2nd WATER WORKSHOP Proactive Water Management for Sports...

www.sportsturfassociation.com | SUMMER 2007 13

Following the success of our inaugeral Spring 2006 workshop, the Sports Turf Association hosted a second

Proactive Water Management for Sports Turf Managers full day event on March 29, 2007. This workshop

addressed the implementation of water use bans and restrictions and the resulting concern for those responsi-

ble for premium field conditions for many sports such as soccer, football and baseball. It brought together those

involved in managing the water supply of a municipality in the best interest of its citizens and those responsible

for the management of quality sports turf surfaces for use by its citizens. Sessions were organized beginning

with a more generalized view of the water management issue progressing to more specific, practical topics for

use by turf managers. The following summary articles have been provided by our speakers and we extend our

thanks to them for their further participation.

®

Count on it.

2nd WATER WORKSHOPProactive Water Management for

Sports Turf Managers

14 SUMMER 2007 | Sports Turf Manager

he key issues that poured out of thewater management workshop werethe increasingly complex regula-tory environment surrounding ir-rigation water use, the need for

WORKSHOP SESSIONSWhat’s Inside

WORKSHOP SUMMARYROB WITHERSPOON, DIRECTOR, GUELPH TURFGRASS INSTITUTE

Timproving water use efficiencies and thedevelopment of best management prac-tices for irrigation system management.

Not a single participant at the workshopwas working in a municipality that doesnot have some form of water use bylaw.A challenge facing sports turf managersis making the various forms of bylawswork for a sports field environment. Asystem that allows professional field man-agers to make application timing decisionswithin a restricted water use situationwould make best use of a limited resource.Rather than applying water based on somearbitrary calendar and/or street addresscriteria, water should be applied in a man-ner that is appropriate for turf growingconditions. Many managers feel it wouldbe better to have a fixed allocation of wa-ter each year to be applied as needed ratherthan working within a day of the weekand/or street address system that is effec-

tive for communicating with homeown-ers, but not particularly suited to the grassplant’s needs.

As water restrictions increase, thereappears to be a movement towards look-ing at alternatives to irrigating with treatedmunicipal water. Some properties lendthemselves to the construction of on-siteirrigation ponds that may provide moreflexibility with regards to water use. Cap-turing on-site runoff is one thing, but ifplans call for tapping into an existingstream as a water source, extensive regu-lations apply including the need to developa bypass pond and maintain a minimumstream flow. Although not discussed indetail at the workshop, waste water recy-cling systems that incorporate sports fieldsmay be worthy of future investigation.

Efficiencies in water application arecritical for sports turf managers to makebest use of this critical resource. Regularauditing of system performance, knowingsoil conditions and using some form ofwater budgeting all contribute to ensur-ing that water is being applied in an ef-fective and logical fashion.

The general consensus of workshopparticipants was that water restrictions arean inevitable component of managingsports turf in the 21st century. The key tosuccess is being an efficient water user andcommunicating with policy makers toensure that water use restrictions conformwith best management practices for wa-ter conservation in field management. ♦

The Protection of Our WaterResources: A Conservation

Authority PerspectiveBob Edmondson, Director,Watershed Management

Services, Conservation Halton

Water Efficiency inHalton Region

Wayne Galliher, Water/Wastewater Outreach

Coordinator, Halton Region

Establishing a WaterUse Baseline

Gregory Snaith, President,EnviroIrrigation Engineering, Inc.

Use It or Lose It: Best Manage-ment Practices for Water Man-

agement on Sports FieldsPam Charbonneau, Turfgrass

Specialist, OMAFRA


THE PROTECTION OF OUR WATER RESOURCESA CONSERVATION AUTHORITY PERSPECTIVE BY BOB EDMONDSON, DIRECTOR, WATERSHED MANAGEMENT SERVICES, CONSERVATION HALTON

Conservation authorities, particu-larly in the Greater Toronto Area,are known to most people for theconservation areas and large tractsof lands that they own and man-

age for outdoor recreation and educationprograms. In reality, the formation of con-servation authorities came about with thepassing of the Conservation AuthoritiesAct in 1946 in response to concern ex-pressed by agricultural, naturalist andsportsmen’s groups “that all the renew-able natural resources of the provincewere in an unhealthy state.” The passing

of the Act provided the means by whichthe province and municipalities could jointogether to form a conservation authoritywithin a specified area – the watershed –to undertake programs for natural resourcemanagement. A conservation authority isbasically a community-based agencyformed on a watershed basis in partner-ship with its municipalities and the prov-ince to deal with resource managementissues that cross municipal boundaries.

