, CA,
1985
10. Phene, Claude C. Drip irrigation saves water. Proceedings of CONSERV90
Conference AWWA, AWRA,ASCE August 1990 pp 645-650
11. Stevens, Leonard. Clean Water Nature's way to stop pollution. Sunrise,
New York 1974.
12. Reed, Sherwood. Land treatment of wastewater, Noyes Publications, Park
Ridge, 1984.
13. Holden, Tim et. al. How to select hazardous waste treatment
technologies for soils and sludges. Noyes Publications, Park Ridge, 1989.
14. Nakayama, F.S. Water analysis and treatment techniques to control
emitter plugging. Proceedings of the Irrigation Association Conference,
Portland, 1982.
15. Ruskin,R. ;Cataldo, D.A.Van Voris, P. Root intrusion protection of
buried drip irrigation devices with slow release herbicides. Proceedings of
the 3rd National Irrigation Symposium, IA, ASAE, Phoenix, AZ October 1990
pp211-216
16. Gile,J.D. et al. Fate of selected herbicides in a terrestrial
laboratory microcosm. Environmental Sci. Technol. 1980, pp1124-1128
17. Probst, G.D. and Tepe, J.B. Trifluralin and related compounds. In P.C.
Kearney and D. Kaufman (Eds.) Degradation of herbicides. Dekker, N.Y. 1969
p.255-282
18. Helling C.S. Dinitroaniline herbicides in soils J. Environ. Qual. (1) , 1976
19. Conta J. F. Site evaluation- How it works. Proc. Third Annu. Midyear
Conf. Onsite Wastewater Manage. Groundwater Protec. Natl Environ. Health
Asso. Denver, Colo. 1988
20. Brown, R.B. Introduction to soils and functioning of onsite sewage
systems. Proc. Third Annu. Midyear Conf. Onsite Wastewater Manage.
Groundwater Protec. Natl Environ. Health Asso. Denver, Colo. 1988
21. Rutledge, E. M., et. al. Climate as a factor in septic tank filter
fields Proc. Fith Natl. Symp. Individual Small Community Sew. Syst., Am.
Soc. Agic. Eng. St. Joseph, Mich(1988)
22. Hoxie, D. C. et. al. A numerical classification system to determine
overall site suitability for subsurface wastewater disposal. Proc. Fith
Natl. Symp. Individual Small Community Sew. Syst., Am. Soc. Agic. Eng. St.
Joseph, Mich(1988)
23. Sawka,G. J. et. al. Evaluation of Florida soils for on-site sewage
disposal systems. Proc. Fith Natl. Symp. Individual Small Community Sew.
Syst., Am. Soc. Agic. Eng. St. Joseph, Mich(1988)
24. Siegrist, R. L. Hydraulic loading rates for soil absorption systems
based on wastewater quality.Proc. Fith Natl. Symp. Individual Small
Community Sew. Syst., Am. Soc. Agic. Eng. St. Joseph, Mich(1988)
25. Adin, A. Rubinstein,L. Zilberman, A. Particle characterization in
wastewater effluents in relation to filtration and irrigation. Filtration
and separation v26 (4) Jul-Aug 1989 p 284-287
26. Adin, A. Clogging in irrigation systems reusing pond effluents and its
prevention. Water Science and technology v. 19 (12) pp323-3281987
27. Oron, Gideon. De Malach, Yoel. Response of cotton to treated domestic
wastewater applied through trickle irrigation. Irrigation Science v8 (4)
Oct 1987 p 291-300
28. Adin, A. Problems associated with particulate matter in water reuse for
agricultural irrigation and their prevention. Water Science and technology
v18 (9) 1986
29. Ayars, J.E. Hutmacher, R.B. et al. Salt distribution under cotton
trickle irrigated with saline water. Drip/ Trickle Irrigation in Action ,
Proceedings of the third international drip Irrigation Congress. Fresno, CA
1985 v2 pp 666-672
30. Oron, Gideon. De Malach, Yoel Bearman, Jacob Trickle irrigation of
wheat applying renovated wastewater. Water resources bulletin v22(3) Jun
1986
31. Oron, Gideon, Shelef, Gedalia Stormwater and reclaimed effluent in
trickle irrigation. ASCE Journal of the Irrigation and drainage division.
v106(4) Dec1980 pp 299-310
32. Oron, Gideon, Shelef, Gedaliah. Trickle Irrigation using treated
wastewaters ASCE Journal of the Irrigation and drainage division.v105(2),
1979 pp 175-186.31.
33. Brown, J. W. Use of treated sewage water for irrigation. Irrigation
Association Conference Proceedings , pp 195-207
34. Hills, D.J. Gu, Y.P. Tajrishy, M.A. Hydraulic considerations for
compressed subsurface drip tape. Transactions of the ASAE Vol32,
4,pp1197-1201, 1989
35. Mizyed, N. Kruze, E. G. Emitter discharge evaluation of Subsurface
trickle irrigation systems. Transactions of the ASAE, Vol 32 , 4, pp
1223-1228, 1989
36. Bar-Josef, B. Sagiv, B. Markovitch,T. Sweet corn response to surface
and subsurface trickle phosphorous fertigation. Agronomy Journal (81) 3 pp
443-447, 1989
37. Neilsen, G.H. Fitzpatrick, J.J. Stevenson, D.S. et al. Yiels and plant
nutrient content of vegetables trickle irrigated with municipal waste
water. Hortscience (24) 2 pp249-252 , 1898
38. Bogle, CR. Nunez, C. Hartz, TK. Comparison of subsurface trickle and
furrow irrigation on plastic mulched and bare soil for tomato production.
J. of the Am. Soc. for Hort. Sci. (114) 1 pp 40-43, 1989
39. Bakker, Theodore P. Drip Irrigation study. Calif. State Dept of
Transpot. Division of constr. 1980.
40. Schwankl, L.J. Prichard, T. L. Clogging of buried drip irrigation
systems. California Agriculture, (44) 1, pp16-17, 1990
41. Meyer, J.L., Snyder, M.J. et. al. Liquid polymers keep drip irrigation
lines from clogging. California Agriculture (45) 1, pp 24- 25, 1991
42. Gray water use considered, safety big question. The Napa register, Nov.
28,1990
