Irrigation Leader February 2013

Volume 4 Issue 2

February 2013

Justin Harter: Naches–Selah Irrigation District, Planning and Building for the Future

Operations and Management Workshop

By Kris Polly

of people like Shannon McDaniels and Dave Solem, the former and current managers of South Columbia Basin Irrigation District; Rusty Jardine of Truckee Carson n January 23 and 24, Irrigation Leader magazine Irrigation District; Craig Simpson from East Columbia hosted a special meeting in Phoenix, Arizona, Basin Irrigation District; Darvin Fales from Quincy; Tom titled, the “Operations and Management Knutson of Farwell–Sargent; David Breniger of Placer Workshop.” The intention of the meeting was to provide County; Ed Gerak of Roosevelt; Tom Davis of Yuma a face-to-face opportunity for irrigation district managers County Water Conservation Association; and many, many and their respective board members to discuss issues others. At some point during the workshop, every attendee directly pertaining to the operations and management of made a presentation, asked a key question, or shared an their districts. Just as the magazine provides a forum for experience that added to the overall value of the meeting. districts to learn from the experiences of their peers, the While I have known many of the meeting attendees for workshop was designed to provide a similar experience. more than 20 years and am well aware of their knowledge All the topics, panels, and speakers were suggested and and abilities, the credit for the idea to gather the managers selected by irrigation district managers. Initially, we together to share their experiences must be given to my planned for 40 to 50 registrants; however, we had nearly good friend Trevor Boomstra of Rubicon Water. Trevor 80 attendees. and I spent a lot of time together on a trip touring TruePoint Solutions, a regular advertiser in the Washington State this past summer. Rubicon is a unique magazine, included the following text in its ad for this company in that its culture is all about innovation and issue: ideas. Trevor said, “Rubicon “One of the highlights of the conference,” said TruePoint’s Kent Johnson, “was the has learned if you gather the fact that vendors who attended were treated as peers and not isolated to an exhibit top people to share their ideas space in another room, which is typically the case at professional conferences and and experiences on a particular problem or challenge, they will tradeshows. The workshop provided a forum for an extremely knowledgeable group develop and share solutions. of individuals to come together with the unified goal of learning from each other and Likewise, if you bring the ultimately running a better irrigation district.” leaders in irrigation together Credit for the idea to include vendors as speakers and to share their ideas and experiences, they will also develop presenters must be given to Russ Luscink of Northwest and share solutions.”

Pipe Company. Russ told me, “If you include vendors as speakers on specific case studies, you will get their Kris Polly is editor-in-chief of Irrigation Leader magazine and president of Water Strategies, LLC, a government relations information without the infomercial.” He was right. The firm he began in February 2009 for the purpose of representing vendors we paired with district managers to present on and guiding water, power, and agricultural entities in their specific projects had a tremendous amount of information dealings with Congress, the Bureau of Reclamation, and other to share. federal government agencies. He may be contacted at The true key to the success of the meeting was simply Kris.Polly@waterstrategies.com. to provide an opportunity to learn from the experiences

O

The Water and Power Report www.WaterAndPowerReport.com The Water and Power Report is the one-stop site for news on water and power issues in the 17 western states. Sign up for the Daily to receive a notice of the top headlines and press releases posted each business day.

2

Irrigation Leader

FEBRUARY 2013

C O N T E N T S 2 Operations and Management Workshop

Volume 4

Issue 2

Irrigation Leader is published 10 times a year with combined issues for November/December and July/August by: Water Strategies, LLC P.O. Box 100576 Arlington, VA 22210 Staff: Kris Polly, Editor-in-Chief John Crotty, Senior Writer Robin Pursley, Graphic Designer Capital Copyediting, LLC, Copyeditor SUBMISSIONS: Irrigation Leader welcomes manuscript, photography, and art submissions. However, the right to edit or deny publishing submissions is reserved. Submissions are returned only upon request.

ADVERTISING: Irrigation Leader accepts one-quarter, half-page, and full-page ads. For more information on rates and placement, please contact Kris Polly at (703) 517-3962 or Irrigation.Leader@waterstrategies.com.

CIRCULATION: Irrigation Leader is distributed to irrigation district managers and boards of directors in the 17 western states, Bureau of Reclamation officials, members of Congress and committee staff, and advertising sponsors. For address corrections or additions, please contact our office at Irrigation.Leader@waterstrategies.com.

Copyright © 2013 Water Strategies, LLC. Irrigation Leader relies upon the excellent contributions of a variety of natural resources professionals who provide content for the magazine. However, the views and opinions expressed by these contributors are solely those of the original contributor and do not necessarily represent or reflect the policies or positions of Irrigation Leader magazine, its editors, or Water Strategies, LLC. The acceptance and use of advertisements in Irrigation Leader do not constitute a representation or warranty by Water Strategies, LLC, or Irrigation Leader magazine regarding the products, services, claims, or companies advertised.

COVER PHOTO: Justin Harter, General Manager of the Naches–Selah.

Irrigation Leader

By Kris Polly

4 Naches–Selah Irrigation District, Planning and Building for the Future

10 Making Progress in Regulatory Reforms for Low-Head Hydro Development

By Charles R. Sensiba

12 Remembering RWCD General Manager Michael O. Leonard

By Shane Leonard

District Focus:

16 Promoting Partnerships and Improving Service: Greater Wenatchee Irrigation District

By Mike Miller

MANAGER PROFILE:

22 Ron Bishop Reclamation Profile:

26 Regional Director Mike Ryan The Innovators:

32 Concrete Jacking with High-pressure Lifting Bags: South Columbia Basin Irrigation District

By Dave Solem

34 Better Mousetraps: Monsanto’s DroughtGard™ Hybrids

36 Mapping Soil to Improve Yields: EM-38 Soil Salinity Assessment Technology

37 CLASSIFIEDS 3

Naches–Selah Irrigation District, Planning and Building for the Future

Wooden trestle flume built in the 1930s with a capacity of 150 cubic feet per second."

T

he Naches–Selah Irrigation District (NSID) has been an integral part of agriculture in central Washington State since the turn of the last century. NSID currently provides irrigation services to approximately 1,700 parcels of land covering just under 11,000 acres in Yakima County, Washington. The district has been and remains predominantly agricultural. While NSID’s Selah Valley Canal was developed by hop farmers, the major crops have long been orchards of apples, cherries, and pears. General Manager Justin Harter has led his district for the past eight years, overseeing an overhaul of 90-year-old wooden pipes and flumes, as well as the automation of NSID’s canal system. In addition, as vice president of the Washington State Water Resources Association (WSWRA), Justin’s leadership on water resource management extends to the state and national level. Irrigation Leader’s Editor-inChief, Kris Polly, talked to Justin about irrigation history, modernization, and the issues facing WSWRA members in 2013.

Kris Polly: Can you tell our readers about the history of your district?

Justin Harter: The district started as a private irrigation development back in 1888. The Selah Valley Development Company purchased 17,000 acres and laid claim to 800 cubic feet per second out of the Naches River.

The founders were three hop growers from the Tacoma, Washington, area. They advertised all over the United States to bring people in to homestead the area. It took them four years to construct the first 20 miles of the main canal. It brings water 15 miles from the Naches River to 4

our current service area.

In the ensuing years, they hurried construction and compromised craftsmanship, creating a lot of problems and a lot of failures. Eventually, the Selah Water Users Association formed in 1910 and took ownership of the system. The local farms needed a more reliable source of water. It took them another six years to incorporate under state law as an irrigation district. At that time, an engineer, Earl Young Robinson, oversaw the district until 1958. He oversaw a lot of the improvements that we still operate today: wood flumes, concrete-lined tunnels, and concretelined canals.

As it is now, funding was the main challenge limiting these improvements. The district took out a bond in the early 1920s for about $375,000—about $16 million in today’s dollars. They were ambitious about moving forward with district improvements even while the nation faced extreme economic challenges and wars.

Kris Polly: How would you describe the state of the district’s facilities when you started eight years ago?

Justin Harter: During the 20 or 30 years prior to my arrival at the district, there were improvements, but these investments were limited to continuing the status quo.

