Koepk Koepke Farm Farms, Inc. s, Inc. All monitoring began on June - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

koepk koepke farm farms inc s inc
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Koepk Koepke Farm Farms, Inc. s, Inc. All monitoring began on June - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1/9/2012 Koepke Koepke Far Farms, Inc Inc. Surface and Tile Water Monitoring Koepk Koepke Farm Farms, Inc. s, Inc. All monitoring began on June 1, 2005 KP1: Tile monitoring site Water Budget at Koepke Farms, Inc. The East basin


slide-1
SLIDE 1

1/9/2012 1

Water Budget at Koepke Farms, Inc.

Koepk Koepke Farm Farms, Inc. s, Inc.

Surface and Tile Water Monitoring

  • All monitoring began on June 1, 2005
  • KP1: Tile monitoring site
  • The East basin
  • 81 acres
  • Monitoring ended October 2009
  • Separated from other sites by drain ditch
  • KP2: Tile monitoring site
  • The West basin
  • 28 acres
  • Monitoring ended October 2009
  • KP3: Surface monitoring site
  • The West basin
  • 6.1 acres
  • Monitoring ended September 2008

Koepke Koepke Far Farms, Inc Inc.

Surface and Tile Water Monitoring

  • The contributing area for the two tile line

sites were influenced by a fluctuating water table that extended beyond the perceived boundaries

  • Calculating yield for tile sites was not

possible; exact area unknown

  • Koepke Farms has hydric soils, formed

under saturated conditions for periods long enough to create anaerobic conditions

  • Drain tile installed to increase crop

production

  • Due to poorly drained soils, dense

glacial material, and a seasonally high water table

Koepke Koepke Far Farms, Inc Inc.

Koepke Water Budget

  • All data is based on the definition of a field year (FY):
  • 12‐month period from Oct 1 through Sept 30 of the following year
  • Allows water monitoring activities to coincide with crop production cycle
  • Harvest after Sept is tied to the previous field year, but activities (tillage, fertilizer,

manure, etc) done after harvest are for the following year’s crop

  • Precipitation is referred to as either frozen or non‐frozen
  • All frozen precipitation was converted to its liquid

equivalent for analysis consistency

Koepke Koepke Far Farms, Inc Inc.

slide-2
SLIDE 2

1/9/2012 2

  • FY06 and FY09 had lower than average precipitation
  • FY07 and FY08 had higher than average precipitation
  • Surface water runoff ranged from 5% ‐ 16% of annual

precipitation.

Koepke Koepke Far Farms, Inc Inc.

5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

FY2006 FY2007 FY2008 FY2009*

Precipitation and Runoff, in Inches

Yearly Precipitation and Surface Runoff Koepke Farm, Oconomowoc, WI

Frozen Precip. (L.E.) Non‐frozen Precip. KP3 Runoff 5% 5% 16%

30‐yr Avg. Precipitation (33.9 inches)

Percent of precipitation that ran off KP3 FY2006 FY2007 FY2008 FY2009

Field Year 2005 Summary

  • Partial Field Year (June 1‐Sept 30)
  • 11.3 inches precipitation; no surface runoff

Field Year 2006 Summary

  • Total precipitation was 33 inches, a little

less than the 30 year average of 33.9 inches

  • 92 percent fell as rain
  • Site water runoff season
  • KP1 – Tile
  • 26% during frozen ground conditions
  • KP2 – Tile
  • 20% during frozen ground conditions
  • KP3 – Surface
  • 5% of total rainfall
  • 81% during frozen ground conditions

Koepke Koepke Far Farms, Inc Inc.

Field Year 2007 Summary

  • Total precipitation was 43.2 inches, a lot more

than the 30 year average of 33.9 inches

  • 92 percent fell as rain
  • Site water runoff season
  • KP1 – Tile
  • 14% during frozen ground conditions
  • KP2 – Tile
  • 16% during frozen ground conditions
  • KP3 – Surface
  • 5% of total rainfall
  • 3% during frozen ground conditions

Koepke Koepke Far Farms, Inc Inc.

Field Year 2008 Summary

  • Total precipitation was 38.6 inches, a lot more

than the 30 year average of 33.9 inches

  • 84 percent fell as rain
  • 30% of the total precipitation fell in June
  • Site water runoff season
  • KP1 – Tile
  • 32% during frozen ground conditions
  • KP2 – Tile
  • 36% during frozen ground conditions
  • KP3 – Surface
  • 16% of total rainfall
  • 7% during frozen ground conditions

Koepke Koepke Far Farms, Inc Inc.

slide-3
SLIDE 3

1/9/2012 3

Field Year 2009 Summary

  • Total precipitation was 31.8 inches, a little less

than the 30 year average of 33.9 inches

  • 27.1 inches fell as rain
  • Site water runoff season
  • KP1 – Tile
  • 25% during frozen ground conditions
  • KP2 – Tile
  • 35% during frozen ground conditions
  • KP3 – Surface
  • No data, site removed during this field year

Koepke Koepke Far Farms, Inc Inc.