43. Goldhammer, D.A. MacDonald, J.D. Beede, R. et. al. Effects of
irrigation method on the incidence of verticillium wilt in a high inoculum
soil. Pistachio ??????
44. De Tar, W.R. and Phene, C.J. Subsurface drip irrigation vs. furrow
irrigation of cotton. Calif. Irr. Inst. 29th annual meeting. Sacramento,
Jan 1991.
45. Phene C. J. , Davis, K.R. et. al. Evapotranspiration and crop
coefficient for cantaloupes. Water Mangement research lab report.
46. Phene C. J. , Pincot, a. Davis, K.R. et al. Drip irrigation of
cantaloupes: effect of surface and subsurface installation in the field.
Water Mangement research lab report.
47. Phene C. J. , Pincot, a. Davis, K.R. et al. Drip irrigation of
cantaloupes: effect of surface and subsurface installation on fruit quality
Water Mangement research lab report.
48. Phene C. J. , Pincot, a. Davis, K.R. et al. Drip irrigation of
cantaloupes: effect of surface and subsurface installation on petiole
levels of N, P, and K. Water Mangement research lab report.
49. Bisconer, Inge. Subsurface micro irrigation of potatoes in Colorado.
Paper No. 87-2033 ASAE summer meeting June 1987
50. Lorentzen, B. Coates, W.E. An implement for extractin subsurface
irrigation laterals. ASAE Pacific meeting, Tucson, AZ March 1987 Paper No.
87-110
51. Siemak, R. Arber, RP and Asano, T. National guidelines for water reuse:
Pros and cons. Proc. of the CONSERV 90 Conf. Phoenix, Aug 1990 pp 51-55
52. Campos, M. Maddaus, W. Manzione, W California Industries learn that
water conservation pays. Proc. of the CONSERV 90 Conf. Phoenix, Aug 1990
pp 87-91
53. Libhaber, M. and Mintzker, N. Wastewater treatment for agricultural
reuse in Israel. Proceedings of AGRITECH, 5th Intl Conf on Irr. Israel,
March, 1990 pp203-221
54 Oron, G. De Malach, J. Hoffman, Z. Subsurface trickle irrigation of
domestic crops with domestic effluent.Proceedings of AGRITECH, 5th Intl
Conf on Irr. Israel, March, 1990 pp243-257
55. Pyle, WL. Moore, RC. Practical drip irrigation for row crops, the
Hawaian experience. Proc. 3d Int. Drip/ Trickle irrigation Congress 1895
.pp 531-539
56. Tollefson, S. Commercial production of field and vegetable crops with
subsurface irrigation. IA Conf. Proceedings. pp144-153
57. Ravina, et al. Filtration requirements for emitter clogging control.
Proceedings of AGRITECH, 5th Intl Conf on Irr. Israel, March, 1990
58. Sacks, M. Adin, A. Matching the drip irrigation system to water quality
for water reuse in agriculure. Proceedings of AGRITECH, 5th Intl Conf on
Irr. Israel, March, 1990
59. Mualem, Y. The use of tensiometer readout for irrigation- Sucess and
failure. Proceedings of AGRITECH, 5th Intl Conf on Irr. Israel, March, 1990
pp119-132
60. Henggeler, J.C. Irrigation Design options and water management for
pecans. Proc. of the 3d Nat. Irr. Symp. ASAE 1990 p501
61. Moore RC , Fitschen, JC. The drip irrigation revolution in the
Hawaiian sugarcane industry Proc. of the 3d Nat. Irr. Symp. ASAE 1990 p223
62 Spurgeon WE, Manges, HL. Drip line spacing and plant population for
corn.Proc. of the 3d Nat. Irr. Symp. ASAE 1990 p 217
63.Grattan, SR. Schwankl, LJ, Lanini, WT. Distribution of annual weeds in
relation to irrigation method. Proc. of the 3d Nat. Irr. Symp. ASAE 1990
p148
64. Oster, JD. Wichelns, D. Infiltration uniformity effects on cotton
yields and potential economic returns. Proc. of the 3d Nat. Irr. Symp. ASAE
1990 p134
65. Schwankl, LJ. Grattan, SR. Miyao, EM. Drip Irrigation burial depth and
seed planting depth effects on tomato germination. Proc. of the 3d Nat.
Irr. Symp. ASAE 1990 p682
66. Bui, W. Osgood, RV. Subsurface irrigation trial for alfalfa in Hawaii.
Proc. of the 3d Nat. Irr. Symp. ASAE 1990 p658
67. Goyal,MR. Roman, J. Zapata, M. Pestigation in trickle irrigation. Proc.
of the 3d Nat. Irr. Symp. ASAE 1990 p464
68. Mc. Caskill, JA. Percolation improvement of pressurized irrigation
water using catalytic water conditioners. Proc. of the 3d Nat. Irr. Symp.
ASAE 1990 p431
69. Athens, Lucia. Regionally appropriate landscaping for integrated
resource management. Proc. AWWA CONSERV 90 Conf. , 1990 pp207-211
70. Tobey, S. Drip irrigation in landscaping. Proc. of the 3d Nat. Irr.
Symp. ASAE 1990 p315
71. Rauschkolb, RS. Klingenberg, J. Subsurface drip irrigation of
turfgrassesProc. of the 3d Nat. Irr. Symp. ASAE 1990 p88
72. Foster, KE. Karpiscak, MM. Grey water reuse. Proc. AWWA CONSERV 90
Conf. 1990, pp1061-1062
73. Novotny, V. Potential and prospects for reclamation of greywater. Proc.
AWWA CONSERV 90 Conf. 1990, pp1063-1064
74. Fulton, AE Oster, JD. Hanson, BR. Phene, CJ. and Goldhamer, DA Reducing
drainwater: Furrow vs. subsurface drip irrigation. California Agriculture,
(45) 2 ,1991 pp 4-8
75. Smith, RB. Oster, JD. and Phene, CJ. Subsurface drip produced highest
net return in Westlands area study.California Agriculture, (45) 2, 1991 pp
8-10
76. Phene, CJ. McCormick, RL. Hutmacher,RB and Pierro, JD. Water -
fertility management for sub-surface drip irrigated tomatoes. ??????
Symposium 1987. pp323-338
77. Ptacek, Lanny R. Subsurface irrigation and the use of chemicals. IA
?????? pp 225- 233
78. De TAr WR. Phene, CJ. Subsurface drip irrigation vs. furrow irrigation
of cotton. Calif. Irr. Inst. 29th annual meeting, 1991