They did what they could to maintain the 80- or 90-yearold concrete and wood facilities, but did not undertake any major rehab or replacement.

Kris Polly: Since you have become general manager, what kinds of changes have taken place?

Justin Harter: When I started with the district, we had a 3 ½-mile-long wooden pipeline that went to our southern service area. It was failing, and a lot of money was being put into its repair and operation. The board of directors, however, was already moving in the direction of replacing it. Working with CH2MHILL as an engineering Irrigation Leader

consultant, we looked at broader picture of putting both the 3 ½-mile-long pipe lateral and a 7-mile canal all into one system. I oversaw the six-phase project—we started in 2005 and just completed it last year. HDR Engineering was the consulting engineer on the last phase.

Kris Polly: What kind of material did you replace that wooden pipe with?

Justin Harter: We used PVC and HDPE pipe. It starts off 36 inches and goes all the way down to 6 inches.

Kris Polly: How much did the project cost, and how did you pay for it?

Justin Harter: That project came in at about $3.5 million. We used multiple funding sources. We borrowed $2.7 million from the [Washington State Department of ] Ecology Clean Water State Revolving Fund. Piping the open ditch and reducing the amount of aquatic pesticides flowing back to the Yakima River were important factors in qualifying for the loan. We Justin Harter with section of original wooden pipe.

also received grants from the Bureau of Reclamation: a Water 2025 Challenge Grant and a Water Conservation Field Service Grant totaling $350,000. We had another $250,000 grant from Ecology for irrigation efficiency.

Kris Polly: Given the age and type of pipe you were replacing, as well as the funding sources, did you run into any cultural resources issues during the project?

Justin Harter: With our public funding sources, we were required to do a cultural survey and report. One of the challenges we faced with the Bureau’s funding was the lack of clarity regarding whether the Bureau would provide its own archaeologist and surveyor. It has been a point of frustration. . . .What was an acceptable level of effort in prior years is now no longer acceptable. We ended up having to go out on our own and hire a consultant to perform the survey and report. That caused a timing issue on the project. And although the pipeline replacement wasn’t delayed, other projects have been.

Ultimately, however, cultural surveys have not prevented us from accomplishing what we wanted to do. [The cultural resources survey] is an exercise in recording what is there and preserving that information for the future. Mitigation has been minimal to this point.

Solar-powered Rubicon gate adjusts for water volume needs automatically while communicating with other gates.

Irrigation Leader

Kris Polly: Can you tell us about the automation of your system?

5

Justin Harter: Let me step back here for a minute.

The main canal is adjacent to a canal that the Bureau of Reclamation bought from the Pacific Power Corporation.

We conducted a study investigating the feasibility of combining the two canals together as part of our modernization plan. After that, I convinced our board to look at our needs in terms of a master plan. In 2006, we worked with JUB Engineering and developed a plan to pressurize the district’s pipes, pipe our laterals, automate the main canal, and possibly add an equalization reservoir in the main canal. This is the modernization plan we continue to implement.

In 2007, we put our first automated Rubicon flume gate on the main canal. We added 3 more gates the following year and kept adding additional gates each year after. Right now, we have 13 Rubicon gates. We have 7 miles of canal that are fully automated with Rubicon’s network solutions and some monitoring and control throughout the rest of the system.

Kris Polly: What is the advantage to having your system automated?

Justin Harter: Over the last five years, we’ve been able to make quite a few strides in controlling our system.

Ultimately, with the new technology, I think we’ve saved money. With our monitoring and control capabilities, we take care of a lot of small issues before they become major problems.

Kris Polly: What are the board’s goals for the district?

Justin Harter: Many of my board represent the fourth and fifth generation of project participants. Many of their families were original homesteaders here. [The board] of course wants to ensure sufficient water resources for future generations, just as they have enjoyed. Our board members understand the cost of keeping something like this going in order to keep the water flowing and put to beneficial use.

Kris Polly: Was it difficult for your district to move forward with the automation projects?

Justin Harter: Looking at our operations and level of service to our users, the sales pitch to the board wasn’t difficult. It was really a matter of due diligence. We talked to other clients of Rubicon and became familiar with other districts employing Rubicon technology. As farmers, many of my board members have used similar technologies for a number of years on their farms.

Kris Polly: What has been the most important lesson you have learned as a general manager?

6

14-inch PVC placed in former earthen canal bed to resolve seepage and erosion issues.

Justin Harter: Patience is one thing. The other is proper planning: You have to thoroughly plan for the future but also be flexible to adjust your plan to meet changing situations.

As a smaller district with limited resources, partnerships are essential to implementing improvements. State and federal funding and other support stretches our rate-payer dollars further. Consultants, contractors, and suppliers are depended on to successfully complete projects.

As a manager, I rely on the support of my staff and these partnerships while overseeing the implementation of the Board’s vision of modernization.

Kris Polly: As we finish up, I would like to switch topics. You are the vice president of the WSWRA. What are some of the top issues the association is addressing this year?

Justin Harter: Looking at a national level, funding for aging infrastructure is a top priority. We are looking to help ensure that our districts can find funding to update their systems. On the regulatory side, we are concerned about rules impacting water quality and water resource management.

Kris Polly: What is the biggest concern of irrigators in Washington State right now?

Justin Harter: Of all the challenges regarding our water supplies, lack of water is always a concern—drought is always in the back of our minds. Following that, we are concerned with how endangered species and water-quality regulations restrict our use of the benefits of water resources.

Irrigation Leader

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

8

ADVERTISEMENT

Making Progress in Regulatory Reforms for Low-Head Hydro Development

By Charles R. Sensiba

A

bout a year ago, I was given the unique opportunity to become involved in an initiative to seek federal regulatory reforms related to low-head hydropower development along irrigation and water supply facilities. This opportunity was a good fit with the experience I’ve gained since arriving in Washington, DC, nearly 15 years ago, as my law practice has focused on representing water districts, public utility districts, investor-owned utilities, and other power generators on hydropower licensing and regulation matters before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). But far more importantly, this new initiative of the Low-Head Hydro Working Group offered a chance to return to my roots—to work on an issue that, if successful, would bring real reform back home.

For much of my childhood, I was raised in the Rio Grande Valley in southern New Mexico, on the last footprint of desert lands that originally were homesteaded by my great-great grandfather following the Civil War. Agriculture, ranching, and dairy farming dominated the local economy and culture. Because my family relied heavily on groundwater resources to sustain operations on our small ranch—in an area that typically sees less than 9 inches of precipitation each year—conversations around the family dinner table often focused on the importance of water conservation and of ongoing water controversies between New Mexico and Texas. My walking route to school was along irrigation canals, and I’ll even admit that my brothers and I became pretty good at avoiding the ditch runners while we fished for crawdads and tried to beat the summer’s heat while swimming in the canals.

So, when I had a chance to return home and see firsthand Elephant Butte Irrigation District’s work to develop low-head hydropower resources at several drops within its system, I jumped at the opportunity to become involved. It’s really an exciting time in this industry.

Technical advancements are allowing developers to generate renewable energy feasibly at low-head locations, and the generated energy can be used onsite to support local power needs or sold to the local utility or cooperative to improve the financial position of the district.

Unfortunately, however, the outdated federal regulatory regime required for approving the development and operation of these emerging technologies is a significant impediment for promoting greater advancement of this renewable energy resource. FERC licensing and exemption requirements, which trigger environmental studies and 10

analysis, as well as resource agency consultation, can add considerable expense to projects that often are marginal. The time-consuming process also delays project development and the resulting revenue stream.

The ongoing efforts of the Low-Head Hydro Working Group seek to fix these problems. While we support ongoing efforts to promote legislative solutions, our efforts have focused on seeking regulatory improvements under existing FERC authority. Our proposal, which has been carefully developed to adhere to current requirements under the Federal Power Act, would reduce regulatory burdens and project expenses by making the process more efficient, simplifying the application, and allowing FERC to move more quickly to approve these projects.

We are encouraged by the reception our proposal has received to date. We have met with FERC Commissioner Philip D. Moeller and his advisory staff a number of times regarding this proposal. As detailed in his recent Irrigation Leader interview, Commissioner Moeller has expressed strong support for promoting new project development along existing infrastructure. We understand that Commissioner Moeller and the chairman of FERC have discussed this issue, and the chairman has reacted favorably to the proposal of our group.