Many of the earlier conservation au-thorities were formed to deal with resourcemanagement issues such as large refor-estation initiatives within their watersheds.Most, however, came into being follow-ing Hurricane Hazel which found its wayinto the Province of Ontario in October1954 resulting in significant loss of lifeand property damage, particularly within

the Humber watershed in Toronto. Ap-proximately 81 deaths were attributed toHurricane Hazel and some 4,000 peopleleft homeless. The damage was put at ap-proximately $1 billion in today’s dollars.The significance of Hurricane Hazel is thatit is the storm event that is used in today’sstandards in dealing with floodplain issuesand the protection of life and property.

Hurricane Hazel served as an addedinitiative for municipalities to join andrequest the province to form a conserva-tion authority as they were looked at asthe ideal agency to deal with flood man-

agement on a watershed ba-sis. Today there are 36conservation authoritiesacross Ontario.

Each conservation au-thority that was formed pre-pared a ConservationReport on the state of theirwatershed(s) that looked atflood management issues,the health of the watershed,opportunities for reforesta-tion, recreation and land ac-quisition. In fact, most of thelarge tracts of land that areowned by conservation au-

thorities today were originally identifiedfrom these early reports that were done inthe 1950s and 1960s. These early reportsalso looked at oppor-tunities to protect lifeand property throughflood managementschemes that control-led flooding and ero-sion. This entailed theidentification of sitesfor reservoirs to con-trol flood flows andc h a n n e l i z a t i o nprojects to divert flowsfrom susceptible areasor control erosion. Asa result, significant in-vestment was made inthis type of structural

approach to flood management that tookplace throughout the 1960s and 1970s. Ex-amples in the Conservation Halton water-shed include the construction of the Kelso,Hilton Falls and Scotch Block dams andreservoirs on the Sixteen Mile Creek andthe Mountsberg dam and reservoir on theBronte Creek. Diversion channels werebuilt in Oakville and Burlington to allevi-ate flooding in core areas of these cen-tres. A channelization project in Miltonwas built to control the flows from theSixteen Mile Creek and alleviate erosionthrough the downtown core.

Flood Damage Reduction ProgramLater in the 1970s a regulatory ap-

proach was taken to deal with develop-ment within floodplains. Regulations wereenacted by conservation authoritiesthrough the Conservation Authorities Actdealing with construction withinfloodplains, alteration of watercourses andthe filling of valley systems and wetlands.Regional storm events were used as theregulatory storm event, which in the caseof most of Southern Ontario is the Hurri-cane Hazel event that occurred over theHumber Watershed in 1954. In the early1980s the federal and provincial govern-ments sponsored the Flood Damage Re-duction Program, which involved themapping and delineation of floodplains by

Hurricane Hazel, 1954


conservation authorities based on the regu-latory storm. In effect, the intensity andduration of that storm event is transposedover a watershed to determine the extentof flooding that would occur in that wa-tershed during that storm event. Develop-ment is prohibited or discouraged fromtaking place within that flood line. Thisapproach by the province, in restrictingdevelopment within the floodplain hasbeen borne out in comparisons betweensignificant storm events in Ontario andother jurisdictions. A well documentedstudy comparing flooding in Ontario andMichigan found that although Michigansustained extensive damage and sufferedloss of life, Ontario had, during that sametime period, higher flood yields. Eventhough Ontario’s yields were higher theprovince recorded a small fraction ofMichigan’s damages. The difference indamages was estimated to be approxi-mately $500,000 in Ontario compared to$310,000,000 in Michigan.