I have a lot more on my old computer which only has a 5 1/2 inch floppy so
I cannot get it across conveniently.

I think that this is a great idea - good luck,

Rodney.

Despite Wet Year, Northern California Farmers Must Shop for Extra Water By
Mark Grossi, The Fresno Bee, Calif. Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News

FRESNO, Calif.--Feb. 21--West side San Joaquin Valley farmers kept the
celebration short last week when they heard they would get their biggest
delivery of federal irrigation water since 1990 - a 75 percent supply.
"Three-quarters of a cup is better than half a cup," said farmer Gary
Robinson, who works almond and pistachio orchards near Huron. "But I'll be
looking for other supplies to make it through the summer. I do it every
February now."
Robinson is not alone. Since the latter part of the 1987-1992 drought, many
west side farmers have gone shopping after the government's annual February
announcement of reduced supplies.
The 600,000-acre Westlands Water District, the largest federal district in
the country, hasn't had a full Central Valley Project allotment since the
1980s. Twice in the last five years the February projection has been as low
as 25 percent.
The drought is one reason for the shortage. But, even after a big rainfall
year such as this one, the shortage will continue because of environmental
protections for dying fish species and a withering Northern California
habitat.
More Northern California river water is needed to protect fish and habitat.
Because the water is the federal supply for the west side, farmers have been
cut back so the Northern California ecosystem can mend.
So Westlands and other west side contractors, such as Panoche Water District,
will continue to shop for extra water from other districts with different
water rights, farmers or the state.
And farmers swap water among themselves. "During the drought, we've learned
the names of many different people who have water for sale," said Robinson,
whose land is in Westlands.
In 1992, the last official year of the drought, Westlands bought 113,491
acre-feet of extra or "transfer" water. By comparison, Fresno's residents,
businesses and industry use about 120,000 acre-feet a year. An acre-foot is
about 326,000 gallons.
In the late 1980s, before drastic cuts in federal water, Westlands bought
less than 25,000 acre-feet of extra water per year.
As a sign of the times, the district last year changed the title of
Operations Chief Steve Ottemoeller to water resources chief. His new job
includes more time to hunt for extra water.
But farmers are not fond of buying the extra water. The price is about double
the amount they pay for their regular federal supplies.
Robinson, who owns three water wells, makes up some of his shortage by
pumping it from the underground, but wells are luxuries for some farmers.
"I don't have any wells myself," said cotton farmer Clay Grofsema, whose
property is in Westlands. "But, in a wet year like this, I'm pretty hopeful
that there will be water to buy."
Grofsema said he has considered drilling a well but decided it was too risky.