While the Low-Head Hydro Working Group has made significant progress to date, our work is far from complete. We must continue to work closely with FERC officials and staff to develop a new regulatory regime that will bring real reform and true cost and process savings.

In light of the president’s policies to promote renewable energy, as well as executive orders for agencies to reduce regulatory burdens, the group’s proposal is perfectly timed to meet these objectives. Our next step is to engage FERC formally with our proposal through the route that will provide the best avenue for success.

Irrigation districts, water supply associations, and others in the water supply industry have a unique opportunity to come together now to achieve success. We look forward to continuing our work with current members of the working group and welcome others to become involved in this effort.

Charles R. Sensiba is a partner with Van Ness Feldman, LLP, law firm. For more information, please contact Mr. Sensiba at (202) 298-1801 or crs@vnf.com.

Irrigation Leader

ADVERTISEMENT

Remembering RWCD General Manager Michael O. Leonard

By Shane Leonard

M

ichael O. Leonard, the innovative and well-respected general manager of Roosevelt Water Conservation District (RWCD), and my father, died November 20. He was 60 years old. A zealous advocate for RWCD and its landowners’ water rights, he was a keen negotiator, and his leadership, vision, and presence will be missed.

For the Leonard family, water has been a way of life. My father was the third of four generations to work for RWCD. His sons represent the fourth. While other families talked about politics or sports at the dinner table, we talked about Arizona water. My father worked for the district for over 35 years—as a pumping plant operator, field superintendent, and ultimately, as general manager. He served in that position for 29 years. His stewardship of the district’s financial and water resources have enabled RWCD to effectively serve its customers and ensure district supplies for years to come.

His management philosophy was unique and could be summed up as, “Let’s do what is in the best interest of everybody.” My father always tried to find common ground, and generally, he could. He was level headed and always seemed to have a clear path to a resolution while everyone else seemed to be getting sidetracked. My dad was in all things a good guy, but that doesn’t mean he was easy. His astuteness and courage to follow his own convictions could be mistaken for hard-headedness. But his philosophy, and his convictions, bred many successes.

He negotiated five Indian water rights settlements for the district, including the Gila River Indian Water Rights Settlement Act, the largest federal water rights settlement in U.S. history. When my father first started as general manager, Arizona was at the heart of the Indian rights settlements. He let the then board of directors and district counsel know that the adversarial approach pursued up to that point had not benefitted anyone. He recognized that the Indian community truly had a claim to water and that all parties had to work together to ensure that everyone had what they needed.

When my father took over as general manager in 1984, the district was in dire financial straits. We had some serious debt issues due to loans that had been taken out to pay for Central Arizona Project water. He moved to reorganize the district and made several innovative long12

term decisions to shore up revenues. The district is now in a much healthier financial position. As a matter of fact, RWCD is debt-free and blessed with a fairly large amount of reserves with respect to our capital concerns. My dad’s ingenuity brought us to this position.

Beginning in the mid-1990s, when development was beginning to take off in the East Valley, RWCD had a number of municipalities approach it wanting to purchase district property. My dad saw this as an opportunity—he was able to negotiate agreements where the municipalities would pay RWCD for the land in both money and water. The water was then brought to us at a much cheaper rate than otherwise would have been if we would have had to go out and acquire it ourselves or produce it from our wells. The agreement helped the district solidify its financial situation and the municipalities saved some money. It was a win-win.

He also approached the Town of Gilbert, the City of Chandler, and a couple of other municipalities with whom RWCD had overlapping service jurisdiction regarding the future of potentially developable land. He negotiated Domestic Water Service Agreements with those entities, under which they purchase surface water from RWCD, treat the water to drinking water standards, and deliver the potable water back to their customers located within the RWCD service area. The agreements provide for the fact that as the lands urbanize, the surface water component associated with the land is still delivered to the landowners, but instead of it coming through a tube, it comes through the tap.

My dad was born on December 14, 1951, in Roswell, New Mexico. He graduated from Westwood High School in Mesa before earning several degrees at Mesa Community College. He enjoyed all things outdoors, taking pleasure in and appreciating nature and all its gifts. He was a life-long horseman and exceptional mule trainer.

In addition to his wife, Nancy, he is survived by his two sons; grandchildren Cassandra, Savannah, Griffin, Alyssa, Allison, and Brandon; brothers Richard, Hugh, and Ron; and sister Kathy.

Shane Leonard is the associate general manager of the Roosevelt Water Conservation District and the son of Michael Leonard.

To contact Shane Leonard, please phone (480) 988-9586 or e-mail s.leonard@rwcd.net.

Irrigation Leader

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

District Focus

Promoting Partnerships and Improving Service:

16

Greater Wenatchee Irrigation District

By Mike Miller

M

ost irrigation districts face a changing landscape with the increases in urbanization— farmlands are sold, subdivided, and developed. Changes in land use bring changes in water demand, system maintenance, and service needs. The Greater Wenatchee Irrigation District (GWID), located in central Washington State, is addressing the changing face of its service area by employing effective administration and communication practices Pumps, switch gear, and computers at GWID's East Unit Booster Station. through a variety of organizational be of a greater magnitude—we can make big holes partnerships to cut through red tape and find when a pressurized pipe breaks. common ground among competing interests. Those partnerships, in addition to technological upgrades, Technological Improvements have enabled GWID to work cooperatively and Our district employs a top-of-the-line SCADA efficiently with public entities and customers alike. system—working with RH2 engineering, GWID Serving 10,000 acres and 4,000 customers, designed, built, and installed approximately $2 million GWID delivers water to agricultural and municipal worth of SCADA equipment over a 12-year period. communities along the Columbia River, just east Bureau of Reclamation Conservation Field Services of the Cascades. GWID is separated into three Grants funded most of our system updates. The distinct districts: the East Unit, which is urban and flexibility and smaller size of the grants made it easier industrialized; the Brays Landing area, which is for GWID to acquire, report on, and match the funds.

23 miles north of East Unit and remains 100 percent The upgrades enable real-time solutions: Our agricultural; and Howard Flats, which is 26 miles field personnel can start and stop pumps from their north of Brays and is a mostly agricultural area with iPhones via a VPN and a Wonderware HMI system, some light industrial uses. Brays Landing produces and they can monitor reservoir levels and zone some of the best apple and cherry crops in the pressures throughout our entire system from anywhere Northwest, while Howard Flats is transitioning from with a cell phone signal. I was on vacation in Chicago larger orchards to smaller farms with pasture for and was able to assist in trouble-shooting by watching horses and cattle. Overall, the district has more than what the SCADA was doing on my smart phone. doubled the number of water users over the last 20 With this level of automation, GWID reliably delivers years. pressurized irrigation water to our 10,000 acres with GWID’s water distribution system is unique (there only four field personnel. are three high-pressure-piped districts that I know GWID is already looking ahead to its next system of ) among irrigation districts. It is an underground upgrades. We will install soft start electrical motor pipe and pressurized system, operating more like starters to address demand costs and reduce wear a large domestic water system than an irrigation and tear on pumps and motors. GWID will also system. It was built that way in 1962. When our water install meters that report readings via our SCADA users—residential, municipal, agricultural, or industrial system. GWID water is metered to the end-user, alike—want water, they go to a valve, turn it on, and requiring that we read meters at least once a month. receive pressurized water through a meter. On the We currently have requested a grant to purchase and other hand, if something does go wrong, problems can Irrigation Leader

install 70 self-reporting meters and the software to run the readings.

The Value of Partnerships

We interact with a variety of public entities—we operate in two counties, purchase power from two separate public utility districts (PUDs) and the Bonneville Power Administration, and work with two municipalities and two airports. Having a relationship with all of them is a real challenge.

When I took over as manager, GWID was suing Douglas County over the issue of whether road repair had damaged a pipe. GWID had already spent $60,000 on a lawsuit seeking $45,000 in damages. I explained to our board that it would be beneficial to drop the suit and work with the county, especially since urbanization was in full swing. I met with the county manager and told him I felt we needed to work together to better serve the people of our respective districts. The county manager agreed, and we have been working well ever since.