Controlling DevelopmentThe Province of Ontario through the

Provincial Policy Statement identifies theimportance of restricting developmentwithin floodplains and hazardous landsthrough Part 3 of the policy statementdealing with Natural Hazards. Conserva-tion authorities represent the provincialinterest in matters of natural hazards at thelocal or municipal level in dealing withdevelopment applications.

A conservation authority’s regulation forflood plains and fill-regulated areas (e.g.valley lands and wetlands) also deals withthe control of pollution and conservationof land as they may be affected by devel-opment. Conservation of land within thecontext of a conservation authority regula-tion includes preserving the ecological in-tegrity of, for example, a valley system.

Changes to the Conservation Authori-ties Act in 1999 resulted in the develop-ment of a Generic Regulation to be usedby all conservation authorities to ensuremore consistency among their individualregulations. In May 2004, the Province ofOntario enacted Ontario Regulation97/04 entitled, “Development, Interfer-ence with Wetlands & Alterations toShorelines and Watercourses Regulation.”This provides for the regulation of all wa-

tercourses, either permanent or intermit-tent, floodplains and meander belts (of wa-tercourses), erosion hazards, shorelines,wetlands and associated lands and otherhazardous lands (e.g. areas of karst topog-raphy). Conservation authorities had twoyears to bring their individual regulationsinto conformity with the Generic Regula-tion, which each conservation authority inthe province has done as of May 2006.

Changes to the Act and the implemen-tation of the Generic Regulation and the

municipalities to provide expert advice ondevelopment applications as they may af-fect natural heritage systems and the sign-ing of agreements with the Department ofFisheries and Oceans to protect fish habi-tat. Conservation authorities take an ac-tive role with their municipal partners indeveloping subwatershed studies and im-plementing recommended strategies aslands are urbanized.

The Federal Fisheries Act has becomemuch more prominent in the last numberof years in protecting fish habitat that maybe affected by development. It should benoted that the Act is not new as it was firstpassed in 1868. Most conservation au-thorities have formed partnerships throughagreements with the Department of Fish-eries and Oceans to screen developmentapplications for impacts to fish habitatwith the guiding principle of no net lossto fish habitat. What is important to un-derstand is the definition for fish habitatwithin the Federal Fisheries Act:

“Spawning grounds and nursery, rearing,food supply, migration and other areas onwhich fish depend directly or indirectly inorder to carry out their life processes.”

A watercourse does not have to con-tain fish in it to be considered fish habitator have permanent standing water. An in-termittent watercourse that does not havefish in it yet contributes a food supply tofish is considered fish habitat. Section 35(1) of the Federal Fisheries Act prohibitsthe harmful alteration, disruption or de-struction of fish habitat (HADD) withoutauthorization by the Department of Fish-eries and Oceans. Contravention of Sec-tion 35 (1) may result in a fine of$1,000,000 and three years in prison.

Low Water Response TeamsMost conservation authorities have de-

veloped well-rounded programs over theyears in caring for the health of their wa-tersheds through restoration initiatives;acquisition of significant natural heritageareas; provision of open space recreationalopportunities; stewardship initiatives withprivate landowners; providing assistanceprograms to landowners; establishing en-vironmental monitoring programs; keymessaging to the public on environmental

associated individual conservation author-ity regulations have essentially placed allnatural hazards as identified in the Pro-vincial Policy Statement under the regu-lations of a conservation authority.Development taking place within an arearegulated by a conservation authority re-quires permission from that conservationauthority. Violations of the regulation canresult in fines of up to $10,000 or threemonths in prison. Further, judgments canresult in significant restoration costs.

The regulations, in addition to protect-ing against natural hazards, also allow forthe protection of watercourses, valleylands and wetlands. Coupled with this arewatershed studies undertaken by conser-vation authorities to identify restorationinitiatives and opportunities to protect andenhance watercourses, valley lands,wetlands and other natural heritage fea-tures and to look at strategies for naturalheritage systems that should be protectedfor the long term.

Protecting Fish HabitatConservation authorities have also

formed partnerships with other agenciesfor the protection of natural features andhabitats. This includes the signing ofMemorandums of Understanding with

A watercourse does not have to con-tain fish in it to be considered fishhabitat or have permanent stand-ing water. An intermittent water-course that does not have fish in ityet contributes a food supply to fishis considered fish habitat.


matters; advocating for environmental ini-tiatives and implementing specific pro-grams to address the needs of theirwatersheds.