"You wind up spending $350,000 to $400,000 for it, and the water you get in
my area is sometimes pretty salty - not high quality," he said. "The
electricity to pump the water is expensive, too."
Still, Westlands records show district farmers pumped 600,000 acre-feet of
water in the 1991 and 1992 crop years. A full allotment of federal water
would be 1.15 million acre-feet, so farmers relied heavily on ground water.
"That's really a concern for us," said Dan Errotabere, Westlands board member
and farmer. "Long-term, we can't continue to pump a lot of water because it
is expensive, not high in quality and it's a finite resource."
When all else fails and farmers can't get enough water, they lease their
property to other farmers or let it accumulate tumble weeds for a season.
"When the supply gets to be less than 50 percent, we go into fallowing," said
Errotabere. "But that becomes an expensive year. You still have land payments
to make and some of your property isn't producing anything."

The following I received from a new subscriber in Israel.

As a new member of the list, I am happy to introduce myself and to answer
some of your questions. My name is Alon Ben-Gal, I am a researcher at The
Arava agriculture research station which is in the far southern part of
the Negev desert in Israel. We are situated 40 kilometers north of Eilat
on the Jordanian border. We serve an agricultural community consisting of
cooperative settlements growing fruit and vegetable crops mostly (dates,
citrus, table grapes, melons, onions, tomatoes, etc) , Our average yearly
rainfall is only 30 mm, our irrigation water sources are local, pumped
from wells up to 400m depth, and are very saline. The best water
available for irrigation has 500-600mg Cl per liter. This is where drip
irrigation was originally developed in the 50s, and the area uses almost
no irrigation other than drip/trickle. We drip all of our agricultural
crops (sprinkling is used for field preparation and seed germination early
in some crops). We seem to be a little slow in going to buried systems,
but are introducing them more and more all the time- first in "permanent"
systems (date orchards, vineyards, alfalfa fields, and landscaping
operations) and recently experimentally with single season crops.
Irrigation here is completely automated, utilizing various commercial
computer systems- all of these systems enable us to irrigate at
frequencies appropriate to crop-soil and weather conditions and to
fertilize through the system. Ammonia nitrate- N, phosphoric acid -P and
potassium chloride or potassium nitrate - K are popular. There are
several chemical companies in Israel which provide pre-mixed NPK
fertilizer solutions and due to their competition it has become worthwhile
for growers to buy these pre- dissolved mixtures. We are beginning to
utilize the city of Eilat's sewage effluent agriculturally in the area,
and this has inspired the desire to bury more of the application systems.
We are working here at the experimental station in conjunction with
Netafim company in developing and testing buried lines and are primarily
concerned with dripper clogging (by roots) problems. As may be clear to
you, our number one problem is that of the salinity of the water.
Agriculture in the area is contributing to further salinization of the
local aquifer through over pumping and over irrigating to compensate for
salinity. I am part of a team consisting of a Soil scientist, Dr Uri
Shani, a cellular bioligist, Dr Hamutal Neori, an Agronomist, Dr. Arieh
Kenig and myself an environmental scientist (my undergraduate work was in
soil and water science at UC Davis, my master at The Hebrew University in
Jerusalem). We are working on salinity issues from a multi-disciplinary
perspective involving many perspectives including that of irrigation
scheduling and type. I personally am developing projects dealing with the
use of wastewater effluent and with lysimeter studies of salt transport
through soil and plants. I hope this note isn't too rambling or unclear, I
know that I have touched on a very many different topics. I also hope
that my new relationship with Trickle-L will be a productive and
interesting one. Thank you for your time and interest, feel free to pass
my name along to those who may be interested as well.

Sincerely,

Alon Ben-Gal
Arava Research and Development
d.n. Eilot, 88840, Israel
ph: 07356358
fax: 07356392
Alon<URI@vms.huji.ac.il>

We are installing 50 acres of subsurface drip tape in the Salinas Valley
California, and have gone to a looped system (fed from both ends). This
year's design is a similar setup compared to our previous installation
except for the loop. We have 1200'+ runs with .001% slopes, and are
using the t-tape 700 series high flow. Finally, we are able to apply
about .5" in roughly 6 hours with our previous installation.

I am expecting to be able to apply more water during the same time period
with a looped system,(more uniform P) if this is correct would
it be advantageous to go with a low flow tape? Given that all other
factors remain the same.

We can use all the technical support that we can get, I am looking
forward to some great replies.

Neil Cooper
Huntington Farms
Soledad, California
dncooper@violin.aix.calpoly.edu

MY REPLY COMMENTS ARE IN ALL CAPS

Subject: Re: Subsurface Loop System

We are installing 50 acres of subsurface drip tape in the Salinas Valley
California, and have gone to a looped system (fed from both ends). This
year's design is a similar setup compared to our previous installation
except for the loop. We have 1200'+ runs with .001% slopes, and are
using the t-tape 700 series high flow. Finally, we are able to apply
about .5" in roughly 6 hours with our previous installation.

I am expecting to be able to apply more water during the same time period
with a looped system,(more uniform P) if this is correct would
it be advantageous to go with a low flow tape? Given that all other
factors remain the same.