Cooperation is essential for successful district management. The local port district manager and I were talking one day and I shared my ideas about cooperation among our entities, as we were operating adjacent properties. He agreed and suggested we start an alliance with all the managers of the entities in the county. The county’s public entity managers now have productive monthly meetings to keep the different entities apprised of issues and undertakings.

Prior to the interentity manager meetings, urbanization took a toll on GWID. Often, we were not notified of subdivision development. In one instance, development led to one of our pipelines running under the back property lines of two subdivisions. The source of the problem is the authority under which easements were granted. As active 1890 easements granted under Reclamation authority, our easements are legal and binding, but public entities fail to abide by them and sometimes do not consider them binding. In this case, neither the county nor the title insurance companies would recognize the legality of the easements.

So right now, GWID has a 24-inch concrete line with upwards of 100 pounds of pressure running through the backyards of 60 people—and it does not show up on their titles. Those backyards run 30-feet deep, and GWID has easements on 15 feet of each one of those yards. In fact, one of the homeowners, in an effort to install a swimming pool, exposed a section of pipe. He requested that we remove the pipe. We called upon Reclamation to attest to the easement and help resolve the situation. It failed to do so. We hired an engineering firm to assist with getting the compaction right as we returned the dirt and compacted it.

Irrigation Leader

Now, to ensure that homeowners are aware of the pipeline, we periodically send out letters informing those homeowners that there are active easements on their yards and that a pressurized pipeline is running through the yard. We have worked with the county to include us in subdivisions and building permitting by requiring our signature before a subdivision or any permit is approved.

We also came up with standard specifications for the persons subdividing properties.

Friday Night Lights Out

I was attending a high-school football game, and midway through the third quarter, a drunk driver hit a power pole, blowing up a transformer and knocking power out in the whole town. After about 10 minutes, the power returned and the game was back on. However, when I arrived home, there was still no power with a prognosis for no power until late the next day—there was no way for the power to loop the east portion of town, which had about 5,000 PUD customers without power.

I had been thinking of ways to get GWID’s 50-yearold power poles replaced. Our lines were right across the road from property that the Douglas PUD had sought transmission easements on. I brought a solution to the PUD manager. Within six months, Douglas authorized the execution of a facility use agreement with the Bureau of Reclamation and GWID. In return, GWID had $6.1 million in new poles at no cost to the district and with obligations for future maintenance costs. The agreement enabled the PUD to overbuild the transmission easements to connect the eastern part of town to a substation. It was a huge win-win.

Expanding Our Partnerships to Better Serve Our Customers

Looking ahead, GWID aims to develop fruitful relationships in the Howard Flats area like those that it has fostered with the public entities in the East Unit and Brays Landing area. Howard Flats is a unique area, a place where both economically challenged and wealthy families call home. It is also located in a different county and is served by a different power company than the other areas.

GWID is prioritizing the challenges in Howard Flats and seeking to find alliances. New partnerships and better communication will help us better serve our customers and deliver water in an efficient and effective manner.

Mike Miller has been with the Greater Wenatchee Irrigation District for 23 years, the last 6 as general manager. To contact Mike, call (509) 670-1327 or e-mail mikem@gwid.org.

17

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Irrigation Leader

19

Steven L. Hernandez attorney at law Specializing in

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Contracts and Western Water Law 21OO North Main Street Suite 1A P.O. Box 13108 Las Cruces, NM 88013

(575) 526-2101 Fax (575) 526-2506 Email:

slh@lclaw-nm.com

ADVERTISEMENT

Manager Profile

Ron Bishop

Ron Bishop, general manager of the Central Platte Natural Resources District, presenting at a water conference in Nebraska.

O

ver the last 40 years as general manager of the Central Platte Natural Resources District (CPNRD), Ron Bishop has served as a true steward of Nebraska’s water resources and farmland. With headquarters in Grand Island, Nebraska, the CPNRD spans an enormous 2.1 million acres, encompassing parts of 10 counties and 185 miles of the Platte River. Ron began his career in soil and water conservation, conducting survey and design work for a private conservation contractor. He later joined the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Soil Conservation Service, working in central and western Nebraska on watershed projects supporting soil erosion and sediment control. In 1966, Ron became district manager of the Douglas County Soil and Water Conservation District in Omaha, and in 1968, he moved to Grand Island, Nebraska, and became manager of the Mid-Platte Valley Watershed, working on flood problems in the Platte Valley of Central Nebraska. In 1972, following Nebraska’s reorganization of watershed and soil and water organizations into Natural Resources Districts, Ron was hired as general manager of the CPNRD. Irrigation Leader’s Editor-in-Chief, Kris Polly, spoke with Ron about his career in conservation and life after management.

Kris Polly: What are you most proud of during your career as general manager?

Ron Bishop: There are several things that stand out

22

in my mind. Number one is [CPNRD’s] water quality program. We started back in the late 1980s when we discovered a nitrate problem in our groundwater.

All of our residents got their drinking water from groundwater supplies. We researched it and found out where the nitrates were coming from. We then conducted a study with the University [of Nebraska– Kearney] and developed a program to start to address the problem.

When we started the program, we had a nitrate problem of 20 parts per million (ppm), on average, across a half-million acres of district land (half of the irrigated land in the valley). Accumulating from the late 1940s to 1988, nitrates increased in the groundwater at a rate of ½ ppm per year. We’ve been at it for close to 25 years, and we have reduced the nitrates to about 14 ppm. We are headed in the right direction, but it is a long process—we’re about halfway to where we want to be. Ten ppm is a safe level for human consumption.

I am also proud of our flood control work. The floodway at Grand Island is a good example. It was a project that we needed since the 1960s. We had a major flood event in 1967, placing large areas of Grand Island and an awful lot of agricultural land under water. In fact, that flood actually brought me to central Nebraska—the watershed board was looking for solutions to ensure that the damage that occurred Irrigation Leader

wouldn’t occur again.

[CPNRD] was successful in getting the Army Corps of Engineers involved in a study to identify the root of the flood problems and potential benefits of addressing [those problems]. Prior Corps proposals were unacceptable for our landowners, but in the late 1980s, we were able to get them to draft a new proposal to do a study and design a new floodway route.

The resulting $17 million project was funded through federal (50 percent) and state (25 percent) dollars. The final 25 percent was a combination of NRD funds, City of Grand Island funds, and county funds. We diverted floodwater out of Wood River and Warm Slough, away from Grand Island, and built a floodway to the Platte River. The ironic thing was that the year after we finished construction, there was another major storm in the area.

The Corps came in, looked at the water levels and runoff, and calculated that the damage the project prevented was to the tune of $19 million. We paid for that project in one year.

In the last few years, I have been proud of the work we have been doing with the state and other NRDs to achieve the goals of the Platte River program and our Integrated Management Plan programs. The bottom line is that we need to come up with additional water for the Platte River in order to both satisfy endangered species requirements and meet state obligations with Colorado, Wyoming, and the Department of the Interior regarding Platte River habitat. It has been a rewarding experience.

We have been able to come up with water gains at critical times. As a result of [those gains], we have not only been able to acquire some water rights from existing uses, primarily irrigation, but also to convert surface irrigation projects to conjunctive management projects to improve efficiency and free up water to go back to the river. We are also using our canals to manage excess flows in the [Platte] River, so that they feed back to the river at a time when it is more productive to have those flows.

Kris Polly: Over the span of your career, what has been the most useful innovation for managing the district?

Ron Bishop: We’re real big on GIS out here. We started using it about 15 years ago. I’ve got three people on staff with extensive GIS skills. I’ve found that very useful not only for myself, but also for working with the board. It has helped me to visually explain to my board, and to the general public, what kinds of issues we are facing. It is a great educational tool.

Irrigation Leader

Kris Polly: How big is your annual budget, and where does the money come from?

Ron Bishop: We have a budget of $10–12 million a year. NRDs have their own taxing authority, so our primary revenue source is a tax on all property, urban and rural, within the district. We use our tax dollars as seed money to try to leverage state and federal grants— primarily the state these days. We also generate some very small revenues from some programs we offer, such as our tree-planting program.