An example of specific watershed pro-grams includes the development of localLow Water Response Teams by most con-servation authorities to deal with droughtconditions within their watersheds. Theprograms were developed from measuresundertaken by the province in the late1990s in response to low precipitation.The programs are basically voluntary innature to initiate actions to address lowwater conditions in streams or rivers andgroundwater tables. The programs use in-dicators of precipitation and streamflowmeasured against normal averages. Threedifferent levels of conditions are consid-ered reflecting prolonged periods with lit-tle or no precipitation and correspondingreductions in streamflows. Initial actionsinclude voluntary reductions in water use

with the most extreme level (Level III) po-tentially resulting in regulation of waterrestrictions by provincial agencies. Thetypical Low Water Response Teams thatare formed include representatives frommunicipalities, provincial agencies, the ag-ricultural community, sportsmen associa-tions, golf courses, aggregate operatorsand the water bottling industry. The teamswill meet to review low water conditions;communication action plans to landown-ers and water conservation recommenda-tions.

Source Protection InitiativesThe contamination of the water supply

in the Town of Walkerton in 2000 has ledto the province looking at protecting drink-ing water supplies at its source. Conser-vation authorities have been identified asplaying a key role in the development ofsource protection plans to protect munici-pal drinking water supplies. Technical

teams have been formed in watershed re-gions to gather data and information incharacterizing the watersheds for thepreparation of source water protectionplans. The information gathered from ex-isting studies and through new studies hashelped all conservation authorities gain abetter understanding of the dynamics oftheir watersheds and the impacts of watertaking on surface and groundwater sup-plies. Shortly, Source Water ProtectionCommittees will be formed for each wa-tershed region to prepare assessment re-ports for their watersheds and ultimatelysource water protection plans to ensure thelong-term protection of drinking watersupplies.

Minimizing Sediment LoadingA continuing problem in protecting

water resources has been attempting tocontrol sediment loading to watercoursesparticularly from construction and de-

Flood Control Then Flood Control Now

Intake Solution, Sample 1 Intake Solution, Sample 2


velopment activities. Section 36 (1) of theFederal Fisheries Act states that “no per-son shall deposit or permit the deposit ofa deleterious substance into water fre-quented by fish.” The release of sedimentto a watercourse is considered a deleteri-ous substance by the Department of Fish-eries and Oceans and there have been welldocumented cases of substantial fines lev-ied for violation of the Act relating to therelease of sediment particularly resultingfrom construction activities.

Excess sediment can have impacts onfish through abrasion of their gill mem-branes and suffocating of their eggs. Sedi-ment can also carry toxins, bacteria andexcess nutrients and can result in the de-pletion of oxygen within a water body.Physically, excess sediment can affectflooding, fill in wetlands and influence thegeomorphic stability of a watercoursechannel.

Fish are typically stressed where totalsuspended solids (TSS) exceed levels of200 mg/L for prolonged periods. Studieson construction sites in Piedmont, Ver-mont show the benefits of having erosionand sediment control practices in place inrelation to concentrations of sediment:

Pre-construction(background level): 25 mg/L

Post construction: 50 mg/L

Erosion & SedimentControls: 283 mg/L

Erosion Controls Only: 680 mg/L

No Erosion or SedimentControls: 4145 mg/L

Studies undertaken more recently in theToronto area have shown similar results.

Typical factors contributing to prob-lems on construction sites relate to lackof phasing during clearing and grading;long lags between soil disturbance andstabilization; unnecessary clearing of sen-sitive areas such as riparian buffers, steepslopes and wetlands; inadequate mainte-nance of sediment controls; poor field in-spection practices and enforcement oferosion and sediment control plans.