WE HAVE USED LOOPED SYSTEMS AND THEY DO IMPROVED UNIFORMITY ON LONGER
RUNS. HOWEVER IF I READ YOU COMMENTS CORRECTLY, YOU ARE PARTIALLY
CORRECT AND PARTIALLY INCORRECT. USING THE CLOSED LOOP SYSTEM, A
GIVEN TAPE WILL APPLY MORE WATER AS A WHOLE BECAUSE THE PRESSURE AT
BOTH ENDS SHOULD BE CLOSER TO THE DESIGN PRESSURE. (I SAY "SHOULD"
BECAUSE THIS ASSUMES THAT PRESSURE LOSSES IN THE LOOP ARE SMALL
RELATIVE TO WHAT THEY ARE IN THE TAPE. PROPER HYDRAULIC DESIGN
ENSURES THIS.) SO THE WHOLE TAPE IS SUPPLYING MORE WATER (THAT IS
HOW YOU ARE PARTIALLY CORRECT). HOWEVER, LETS LOOK AT THE EMMITER
FLOW RATE NEAR THE TRADITIONAL HEAD END. THE EMITTER FLOW RATE IS
GOVERNED BY THE PRESSURE AND THAT PRESSURE IS SIMILAR TO WHAT IT WAS
FOR THE NON- CLOSED LOOP SYSTEM. SO AT THAT POINT, THE FLOW IS VERY
LITTLE DIFFERENT THAN IT WAS BEFORE INSTALLING THE LOOP. SO A LOW
FLOW TAPE WILL PUT ***LESS*** WATER AT THAT PARTICULAR POINT. (THAT
IS WHERE YOU WERE PARTIALLY INCORRECT).

THE LOOP GIVES YOU UNIFORMITY OF APPLICATION. USING THE LOOP SYSTEM
WILL REQUIRE MORE SUPPLY WATER FOR THE SAME TAPE. IF THIS IS A
CONCERN, THE LOWER FLOW TAPE WILL HELP YOU IN THIS MATTER. HERE IS A
SIMPLISTIC EXAMPLE OF WHAT YOU ACTUALLY HAD WITH THE NON- LOOPED
SYSTEM. ****THE NUMBERS AREN'T CORRECT**** BUT THEY WILL SERVE THE
EXPLANATION. YOU HAVE A GROSS APPLICATION OF 0.5 INCHES IN 6 HOURS
TO THE SYSTEM. HOWEVER, A SMALL PART OF THE FIELD RECEIVED 0.7, A
SMALL PART RECEIVED 0.6, A SMALL PART RECEIVED 0.5, A SMALL PART
RECEIVED 0.4, AND A SMALL PART RECEIVED 0.3 INCHES. IF ALL THE SMALL
PARTS WERE EQUAL THE AVERAGE APPLICATION WOULD BE 0.5 INCHES. ***ONCE
AGAIN, THE NUMBERS ARE NOT CORRECT****. WITH THE LOOPED SYSTEM, A
SIMILAR EXAMPLE MIGHT BE .55 .5, .45, .5, .55 FOR THE DIFFERENT
FIELD PARTS. THE ACTUAL NUMBERS ARE CONTROLLED BY THE HYDRAULIC
DESIGN.

I HOPE THIS GIVES YOU THE BASICS. TO ACHIEVE MANY OF THE BENEFITS OF
SDI, A PROPER DESIGN MUST BE USED. I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO WORK
CLOSELY WITH A REPUTABLE DESIGNER OR CONSULTANT.

FREDDIE LAMMFreddie Lamm
Research Agricultural Engineer
KSU Northwest Research-Extension Center
105 Experiment Farm Road, Colby, Kansas 67701-1697
Ph. 913-462-6281
FAX 913-462-2315

I am interested to find out what the burning research issues are at the
moment in subsurface drip irrigation. I hope Dr. Richard Mead and many
others who are very acitive in this area can respond to my this query.

Many thanks.

Basant Maheshwari

________________________________________________________________
Dr. B.L. Maheshwari Email
b.maheshwari@uws.edu.au
School of Agri. & Rural Development Tel. (61+45) 701 235
or 885 652
University of Western Sydney Fax (61+45) 885 538
Richmond, NSW 2753, AUSTRALIA
________________________________________________________________

Shalom Alon,

May I suggest that you contact Metzerplas who have the license for Israel
for the ROOTGUARD technology which (in the USA) is guaranteed to keep roots
out of your buried drip system.

In the U.S. there is a dripline available which combines ROOTGUARD with a
inner lining containing a bactericide to inhibit bacterial growth when
using reclaimed sewage. This is not yet made by Metzerplas, but they can
easily do so if there is demand for this product.

SSD is certainly a great way to go to handle salt. We have a client in
Hawaii, Irrigation Technology Corp (ITC), who have successfully handled
reclaimed sewage effluent at 900 mg./l of nitrates for a superb park with
grass, trees and flowers. Of course in Hawaii they do have periodic heavy
rain to leach the accumulated salts. If you wish to follow up on this
please contact me by e-mail and I will put you in touch with ITC.