Kris Polly: My family received trees from the NRD when we built our windbreaks. Do you have your own nursery?

Ron Bishop: We obtain our seedlings from the federal nursery at Halsey, Nebraska, and from private nurseries.

We handle anywhere from 50,000 to 140,000 trees a year.

In the 40 years we’ve been in operation, we’ve planted over 3 million trees in our district.

Kris Polly: I understand that you will be retiring this year.

Ron Bishop: Yes, I’ll be retiring in June. But, I’ve entered into an agreement with the district to remain available to them as a consultant for some time after I leave the general manager position.

I’ve worked closely with the irrigation districts in the western part of the NRD. We have a program started with them on conjunctive management and the recharge of excess flows. We are in the middle of rehabbing three projects out there right now. I’m interested in seeing those projects followed through. That is what most of my work after June will entail.

Kris Polly: Based on your experience, what advice would you give other managers?

Ron Bishop: Be honest and truthful. Even if it is bad news, you need to be upfront and truthful with people.

Whether it is the right of way required for a dam, or a regulatory change needed to help do the job, you need to be honest.

I’ve found that much of my success here is due to hiring the right people and then getting out of their way to let them do the job. I haven’t micromanaged. . . . I hired good, qualified people to do the work.

23

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

R E C L A M A T I O N

P R O F I L E:

Regional Director Mike Ryan Michael J. Ryan is the regional director of the Great Plains Region, the Bureau of Reclamation’s largest region. He oversees 650 employees who manage and maintain 80 Reclamation reservoirs, 21 power plants, and 81 recreation areas.

Mike joined Reclamation in the summer of 1982 and during his 30‑year career, he has worked in facility operation and maintenance, dam safety, and river restoration programs across the West. He became the Great Plains regional director in 2005. Irrigation Leader’s Editor-in-Chief, Kris Polly, kicks off the first in a series of Reclamation manager profiles with this discussion with Mike about the upcoming year and Reclamation projects important to the Great Plains Region.

Kris Polly: What value does Reclamation bring to the American public?

Mike Ryan: Reclamation brings value to our nation in both tangible and intangible ways. You have tangible products, such as water for irrigation, drinking water, and power generation, and water and land for recreation. These sorts of things make a difference. Farmers see increases in the value of agricultural products grown on projects developed by the Bureau of Reclamation. We run power plants that produce electricity for customers in rural areas and build and maintain rural water projects that make a big difference in people’s quality of life.

Reclamation helps ensure the security and reliability of our nation’s food supply. I remember the oil embargo of the late 1970s and the impact that had on my hometown, my state, and the nation. I wonder what would have happened if it had been food instead of oil. Reclamation helps bring a stable and safe food supply to the nation, whether it’s what we see on our table or what goes to livestock. I don’t mean for us to claim too much of the credit for that, but I do believe Reclamation plays a vital role.

Reclamation also delivers intangible benefits to our nation . . . programs with values that are a little more subtle, a little harder to appreciate. When Reclamation does its job really well, there is an absence of a problem, and that doesn’t always get a lot of attention. We see that in the Platte River Restoration Program and in addressing the Endangered Species Act issues on the Lower Yellowstone River.

An important value dating back to when President Theodore Roosevelt named us over a century ago is providing a stable economic foundation for areas in the western United States— whether its through agriculture, municipal water, electric power supply, or recreational opportunities.

Kris Polly: Tell us about irrigation in Reclamation’s Great Plains Region.

Mike Ryan: The Great Plains Region is geographically huge, spanning 856,000 square miles from the Canadian border to the Mexican border and covering an area greater than all of the other regions put together. Within the region, we have about 15,000 farmers and 2.2 million irrigated acres generating an average annual value of $1 billion worth of crops. The average 26

Irrigation Leader

size of a farm in the region is about 150 acres—the farmers in our region are a lot like the ones described in the Paul Harvey speech, “So God Made a Farmer,” featured in the Super Bowl ad this year.

There is an incredible diversity of crops grown in the region. Reclamation projects provide water for hay and pasture (778,000 acres); corn (620,000 acres) grown primarily in Nebraska and Kansas; edible beans (125,000 acres), barley (110,000 acres), and sugar beets (100,000 acres) that are mostly grown in the north of the region; and cotton (90,000 acres) grown in Oklahoma and Texas.

Kris Polly: How does the water supply look for 2013?

Mike Ryan: It’s not great. The water supply forecast is a little better in the northern part of the region. For instance, in the Upper Missouri River Basin in Montana, we are looking at 100 percent of average (using the 30‑year record) for the April-to-July inflow and reservoir storage.

In northern part of Wyoming, in the Wind, Shoshone, and Bighorn Rivers, storage is at or above 100 percent of average, but their inflow ranges from 65 to 90 percent of average, depending on the subbasin. Contrast that with the North Platte in central Wyoming: Its storage is at about 89 percent of average, and expected runoff is at 30 to 35 percent. The Colorado–Big Thompson project on the western slope is generally very productive, but this year its storage and runoff are forecast to be 75 percent of average, respectively.

As you go further south, it gets worse. We are expecting extreme drought this season, so we are bracing ourselves.

The folks in Oklahoma and Texas have gone through several years of really dry conditions. We are making the wisest decisions possible about the storage we do have, and getting the word out to farm families. Now is the time to let them know, since many of them are making operating and financial decisions.

Mount Elbert Powerplant on the the Fryingpan–Arkansas Project in Colorado.

Guernsey Powerplant, completed in 1928, on the North Platte Project in Wyoming.

Kris Polly: Over your three-decade career, what things have changed, and what has remained the same?

Mike Ryan: Technology has changed. When I first began working for Reclamation, the regional office in Billings had two faxogram machines—one was in the regional director’s office and the other was in the budget officer’s office. You had to get the regional director’s approval to send a fax. The office had only one personal computer. Power plants had equipment dating back to the 1940s and 1950s.

Nowadays, it is a digital world—information can be easily shared and analyzed. In the power plants, we have protective equipment and monitoring systems that not only track the generators, but also switch yards and transmission lines.

The entire system is electronic and operates in milliseconds and milliamps. Technology and its use in our efforts have Irrigation Leader

Pathfinder Dam is one of the first constructed by Reclamation. The dam is in a granite canyon on the North Platte River in southwest Wyoming.

27

changed significantly in the last 40 years.

For me, what has stayed the same is farmers’ ingenuity.

Many of our people have grown up around agricultural operations. They know that you can’t just run next door to buy or replace something that needs fixing. You have to come up with those fixes yourself to solve problems. Even though some of the tools have changed, that attitude of ingenuity remains the same.

Another change I have witnessed is concern for the environment. I don’t mean to say that years ago, individuals, whether Bureau employees or farmers, were not concerned— the majority of those folks were good natural resources stewards. It’s inherent to the business model of agriculture.

So, the idea of stewardship has not changed. But now we have to expand our horizons a little more. We care about watersheds, and the effects that others may have upon us, and the effects we may have upon others. There is more of a willingness to engage in those types of conversations. I see that with Reclamation, irrigation districts, municipalities, and individual landowners.

We are savvier. We know that it is good business to be on top of natural resources issues. Margins are so tight for irrigators nowadays; you really have to be paying attention to everything that is going on in the natural resources world.

Another thing that has stayed the same is the value of relationships. Relationships have always been important.

One of my first supervisors in the Bureau of Reclamation was a man named Roger Patterson. He would drill into us that we would be only as successful as our relationships.

That is still as is important as it was, but one thing that has changed over the years is the nature of relationships in terms of who is at the table. Whether it is an irrigation district or Reclamation, there has been an increase in sitting down with all the entities involved with working on our issues.

Trust has a professional component and personal component. You can’t really trust someone unless you have had an opportunity to work with him or her, especially on difficult issues. To develop rapport, you need that personal component—you have to look at them and

talk to them across the table. That never changes.

Kris Polly: What are the working priorities for the Great Plains Region? In particular, where does infrastructure stand?