Erosion and Sediment Control Plans aretypically required by conservation authori-ties through approvals associated with theirregulations or by municipalities as condi-tions of development through the planningprocess. Recently the conservation authori-ties within the Greater Toronto Area haveproduced an Erosion andSediment Control Guide forUrban Construction (De-cember 2006). The purposeof the guide is to improvethe practice of sedimentcontrol, ensure that a well-defined process is inplace and ensure thatErosion and SedimentControl plans are pre-pared, implementedand enforced. Theguide stresses the im-portance of erosion preven-tion. It is intended for contractors,consultants, developers/owners, govern-ment agencies and government inspectors.Current erosion and sediment control prac-tices and methods are illustrated. More in-formation on the document and up-to-dateinformation on sediment and erosion con-trol is at www.sustainabletechnologies.ca.

Water TakingsA Permit to Take Water (PTTW) is re-

quired from the Ministry of the Envi-ronment where the taking of water froma surface or groundwater source ex-ceeds 50,000 litres per day (10,000 gal-lons). In recent years, the Ministry ofthe Environment has initiated new wa-ter conservation requirements for per-mits to take water. A new classificationsystem has been introduced that placestakings in categories as to their poten-tial for causing adverse environmentalimpacts. There is a greater emphasis onmaintaining data on the taking of wateron a daily basis and requirements formonitoring and reporting on an annualbasis. Water takings in high use water-sheds can be refused. Conservation au-thorities have always been concernedwith the taking of water within their wa-tersheds and the cumulative impactsthat can affect the aquatic environment.While the Ministry of the Environment

through their PTTW controls the actualtaking of water, conservation authori-ties can influence the water takingsthrough their regulatory control on thestructures that are required to facilitatethe water taking.

In some watersheds, strategies havebeen developed that set thresholds be-

low which water can-not be taken. Inpermitting the intakestructures, the conser-vation authority can es-tablish the setting of theintake to ensure that wa-ter is not taken during pe-riods of low flow wherethe taking would affect theestablished threshold forthat watercourse. In dealingwith developments such asgolf courses, new golfcourses and changes in de-

signs to older golf courses, designers havelooked at retaining more runoff from over-land flow into larger irrigation reservoirs.This ensures that there is less reliance onwater taking, particularly during droughtor periods of low precipitation. In manycases, these reservoirs are large enoughto supply other ponds scattered through-out the course that are in place for aes-thetics or “water hazards” rather than forirrigation purposes. With many of thesenew designs or re-designs, conservationauthorities will work with the Ministry ofthe Environment and the applicant to en-sure that any water taking from a water-course will not result in environmentimpacts by constructing the intakes so thatwater can only be harvested during highflows.

In summary, the main role and man-date of a conservation authority is to pro-vide for programs that protect and enhancethe natural resources of its watershed andto provide for the protection of propertyand life through regulatory control pertain-ing to natural hazards. Hopefully, this ar-ticle has helped explain some of thehistory of the conservation authoritymovement and some of the tools, pro-grams and partnerships that are utilizedby conservation authorities to fulfill theirrole and mandate. ♦


WATER EFFICIENCY IN HALTON REGION

W ith the increased tempera-tures experienced duringsummer periods, water utili-ties across Ontario face anincrease of peak in water

servicing demands attributed to recrea-tional tasks such as car washing and fill-ing of swimming pools, seasonal irrigationof lawns and gardens, and increased per-sonal water consumption. Should periodsof peak consumption persist and recov-ery of water distribution system reservoirsbe unachievable or overall system pump-ing capacities thresholds be threatened,many water service utilities are requiredto put in place watering bans and/or re-strictions to ensure adequate levels ofwater are reserved for residential and busi-ness based consumption requirements andfire protection purposes.

Residential water consumption can asmuch as double in summer periods. It isin the best interest of water service utili-ties to limit the operational impacts ofunnecessary treatment when looking to theadded costs of additional treatment chemi-cals needs, energy used in treatment and

distribution, and the secondary treatmentof added wastewater volumes experiencedunder increased water peak consumptionperiods. As such, the introduction of nu-merous municipal based water efficiencyprograms and policies have fast becomethe most cost effective and environmen-tally friendly means in achieving reduc-tions, and creating additional capacity, tolimit the operational impacts experiencedduring peak summer periods.