>From discussions with Menahem Rebhun of Haifa Technion I understand there
is the potential for a disaster due to salinization throughout the Jordan
Valley unless you do something to drain the salts. SSD can be a factor to
delay the inevitable without drainage. Is it practical for you to drain
into the Red Sea from the Arava?

I was interested in your comments that work on drip irrigation started in
the Arava in the 50's. I first became aware of the drip irrigation work in
the Arava on peppers in 1969 under the tutelage of a British gentleman,
Simon Blass, who had retired to live in Israel after working in a British
government water department.

Welcome to trickle-l

Rodney

Regarding Dr. B.L. Maheshwari's question on what are burning issues in drip
research, I'll just name a few which we are pondering or doing at the Water
Management Research Lab:

1) Determing salinity build up with subsurface drip on a permanent crop such
as alfalfa using fairly saline irrigation water (~1.5 dS/m)

2) Differentiating between water uptake from a subsurface drip system vs a
shallow water table. We have built two monolith lysimeters (presumably the
only ones in the world of this type) to determine this water uptake question.

3) What is the true cause and effect of root intrusion and what is the most
viable way to eliminate this problem.

4) Where does one place the drip tape/hose when burying it?
We have one experiment which consists of three treatments:
drip laterals placed @ 30, 45 and 60 cm deep. We have sophisticated sensors
(matric and capacitance) which will monitor soil profile activity.

5) Our newest adventure will be finding various ways to eliminate or find
alternative sources of Methyl Bromide in fumigation of soil......chemigation
probably is the next frontier of subsurface drip.

Hope this helps.

R. Mead
List owner

Dear Dr. Mead:

Thank you for the timely article. This information is very useful to us
folks who don't even know a whole lot about trickle/drip irrigation. I use
the information on the other end (the dischargers) to promote beneficial uses
of wastewater and that by showing consistent quantity and quality, certain
discharges can aid in recharging aquifers.

Tom Moon

>We are installing 50 acres of subsurface drip tape in the Salinas Valley
>California, and have gone to a looped system (fed from both ends). This
>year's design is a similar setup compared to our previous installation
>except for the loop. We have 1200'+ runs with .001% slopes, and are
>using the t-tape 700 series high flow. Finally, we are able to apply
>about .5" in roughly 6 hours with our previous installation.
>
>I am expecting to be able to apply more water during the same time period
>with a looped system,(more uniform P) if this is correct would
>it be advantageous to go with a low flow tape? Given that all other
>factors remain the same.
>

I have installed looped systems and systems that feed from the
middle. Problem #1 with loop system is flushing. If you dont
want to keep the tape then fine, don't flush. You cannot get
enough velocity to properly flush lines 1,200 feet. It looks good,
but proper flushing requires that you see the "bad stuff" and
watch it clear and _Wait_ some more.

Next attempt. We went from the center both ways. It installed
fine. We installed the headline 1/3 the way from the top.
Problems: the head end got less water it was sandier, and we are
not happy with uniformity. 2. No valves for the sprinklers. We
put one 6" valve per 7 ac set.

Third attempt. Head line, second main inside and collecter tail
main. Probably the best. Problem with any interior system is
ground work...

Dear Sir:
900 mg/l nitrate ? what plant can survive and does it affect the soil
thanks
Gideon Oron

On Thu, 23 Feb 1995, Rodney Ruskin wrote:

> Shalom Alon,
>
> May I suggest that you contact Metzerplas who have the license for Israel
> for the ROOTGUARD technology which (in the USA) is guaranteed to keep roots
> out of your buried drip system.
>
> In the U.S. there is a dripline available which combines ROOTGUARD with a
> inner lining containing a bactericide to inhibit bacterial growth when
> using reclaimed sewage. This is not yet made by Metzerplas, but they can
> easily do so if there is demand for this product.
>
> SSD is certainly a great way to go to handle salt. We have a client in
> Hawaii, Irrigation Technology Corp (ITC), who have successfully handled
> reclaimed sewage effluent at 900 mg./l of nitrates for a superb park with
> grass, trees and flowers. Of course in Hawaii they do have periodic heavy
> rain to leach the accumulated salts. If you wish to follow up on this
> please contact me by e-mail and I will put you in touch with ITC.
>
> >From discussions with Menahem Rebhun of Haifa Technion I understand there
> is the potential for a disaster due to salinization throughout the Jordan
> Valley unless you do something to drain the salts. SSD can be a factor to
> delay the inevitable without drainage. Is it practical for you to drain
> into the Red Sea from the Arava?
>
> I was interested in your comments that work on drip irrigation started in
> the Arava in the 50's. I first became aware of the drip irrigation work in
> the Arava on peppers in 1969 under the tutelage of a British gentleman,
> Simon Blass, who had retired to live in Israel after working in a British
> government water department.
>
> Welcome to trickle-l
>
> Rodney
>
>
>
>
>
>