Mike Ryan: Taking care of infrastructure is a huge priority for the region and for Reclamation. It is a cornerstone of who we are and why we are here. If you really want to understand someone’s priorities, look at where they spend their money. In the Great Plains Region, half of our appropriated funding goes toward infrastructure—whether its dams, power plants, or rural water.

I establish performance criteria for the facilities. I try to balance the reliability of that infrastructure, its availability, and the cost of providing the service. We send out bills to people, and for some of those people, money is tight, so it is critical to ensure we are doing what we need to do and delivering value.

Up to a third of our budget goes toward rural water project construction in Montana and the Dakotas. These projects provide potable water to rural areas with extremely poor quality water. In some of these areas, water out of the tap can look like a glass of Coca-Cola. They are dealing with high concentrations of iron, manganese, and sulfur. It’s really a witches’ brew. In their houses, and out on the farm and the ranch, they end up having to replace all of the plumbing fixtures every few years.

One story comes to mind: On one of the systems we constructed, a gentleman told me how the change in water quality has made a difference. He felt much better about the long-term health of his ranch after the water project. The mortality rate on his calves decreased, his veterinarian bills went down, and the cows put on weight faster. His costs were down and production went up.

We also have a very successful endangered river restoration program, the Platte River Restoration Program.

You don’t hear a lot about it, but that is because it has been so successful. It is a partnership between Wyoming, Colorado, Nebraska, and the United States government through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Bureau of Reclamation to help restore the Platte River.

The National Academies of Science are preparing a report on large ecosystem restoration projects, and it highlights the Platte as a river that is doing really

Great Plains Regional Director Mike Ryan (right) and Reclamation Commissioner Mike Connor (middle) tour South Dakota's Standing Rock Water Treatment Plant with Doug Mund of Bartlett and West Engineering.

28

Irrigation Leader

Ryan’s Ten Rules for Reclamation 1. Keep your eye on the ball.

2. Act like an adult.

3. Make your folks proud.

4. Give respect to those on the front line.

5. Attitude dictates altitude.

6. Dance with the one that brought you.

7. Don’t just stand there, do something.

8. Take the high road.

9. You’re only as good as your relationships.

10. Pay attention to the bottom line. well.

Although not a traditional infrastructure project, the program does highlight that taking care of riverine systems is a way to make sure that your existing infrastructure can still serve its intended purpose. If the project were not successful, I would be in Endangered Species Act consultation for both the North Platte and the Colorado–Big Thompson projects.

That would place both projects at a huge risk.

Kris Polly: As director, what issues draw your personal focus?

Mike Ryan: Right now, there are several issues that I am addressing directly. Within the Republican River Basin, in Colorado, Nebraska, and Kansas, there is ongoing U.S. Supreme Court litigation. We have an upcoming watershort year in the basin, so we are working with Nebraska, Kansas, the Army Corps of Engineers, and irrigation districts to help provide adequate water supplies for folks this year and to ensure that Nebraska can obtain compact compliance this year.

Kris Polly: What can you tell us about the Nebraska/ Kansas Republican River issue?

Mike Ryan: There’s been a call placed on the river already. Mr. Dunnigan of the Nebraska Department of Natural Resources came up to see me last December to let me know that it was happening. He offered to work with us to help soften the blow on our irrigators in the basin. We are still working that issue.

Another issue I am working on personally is in the state of Colorado. The Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District has some infrastructure on the western slope, Windy Gap Reservoir, in which they want to firm their yield. There appears to be a way it can be done through the utilization of not only their facilities but also Colorado–Big Thompson facilities. In the near future, I am going to be sitting down with Northern Water and the municipal subdistrict to negotiate a contract about how these federal and nonfederal facilities can work together.

Irrigation Leader

We are also working with the Corps of Engineers, the Fish and Wildlife Service, the State of Montana, the Nature Conservancy, and irrigation districts on the Lower Yellowstone River in Montana to modify a diversion dam and canal head gate so that it is fish friendly. We already have screens in place so we don’t have entrainment in the canal. The next big item is to resolve the fish passage issue around the diversion dam.

Another issue that draws my attention all the time is the funding issue. Right now, we closed out our books for fiscal year 2012, and we did really well, but we are still kind of in a holding pattern for 2013 under the continuing resolution.

The Department of the Interior, Reclamation, and the Office of Management and Budget are working to finalize what is going to the president’s request for 2014. For 2015, I drew the assignment to be the chairperson of Reclamation’s budget review committee. We are getting submittals from the regional offices to figure what we need to request for 2015.

Kris Polly: Tell us how Reclamation’s Great Plains Region is organized.

Mike Ryan: Because we have this huge geography, we have a regional office in Billings, Montana, and we have six area offices—Billings; Bismarck, North Dakota; Casper, Wyoming; Loveland, Colorado; McCook, Nebraska; and Austin, Texas—that work with us. They provide coverage to the nine states that we serve. Some of our area offices have field offices. For example, Austin also has a field office in Oklahoma City.

Our organizing concept is one of local decisionmaking.

Some call it decentralized decisionmaking, but it is really just empowering the local managers. Our managers have a lot of experience, and they make good decisions. We believe in hiring good people, getting them close to the issue, and letting them exercise their personal and professional judgment to solve problems. It is good for managing issues and developing personnel.

Kris Polly: What advice would you give to Bureau contractors about how to work with the Bureau?

Mike Ryan: I would give them the same advice that I give my area managers: Get to know the local folks. If the only time you go to see Bureau staff is when there is problem, that is not good. You need to get to know staff personally and professionally with the idea that we are in this together for the long run. My advice when I visit with an irrigation district manager or a new district board member is to start to work with your local or area staff, and if an issue is not being resolved, work your way up the organizational chart. There are very few issues that we can’t get resolved.

29

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Pivot stuck again? Put your log chain away.

RAAFT TRAcks will solve your problem.

by PolyTech LLC

• Quick & easy to install • Keeps center pivots from getting stuck • Reduces or eliminates tracks and ruts • Fits tire sizes: 11.2x24, 11.2x24.5, 11.2x38, 14.9x24 • Can withstand bridges yet float with ease over acres of muddy terrain RAAFT tracks are manufactured using a rugged polyethylene/carbon composite plastic that is 100% recyclable and floats with ease over acres of muddy terrain. RAAFT Tracks are designed to operate in field conditions from 40° F to 105° F, with water being applied to the wet the track. It can be winter moved at temperatures down to -10°. Lightweight enough to be carried/dragged by one person, 4 to 6 bolts for installation per tower, depending on the model.

For more information, please visit our web site at

www.RAAFT.com e-mail raaftsales@gmail.com or phone (402) 261-5774

The Innovators

Concrete Jacking with High-pressure Lifting Bags:

South Columbia Basin Irrigation District

By Dave Solem

S

imple solutions are often the best—and the most cost effective. The South Columbia Basin Irrigation District (SCBID) faced a real challenge when a 30‑ton concrete drop structure washed out.

Aided by some common-sense ingenuity, SCBID’s crew executed an effective and relatively inexpensive solution to fix the drop.

The particular drop structure in question was much bigger than it needed to be for what normally goes down it—it was designed to pass 50 cubic feet per second (cfs), and it normally gets 4 or 5 cfs. Given the weight of the chute and the distance between it and the road where a crane could park, we would have had to bring in a 50- to 60-ton crane. Fortunately, our assistant watermaster, Chuck Eagy, came up with a unique and effective solution.

Chuck, formerly a district mechanic, had previously looked into the use of high-pressure lifting air bags to jack up equipment in the field. He thought the bags might work for this situation. When Chuck told us about the air bags, we searched online and saw that were all kinds of applications for them: rescue lifting for fire departments, jacking up buildings and large structures, and stabilizing heavy objects.

Looking at all the options, we figured a crane would have been very expensive. The size required would mean it would have to be brought in from Spokane.

There was also a concern about the risks involved with hanging the structure from a cable. The air bags seemed to be a safer application.

We could not find one from a local rental outfit, so we rented two SAVA 46‑ton air bags from a company called Rental Tools Online (http://www. rentaltoolsonline.com). Even though our local rental The air bag at work.