In working to reduce the impacts ofpeak seasonal water servicing demandsand to demonstrate environmental stew-ardship of the region’s water resources,Halton Region has employed a combina-tion of demand side management, publiceducation and bylaw based water conser-vation measures.

Water Balance AuditsAs part of Halton’s demand side man-

agement initiatives, an annual Water Bal-ance Audit is completed to assess theoverall efficiency of each of the region’swater distribution systems through a com-parison of water production, billed water

consumption and the calculation of watervolumes attributed to non-metered tasks.In response to levels of lost water identi-fied through the audit, Halton has em-ployed an ongoing leak detection programto assess daily water flows into areas ofsuspected loss and to pinpoint water leak-age in each water distribution system.Further to leak detection studies, demandside management initiatives have alsotranscended to include the region offer-ing voluntary water use audits to largeIndustrial, Commercial and Institutional(ICI) water users within the Halton Hillsgroundwater based communities of Actonand Georgetown. Through this initiative,representatives of the Halton water con-servation program assess how water is uti-lized at each site, and following a flowmonitoring period at the site, provide adetailed report of possible measures whichcould be undertaken to limit the use ofexcess volumes of water observed.

Educating the PublicTo promote public knowledge of wa-

ter conservation practices and programs

WAYNE GALLIHER, WATER/WASTEWATER OUTREACH COORDINATOR, HALTON REGION

Peak Seasonal Water Servicing Demands


within the community, Halton staff hascontinually been involved with commu-nity based outreach events throughoutHalton Region. In continuing with waterconservation based public education,Halton Region and Conservation Haltonpartnered to provide the inaugural HaltonChildren’s Water Festival in Septemberof 2006 at Kelso Conservation Area inMilton, Ontario. Throughout the three-day event, over 3,000 grades 3, 4 and 5students from across Halton Region par-ticipated in 56 interactive Ontario curricu-lum based activity centres focused on themain festival themes of water conserva-tion, water health and safety, water pro-tection, water science and technology andwater stewardship. With the high successof the inaugural event, planning of thesecond Halton Children’s Water Festivalis currently underway. The 2007 eventplanned for September 25, 26, and 27,2007, will again be held at Kelso Con-servation Area and feature over 50 inter-active activity centres for grades 2, 3, 4and 5 Halton Catholic District School

Board and Halton District School Boardstudents.

Implementing BylawsThe third measure used for water effi-

ciency is the Halton Water Use Bylaw(Bylaw 42-04). This bylaw distinguishespermitted usages of water, provides speci-fication as to qualified personnel who mayoperate water system infrastructure, speci-fication regarding the components of wa-ter system infrastructure, and outlineswater usage violations and penalties un-der violation of the bylaw. In addition tothe terms listed above, the Halton WaterUsage Bylaw also provides the ability toimplement water usage bans, restrictionsand watering policies. With reference tothis, Halton Region introduces the odd andeven day watering policy each spring tolimit excessive levels of irrigation as anindustry best practice in water resourcemanagement and stewardship.

Further InitiativesIn continuing to employ water effi-

ciency measures, Halton Region is cur-rently working towards the introductionof numerous programs including a resi-dential toilet rebate pilot program, anICI pre-rinse spray valve replacementprogram, school based water andwastewater Ontario curriculum basedoutreach program, and a landscape as-sessment program to promote outdoorwater efficiency through the use ofdrought tolerant and native plants inhome landscaping.

Furthermore, Halton Region has cur-rently started development of the HaltonWater Efficiency Master Plan to providea measurable, sustainable and achievablewater efficiency strategy. The plan, uponendorsement by Halton Regional Coun-cil, will see the introduction of an en-hanced water conservation based programstrategy and the introduction of an over-all water efficiency reduction goal to beachieved over the next decade.

For more information on the HaltonWater Conservation Program, please visitwww.halton.ca/waterconservation. ♦


DEVELOPING AN IRRIGATION BASELINE

Using Water to Ensure SafetyA critical water use balance is essen-

tial to maintain a healthy, safe and func-tional turf sports field. Under irrigating asports field may result in a playing sur-face that becomes dry, compacted and lesssafe for athletes. Sports turf managers re-quire historical water use baselines whichprovide a datum to measure from whileimplementing higher water managementtechnologies.