>Dear Gideon and all,

I apologize profusely: I intende to write 900 mg/l of chlorides.
>>
>> Rodney
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>

rev trickle-l

A recent article in the American Vegetable Grower magazine discussed a study
at the University of Florida's Gulf Coast Research and Education Center.
Researchers Gary Clark, Donald Maynard and Craig Stanley did a comparison
study of surface vs subsurface drip irrigation of fresh-market tomatoes on a
"sandy" soil. They grew the tomatoes in plots using drip tubing buried at
2.5 cm (1 inch) and 30 cm (12 inches) below the soil surface. The shallower
depth was considered "surface drip" irrigation. Tomato yields were found to
be higher for the surface drip ,79 t/ha (35 t/a) vs 55 t/ha (24 t/a) for the
subsurface drip treatment.
Our research with processing tomatoes grown on a clay loam soil where the
drip tube was placed 45cm (18 inches) deep, produced yields of 206 t/ha
(~90 t/a) for the subsurface treatment vs 179 t/ha (~80 t/a) for the surface
treatment. This is really not a fair comparison, since processing tomatoes
are different than fresh-market tomatoes, climatic conditions are different
(humid Florida vs arid California), and the two obvious differences in soil
types (sandy vs clay loam). However, I would like to bring up some questions
and comments concerning the Florida study:

1) How frequent were the irrigations in this study? The article in American
Vegetable Grower did not state this. One long run per day could have created
leaching of nutrients and drainage of irrigation water.

2) Why wasn't tubing placed at 15 cm (6 inches), half way between surface and
their only subsurface placement? Seems like going to 30 cm (12 inches) is a
bit too deep for a sandy soil.

3) Were there any weed population differences between the two treatments?

4) What about labor cost differences, particularly reeling in the surface
drip every season?

Admittedly, the article was a bit cursory and most likely research in this
area is continuing. Subsurface drip is NOT a panacea for all irrigation
situations and the article does bring up aspects of where subsurface drip can
and cannot be accomplished. We (Water Management Research Lab) have learned
the hard way in some very clay soils in the Imperial valley that onions are
too shallow rooted to obtain moisture from laterals buried at 38 cm (15
inches). I've also heard that celery needs the soil moist at all times to
grow well. Does anyone know of other crop/soil type scenarios where one
system is undoubtedly more advantageous than the other?

Richard Mead
List owner

About a half a year ago, I posted a query as to whom I could send flyers
about Trickle-L to. Several individuals were kind enough to suggest certain
magazines whereby I proceeded to fax the flyer to the editor of the magazine.
Now that our group has grown to almost 200 individuals, maybe I should ask
again to see if there are more suggestions available. Please post me a note
at this email address or my work address (rmead@asrr.arsusda.gov) if you know
of any organization or irrigation media source that could benefit from our
discussion group. International individuals are especially encouraged to
notify me.

Richard Mead
Trickle-L owner

A while back I posted that Domaine Chandon, a winery in Napa Valley,
California, recently installed about 40 hectares of subsurface drip
irrigation in a new vineyard planting. We have many concerns. The main
issue is root plugging. We are using Netafim Ram tubing which does not
have any treatment for preventing root intrusion. We will be monitoring
the flow rates and perhaps trying some different treatments to prevent
root plugging. Because you can't see what is going on, we are naturally
concerned about leaks, plugged emitters, etc. Another issue is placement
of the tubing. We opted for 16 inches deep and 16 inches from the vine
row. Without any solid experience we felt this would be deep enough to
avoid puddling and far enough away to keep the vine trunk well drained.
As you can see, the main worry with subsurface drip is the unknown. We
will not be installing more subsurface until we are completely
comfortable with the first 40 hectares planting.

*************************
* Zach Berkowitz *
* Domaine Chandon *
* (707)944-8844 *
* (707)944-1123 fax *
* zachb@community.net *
*************************

On Thu, 23 Feb 1995, Basant Maheshwari wrote:

> I am interested to find out what the burning research issues are at the
> moment in subsurface drip irrigation. I hope Dr. Richard Mead and many
> others who are very acitive in this area can respond to my this query.
>
> Many thanks.
>
> Basant Maheshwari
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> Dr. B.L. Maheshwari Email
> b.maheshwari@uws.edu.au
> School of Agri. & Rural Development Tel. (61+45) 701 235
> or 885 652
> University of Western Sydney Fax (61+45) 885 538
> Richmond, NSW 2753, AUSTRALIA
> ________________________________________________________________
>
>
>
>

>A recent article in the American Vegetable Grower magazine discussed a study
>at the University of Florida's Gulf Coast Research and Education Center.

[stuff deleted for the bandwidth impared]

> However, I would like to bring up some questions
>and comments concerning the Florida study:
>
>1) How frequent were the irrigations in this study? The article in American
>Vegetable Grower did not state this. One long run per day could have created
>leaching of nutrients and drainage of irrigation water.
>
Not only that but how and when was the fertilizer applied? I have
not read this article and I don;t want to sound like a science snob, but I
assume that the Am. Veg. Grower mag is not a peer reviewed journal since
this infomation is necessary for understanding the research methodology and
was not included.

>2) Why wasn't tubing placed at 15 cm (6 inches), half way between surface and
>their only subsurface placement? Seems like going to 30 cm (12 inches) is a
>bit too deep for a sandy soil.
>
We noticed that we had difficulty getting water to the surface
after planting cantaloupes and watermelons in a sandy loam soil with T-tape
buried at 20 cm, in southeren Arizona. This might have caused some yield
loss for the more deeply placed tubing in the Florida study. We also had
problems with salts building up at the fringe of the wetted perimeter which
caused seedling injury early in the growing season.