32

Irrigation Leader

shops had not really heard of the high-pressure bags, they became very interested after we inquired. Rental Tools Online shipped them to us via FedEx for around $1,200 for a two-week rental. Most of the cost was actually the shipping itself, which cost $800. The cost of purchasing the bags was not much more than the total rental costs, so if interested, managers could consider sharing with neighbor districts to address a variety of lifting needs.

Each bag measured 31 inches by 31 inches, exerting up to 116 pounds per square inch (psi) on the contact surface. The lifting system included the Kevlar cord–reinforced rubber bags, air lines to connect to a compressor, and lines running from compressor into a control box with pressure gauges. From that box, the line split, going directly to the bags. From the control box, you could just push a button to deflate the bags. The system works with any kind of standard air compressor—we only needed 85 psi.

Our crew placed the bags underneath the drop

structure, pumped up the bags to lift the structure up, then propped it in place with railroad ties. They repeated the process every 6 to 8 inches. After the crew raised the structure in place, they dumped controlled density fill beneath the structure. There was no way to get in there with compactors or dirt. Controlled density fill is a low-density flowable fill, maybe 1,000 psi. Contained by plywood forms, it leveled out nicely and filled in under the structure.

The project was really simple and only took a couple of hours.

The plan worked exactly as the crew envisioned it.

Dave Solem is the general manager of the South Columbia Basin Irrigation District. For more information, please contact Mr. Solem at (509) 547-1735 or e-mail dsolem@scbid.org.

Diversion of water around the repairs on the drop structure.

The Innovators

Better Mousetraps:

34

Monsanto’s DroughtGard™ Hybrids

W

ith the grip of persistent drought squeezing farmers in the Great Plains, efficient and sufficient water use is critical to ensuring healthy yields. Monsanto’s Water Utilization Learning Center in Gothenburg, Nebraska, has been instrumental in developing a potential tool to mitigate yield loss due to environmental stresses. After years of testing the effects of drought conditions on corn, the Learning Center’s work has helped deliver integrated breeding and biotechnology hybrids for drought.

DroughtGard™ hybrids are more than just a collection of drought-resistant traits. The DroughtGard™ system employs a three-pronged approach to build drought-tolerance: a breeding program that advances hybrids with strong drought tolerance, a drought resistant biotech gene inserted into those hybrids, and different agronomic recommendations on how to use the product to help manage drought. When DroughtGard™ hybrids encounter moisture stress, particularly in the phases before, during, and post-pollination, they slow down their water use and bank that soil moisture for future use. On the other hand, even in times of abundant precipitation, DroughtGard™ hybrids possess target yield potential.

Monsanto scientists have tested across the high plains for multiple years. Through its Ground BreakerSM program, Monsanto has employed an innovative testing regime that helps launch biotech trait systems such as DroughtGard™. During

2012, the company facilitated 250 large-scale on-farm trials of the DroughtGard™ system across the western half of the Great Plains.

Studying the Plant-Water-Soil Nexus Work at the Learning Center defined, in much greater detail, what benefits the DroughtGard™ product line can bring to a farmer. The center employs a rainout shelter to simulate drought conditions on corn plots, and to compare competitor hybrids to Monsanto’s. This mobile shelter covers a plot area to shield it from rain and moves off to resume normal growing conditions, allowing scientists to completely control moisture levels. The rationale behind the rainout shelter is a simple one: Both the industry and academic world lack a comprehensive understanding of the plant-water-soil relationship.

As center Director Chandler Mazour stated, “[t]he more [Learning Center scientists] can understand the full interaction of plants, water, and soil, the better drought tolerant systems we will be able to deliver to farmers.”

Scientists applied stress treatments at various stages of the corn life cycle: from V-6 to V-17, which is shorter than kneehigh corn to right before pollination; from V-17 through R3, or milk stage; and from milk stage to physiological maturity.

Mr. Mazour was amazed with the results of the slate of stress tests: “I saw some of the most dramatic phenotypic response from stress and irrigation after-stress that I have ever seen in my career.” In the treatment where Learning Center scientists Irrigation Leader

stressed plants from V-6 to V-17, just prior to pollination, the corn was short, lacking tassels, and characterized by grayish-green leaves. Mr. Mazour thought they killed the plants. However, within 12 hours of giving the corn water, silks and pollen were out and the plot produced 120 bushels of corn.

Overall, that testing proved to be an eye-opener. Using soil moisture probes, Learning Center scientists saw that the DroughtGard™ hybrid used less water than other hybrids. In addition to the water savings, they found more kernels per ear on a DroughtGard™ hybrid compared to competitive hybrids, and that their hybrid out-yielded the check hybrid. In fact, the application of a mere 6.2 to 7.4 inches of moisture total in the rain shelter environment, depending on the particular stress treatment, yielded anywhere from 120 to 170 bushels.

One of the key metrics of the hybrid’s value is hydroefficiency, measured by dividing yield (bushels per acre) by the amount of water drawn from the soil (millimeters of water used to produce 1 bushel). Mr. Mazour provided an apt example. During one of the stress treatments, a DroughtGard™ hybrid used 261 of water from the soil, whereas the check used 338 mm of water from the soil. In that same treatment, the hydroefficiency of the DroughtGard™ hybrid was .59, while the hydroefficiency of the check was .44.

Mitigating Risk and Saving Water According to Mr. Mazour, “When a farmer makes a decision about plant population, it is a defensive decision. They are planning on it being dry.” When a year’s precipitation is ample, plant population is the limiting yield factor. The driving question behind 2013 DroughtGard™ research will be whether a farmer would be able to bump up one or two thousand plants an acre because of the further protection from periods of inadequate precipitation. Learning Center trials have helped to show that it may be possible. As Mr. Mazour described it, “[Monsanto] is in the business of helping to build farmers a better mousetrap.”

DroughtGard’s™ value goes beyond boosting yields—the potential aggregate impact on water conservation is staggering. Hypothetically, reducing water inputs a half-inch on every corn acre in the United States would save 1.3 trillion gallons of water.

That would fill Lake McConaughy, Nebraska’s largest lake, four times, or provide the city of Denver with water for nearly 30 days.

The Monsanto rainout shelter is a movable structure that researchers can roll over a field to prohibit rain from falling on the crops. The shelter makes it possible to accurately simulate different drought scenarios while keeping all other factors, such as soil characteristics, constant at a field-scale level. The shelter eliminates the rain variable and can produce exact levels of water, leading to a clearer picture of how crops use water.

Irrigation Leader

35

The Innovators

Mapping Soil to Improve Yields:

EM-38 Soil Salinity Assessment Technology

A

ll irrigation water contains some level of salt—wherever that water goes, salt follows.

As any irrigator knows, salt interferes with crop growth by impeding a plant’s ability to extract water from the soil. The potentially deleterious effects of excessive soil salinity on crop growth are commensurable to the damaging effects of drought.

Salinity patterns across a field paint a picture of the irrigated history of that field. Those patterns can be used to identify the causes of salinity, leading to effective remediation and better crop yields. In the past, farmers and soil scientists had to take numerous soil samples over a large area to get some idea about a field’s salinity. But because salinity distribution in a field can vary widely within short distances, results of lab testing were often limited, failing to reveal a full picture of field salinity patterns.

Building on research conducted at the United States Salinity Laboratory (USSL) in Riverside, California, the soil scientists at Stetson Engineers are now employing a powerful diagnostic tool to discern the patterns and causes of salinity. Since 1957, Stetson Engineers has provided innovative and effective solutions to challenges in the water management field throughout the Southwest. Stetson is using the EM‑38, the latest in soil salinity assessment technology, to comprehensively measure and inventory soil salinity in fields where salt buildup lowers crop yields.

Salinity Tolerance and Yield Loss For years, the USSL has researched the salinity tolerance of hundreds of crops. The lab has made significant strides—it is now possible to show the percent decrease in yield that occurs with the increase of one unit of salinity across a field. With that information, it is possible to accurately assess yield

36

Crop Threshold Slope

(dS/m) (%/dS/m) Alfalfa 2.0 7.3 Barley 8.0 5.0 Bean 1.0 19.0 Corn 1.7 12.0 Cotton 7.7 5.2 Peach 1.7 21.0 Sorghum 6.8

16.0

losses due to salinity and to determine what crops will grow at full yield within a field’s soil salinity range. The table presents the salinity tolerance threshold (the level at which the plant begins to be affected) and the yield loss slope (the percent yield loss for every salinity unit above the threshold) for a few commonly grown crops.