Precipitation and runoff summary

  • Annual precipitation and
  • Surface runoff from KP3 (yield) and
  • Tile flow volume from KP2 and KP1 (load)

Koepke Koepke Far Farms, Inc Inc.

Field Year Precipitation (inches/acre) Surface KP3 (inches/acre) Tile KP2 (million gallons) Tile KP1 (million gallons) 2005* (June 1 ‐ Sept 30) 11.3* 0.0* 0.05* 0.03* 2006 33.0 1.7 6.0 3.5 2007 43.2 2.1 15.9 15.1 2008 38.6 6.1 17.0 25.9 2009 31.8 n/a 10.6 11.2 * Annotates partial field year. 30 yr avg precip = 33.9 inches.

Relationship Between Precipitation, Tile Flow, and Surface Runoff

  • There is a rapid response to precipitation when soils were at high moisture

contents

  • Once tile flow was continuous, response times to events corresponded with

the amount of tile flow present before the event

  • Low tile flow resulted in a response longer than a half an hour
  • Medium to high tile flow resulted in a response time of about 10 minutes
  • This is likely due to the well developed soil structure and macropores caused by the

no‐till cropping system

Koepke Koepke Far Farms, Inc Inc.

Relationship Between Precipitation and Tile Flow

Koepke Koepke Far Farms, Inc Inc.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ‐1.0 ‐0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0

06/01/05 07/01/05 07/31/05 08/31/05 09/30/05 10/31/05 11/30/05 12/31/05 01/30/06 03/01/06 04/01/06 05/01/06 06/01/06 07/01/06 08/01/06 08/31/06 10/01/06 10/31/06 11/30/06 12/31/06 01/30/07 03/02/07 04/01/07 05/02/07 06/01/07 07/02/07 08/01/07 08/31/07 10/01/07 10/31/07 12/01/07 12/31/07 01/31/08 03/01/08 03/31/08 05/01/08 05/31/08 07/01/08 07/31/08 08/31/08 09/30/08 10/31/08 11/30/08 12/30/08 01/30/09 03/01/09 04/01/09 05/01/09 06/01/09 07/01/09 08/01/09 08/31/09 09/30/09

24‐hour Rainfall, in Inches Tile discharge daily average, in gallons/second

Blue = Rain. Red = KP1. Brown = KP2 Tile flow responds rapidly to rain when soils have high moisture content; 10‐30

  • minutes. No‐till / Macropores.
slide-4
SLIDE 4

1/9/2012 4

Relationship Between Precipitation, Tile Flow, and Surface Runoff

Koepke Koepke Far Farms, Inc Inc.

0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 ‐2 ‐1 1 2 3 4 Hourly Precipitation, in Inches Surface & tile discharge, in gallons/second (5‐minute interval)

Surface versus tile discharge

Surface Tile Rain Tiles flowing at capacity

Example over a 3 ½ day period – Tile drainage has strong influence

  • ver surface runoff. For most surface runoff events, surface flow

did not occur until tile line was discharging at or near full capacity.

Relationship Between Precipitation, Tile Flow, and Surface Runoff

  • The tile flow at KP2 had to be running

at near capacity before there was surface runoff detected at site KP3

  • This was not true of some runoff

events during snowmelt when runoff could not rapidly enter the tile system

  • The organic mat of plant residue aids

to trap precipitation on the soil surface, lessening potential for surface runoff

  • Precipitation infiltrates soil due to

well developed soil structure and macropores caused by the no‐till cropping system

Koepke Koepke Far Farms, Inc Inc.

Tile Flow and Basin Topography / Size

  • Tile flow volumes were different between the two tile sites over time
  • KP1 had a higher relative flow volume in FY05 and FY06
  • KP2 had a higher relative flow volume in FY07 and FY08
  • The two site were similar in FY09
  • The surface topography at site KP1 was nearly 3 times larger

than KP2 (81 and 28 acres, respectively)

  • KP1 should have a higher flow volume
  • Total tile line flow volume was nearly equal over the study period (56 and 50

million gallons, respectively)

  • Could be due to the high water table present, contributing

lateral flow groundwater from an area larger than – and

  • utside the drainage basin defined by surface topography

Koepke Koepke Far Farms, Inc Inc.

Conclusions

  • The general precipitation trends during the monitoring

period were higher than the 30 year average

  • Surface runoff values varied between 5% and 16% of total

annual precipitation

  • Tile lines were intercepting lateral flow ‐ except in very

droughty conditions

  • Tile line flow had a rapid response to precipitation,

especially when soils were at high moisture contents

  • Tile line drainage has a strong influence over surface

runoff

  • Fluctuating water tables made it difficult to determine

the area contributing to the tile monitoring sites

Koepke Koepke Far Farms, Inc Inc.