>Admittedly, the article was a bit cursory and most likely research in this
>area is continuing. Subsurface drip is NOT a panacea for all irrigation
>situations and the article does bring up aspects of where subsurface drip can
>and cannot be accomplished. We (Water Management Research Lab) have learned
>the hard way in some very clay soils in the Imperial valley that onions are
>too shallow rooted to obtain moisture from laterals buried at 38 cm (15
>inches). I've also heard that celery needs the soil moist at all times to
>grow well. Does anyone know of other crop/soil type scenarios where one
>system is undoubtedly more advantageous than the other?
>

The literature I have read seems to indicate that one can place the
drip tape/tubing deeper in finer textured soils but that shallower placement
is preferable for coarse textured soils. The reason appears, to me, to be
due to the inability of coarse soils to draw water to the surface. I also
feel that the optimum soil water Tension for growth of vegetable crops under
subsurface trickle tends to be higher in finer textured soils than with
coarse soils. I think this is related to moisture release characteristics of
these soils. I would be interested in hearing a different opinion on this.

>Richard Mead
>List owner
>
>
>
Sincerely,

Jerome Pier
Post-Doctoral Research Associate, Soil Scientist
List Owner Agmodels-L and Soils-L
jp@unl.edu

I'm sorry I don't have much time for comment at this point.

However, the issue is very active. There will be two complete
sessions on SDI at the 5th International Microirrigation Congress,
April 2-6, 1995 at Orlando, Florida. There will be 5 and 6 papers in
these sessions. 20 of the total 156 papers at least touch the subject
of SDI according to the subject index of the proceedings.

t

Freddie Lamm
Research Agricultural Engineer
KSU Northwest Research-Extension Center
105 Experiment Farm Road, Colby, Kansas 67701-1697
Ph. 913-462-6281
FAX 913-462-2315

Fellow tricklers!!!

Irrigation application depths are often normalized as W = w_i / w_avg; where W
is a dimensionless number, w_i is the required application depth and w_avg the
averaged applied depth. If severe deep percolation losses are to be avoided the
W can attain a maximum value of one i.e. when w_i = w_avg.

Question? what will be the most practical range of W? Is there any reference I
can lay hands on?

I appreciate your help.
Thanks.

Neba Ambe
ambebihn@student.msu.edu
517 355 4496

>A while back I posted that Domaine Chandon, a winery in Napa Valley,
>California, recently installed about 40 hectares of subsurface drip
>irrigation in a new vineyard planting. We have many concerns. The main
>issue is root plugging. We are using Netafim Ram tubing which does not
>have any treatment for preventing root intrusion.

One of the basic problems with grapes is that you need to control
moisture. A lush full soil profile is not necessary nor
desireable. In those conditions, root intrusion maybe difficult
to monitor. In veggies, root intrusion means drought stress. Your
alternatives may include chemicals. nPhuric? Have you tried
Treflan? It can work wonders, but is not registered for drip
irrigation. There is not many gallons (not much money) for a
registration. IR 4? But you are not in the US, huh? There is no
real danger of treflan in the grape (or so I think).

Dear Prof. Lamm
I sent my registartion form last week hoping it will
reach the ASAE office in time. It includes the payment,
personal information. However, I did not include the
request for any type of projector. Is it OK ?
I hope my payment will raech you in time,
see you soon, regards
Gideon Oron

Hi. I'm Chris Meyer from Rochester, New York. I'm curious to know if there
is anyone with data/recommendations regarding the control of insects using
DuPont Vydate L insecticide in drip on vegetable crops. Am especially
interested in any comparative data versus other insecticides.

thanks.

Hi Zach,

Because you chose to use a pressure compensating emitter without root
intrusion protection there are even more difficulties than that of which
you mention.
Pressure compensating emitters with the rubber diaphragm pressed against a
flow path, often increase in flow as they begin to fail. This is because
the diaphragm is held away from the flow path by root intrusion and soil
ingestion. Furthermore EPDM diaphragms are not totally chemical resistant
and may harden or soften from chemical injection.
Therefor monitoring flow rates does not mean that all is well. It means
that on average all is well but you may well have some drippers flowing at
very high rates and others flowing scarcely at all. This phenomena has been
independently recorded in a commercial turf installation. By the time you
know something is wrong it is beyond recovery. Because the first signal
will usually be an increase in flow I would suggest that in the event of
even 5% increase in flow you start digging and testing drippers one by one.

If you so wish please contact me at the above e-mail address I will send
you independant reports from C.I.T. and the HSPA which colloborate the
above information.

Rodney.

To Steve Jordan,

The main concern about injection of trifluralin is not accumulation in the
grape, even though there is not enough data to permit such a use. More
serious is that under certain circumstances when injected in suspension in
water trifluralin can be carried through the soil into the groundwater.
Trifluralin is toxic to fish.

Rodney.
>

------------------------------ Cut here ------------------------------