For example, consider the effect of a soil salinity level of 8 dS/m on alfalfa and cotton: Alfalfa: yield loss = (8.0-2.0) x 7.3% = 43.8% (Disastrous) Cotton: yield loss = (8.0-7.7) x 5.2% = 1.6 % (Negligible)

The EM-38 USSL research directly led to a technological breakthrough in soil salinity measurement and assessment capabilities: the EM‑38. This mobile instrument has an electrical transmitter on one end and an electrical receiver on the other. It emits a current out of the transmitter, and the receiver measures the strength of current passing through the soil. The EM‑38 is highly adaptable to be towed across fields; the wheels of the transport vehicle are adjustable to fit row spacing in the field, and the height of the vehicle is adjustable to move over established crops. The instrument includes a GPS antenna and a GPS/data logger. A hydraulic soilcoring machine is mounted on the front for collecting calibration samples.

As the EM‑38 is towed across a field, bulk soil Irrigation Leader

conductivity and GPS readings are downloaded to the data logger. For a 40‑acre field, the EM‑38 conducts up to 800 readings. Using data from a few calibration soil samples, the USSL software converts the bulk EM‑38 conductivity readings into soil salinity readings.

Salinity Assessment and Mapping The software prepares soil sampling plans, selecting 6 to 12 sites for sampling. Twenty‑four samples are collected per field. After lab testing, USSL software utilizes soil test results to “calibrate” the EM‑38 readings and establish salinity at each of the 600–800 data points in the field.

The software produces interpretive maps for each field, including: • yield loss, due to salinity, for over 100 different crops • salinity in depth-increments of 1 foot • percent of applied moisture that passes through the root zone • areas where amendments should be applied to improve saline-sodic soils • other interpretive maps required by the unique conditions of the field According to Stetson Soil Scientist Cliff Landers, “The ultimate use of these maps is to depict what yield losses a farmer suffers in a field due to soil salinity, where in the field those yield losses are occurring, and whether the irrigation efficiency is appropriate—too much water, too little water.” Often these characteristics are difficult for an irrigator to see with the naked eye.

visually observable was the area in the south-center (blue).

The solution to the problems in this entire field was to repair the canal leak.

Map 1: Yield loss for alfalfa

Map 2: Salinity level at depth of 4 ft.

The Power of Mapping—An Example There are multiple factors negatively impacting the salinity content in a field, including improper drainage, land benching methods, and the application of water greater than the soil intake capacity. Remediation depends on the cause. Cliff Landers noted that Stetson has worked on areas where “there was leakage from irrigation canals, seeps that were affecting soil a third of the way across the field from the canal—they couldn’t be seen above ground.” In these situations, mapping is essential. It shows an irrigation district the location of the leaks and helps identify root causes of salinity issues.

At the right are maps of salinity in a field roughly 40 acres in size. The first shows the percent yield loss for alfalfa due to that salinity. The second shows the soil salinity across the field at a depth of 4 feet. The irrigation canal runs along the top (north) edge of the field. A clay strata runs across the field (an old slough) from north to south. A canal leak was discovered in the blue area (map 2) along the top edge. The water from the leak traveled along the slough from north to south and is causing salt buildup in the blue area. The only part of the field where this was Irrigation Leader

The Impact Prior to this technology, if a field had salinity buildup at a depth of 3 to 4 feet, it would go undetected. Yet an irrigator would know that his crops were not doing so well. Addressing what looked to be a nutrient problem causing lower yields, the likeliest solution would have been to add more fertilizer to the soil, exacerbating the problem.

Now, with the EM‑38, an irrigator can utilize a CAT scan of a field to make the right diagnosis and formulate the appropriate remedy. As Cliff Landers aptly stated, “Nobody knows a field like an irrigator.” With the help of the EM‑38, irrigators can build on their understanding of their own fields to more effectively combat salinity issues and improve crop yields.

37

ADVERTISEMENT

CLASSIFIED LISTINGS THE TWIN LOUPS DISTRICTS ARE TAKING APPLICATIONS FOR THE POSITION OF GENERAL MANAGER

Responsibilities include: personnel management, evaluate general operational procedures and take corrective action as required, coordinate planning and development programs, financing and budgets, oversight of expenditures, and public relations. Attend Board meetings, provide various reports to the Boards, and collate information on issues and items of negotiations as directed by the Boards. Administration of District policies, water rights, and water transfers. Work with various inter-local agreements and coalitions, water associations, and with local, state, and federal agencies. Hands-on experience with water delivery and/or irrigation district maintenance preferred. College and/or administrative experience a plus.

Big Horn Canal Irrigation District currently has an opening for a full time ditch rider. Duties involve running heavy equipment, working on canal structures, must be willing to work weekends. CDL and general knowledge of water is preferred. Random drug testing required.

Please mail resume to Big Horn Canal Irrigation District PO Box 348, Basin, WY 82410. Salary is based on experience.

Preferable living in Basin or Greybull area.

Salary negotiable and commensurate with experience.

For information on posting to the Classified Listings, please e-mail Irrigation.Leader@ waterstrategies.com

Submit resumes by April 25th, 2013 To: Twin Loups Districts, P. O. Box 98 Scotia, Nebraska 68875 or to twinloups@nctc.net The Twin Loups Districts Headquarters are located near Scotia, Nebraska, 55 miles north west of Grand Island, Nebraska. The Districts provide irrigation to 55,000 acres with a crew of 13 people. Facilities include 2 reservoirs, one diversion dam, two electric lift stations, 165 miles of canals, and 212 miles of pipelines.

Family Farm

LLIANCE The Family

SM

Farm Alliance is a powerful advocate for family farmers, ranchers, irrigation

districts, and allied industries in seventeen Western states. The Alliance is focused on one mission To ensure the availability of reliable, affordable irrigation water supplies to Western farmers and ranchers.

As a 501(c)(6) tax exempt organization, our support comes exclusively from those who believe our mission is important enough to contribute. We believe the cause is important enough to ask for your support - Please join us by completing the web form at http://www.familyfarmalliance.org/ProspectiveContact.cfm.

For more information contact Dan Keppen by phone at (541) 892-6244, or by e-mail at dankeppen@charter.net

2013 CALENDAR Feb. 21–22 Feb. 26 Feb. 26–28 Mar. 5 Mar. 6–8 Mar. 9–13 Mar. 13–14 Mar. 15

Mar. 18–20 Mar. 21 Mar. 22 Apr. 14–16 May 7–10 May 17

Family Farm Alliance Annual Conference, Monte Carlo Hotel, Las Vegas, NV Nebraska Assn. of Resources Districts, Water Programs Conference, Kearney, NE Assn. of California Water Agencies, DC Conference, Washington, DC Assn. of California Water Agencies, 2013 Legislative Symposium, Sacramento, CA Texas Water Conservation Association, Annual Convention, Austin, TX Nebraska Assn. of Resources Districts, Annual DC Conference, Washington, DC Irrigation Association, Agricultural Irrigation Fly–In, Washington, DC Mountain Counties Water Resources Assn. & Assn. of California Water Agencies, Region 3, Joint Program: Drought and Climate Change, Auburn, CA Utah Water Users Assn., Utah Water Users Workshop, St. George, UT Oregon Water Resources Congress, District Managers’ Workshop, Newport, OR Mountain Counties Water Resources Assn., Small Hydro Workshop, Placerville, CA National Water Resources Assn., Federal Water Seminar, Washington DC Assn. of California Water Agencies, Spring Conference & Exhibition, Sacramento, CA Agri–Business Council of Arizona, Annual Meeting, Phoenix, AZ

For more information on advertising in Irrigation Leader magazine, or if you would like a water event listed here, please phone (703) 517-3962 or e-mail Irrigation.Leader@waterstrategies.com.

Submissions are due the first of each month preceding the next issue.

Past issues of Irrigation Leader are archived at

www.WaterandPowerReport.com