Daily Peak DemandsDuring the summer months, many cit-

ies and towns across North America ex-perience daily peak demands whichapproach the rated capacity of water dis-tribution infrastructure. In critical situa-tions, this limits available water resourcesfor emergency response and fire protec-tion. While outdoor water use bans andrestriction programs are created to de-crease daily peak demands, these waterprograms are often in conflict with therequired water to ensure athlete safety,functional turf sustainability and Inte-grated Pest Management program sup-port.

Implementing the Water Efficiency PlanAn effective Water Efficiency Plan

should separate the Water Efficiency Pro-gram for Sports Fields from the Outdoor

Landscape Water Use Program. It onlymakes sense, since one is to provide a safesports environment for the public whilethe other functions to achieve beautifica-tion. Since irrigation is generally consid-ered a high water use sector, golf coursesuperintendents and sports field manag-ers should have strategic influence on thedevelopment of water efficiency plans.The double win opportunity would be apartnership between the city and the wa-

ter purveyor (often the re-gion) to promote water sav-ing incentives including ir-rigation system performanceauditing, training, technol-ogy upgrades and water usemonitoring. For most cities,if water efficiency programsare not implemented, theywill require major infrastruc-ture expansion to accommo-date future populationgrowth.

Justifying Water UsageJustifying water use for ir-

rigation is based on the areaof playing surface multiplied

by the depth of water required. To imple-ment water efficiency, it is essential everysports turf manager understands:

• soil water holding capacity• drainage• infiltration rates• compaction• evapotranspiration rates

A recommended resource on these top-ics is Understanding Turf Managementwritten by Dr. Robert Sheard and pub-lished by the Sports Turf Association.

Typical Irrigation Baseline vs. ETManagement

The majority of existing irrigation con-trollers rely on a weekly schedule of irri-gation cycles that remain fixed until thesports turf manager adjusts them. Self

adjusting water efficient irrigation control-lers take into account both on-site rainfalland changing weather. Case studies haveshown such automatic adjustments canaccount for seasonal water savings up to30% or higher. Irrigation is only requiredto make up for the lack of timely and ef-fective rainfall. For example, an effectiverainfall of 10 mm on a 6,000 m2 soccerfield is worth $120 if during a dry periodthe same amount was added by irrigationand the water cost was $2 per m3.

Record Keeping is EssentialMeasurement of the irrigation system’s

performance whether a golf course, sportsfield or a commercial site, is the criticalstep in identifying baseline water use.Personal auditing experience proves thatno one can judge with accuracy the effi-ciency of any system until it is measuredprofessionally.

Verify Water Usage With DedicatedFlow Meters

Dedicated water meters are excellentwater usage management tools and takethe estimation out of volume calculations.The strategic key to implementing anywater efficiency plan is to first establishand provide the historical water use base-line. This can be done by monitoring adedicated water meter on a monthly basisand by providing a performance audit tothe existing system.

Historical Water Use Baseline (HWUB)The HWUB for any irrigation system

is affected by:

1. Original irrigation design (ideally doneby Certified Irrigation Designer independ-ent from the sale or installation of anyproduct).2. Original irrigation installation (ideallyinstalled by a Certified Irrigation Contrac-tor with same project experience and in-spected by a certified designer).3. Maintenance of system (routinelychecked and repaired).

ARTICLE & PHOTOGRAPHS BY GREGORY SNAITH, P.ENG., ENVIROIRRIGATION™ ENGINEERING INC.


4. Management of system (ideally by im-plementing monitoring and seasonalchanges using Smart Water ApplicationTechnologies).

Once a water use baseline has been es-tablished it can then be utilized as a da-tum against the following:

1. Measure baseline against seasonal ETrequirements (usually measured in mm perday, week or month).2. Measure baseline against expected wa-ter efficiency technology performance (itis realistic to expect a rotor zone to oper-ate at an overall efficiency of 75%).3. Measure baseline against goals and/orobjectives of a Water Efficiency Plan (thegoal may be to decrease the water use bya realistic 20-30%).

The Irrigation Association, consultant,manufacturer, contractor and the distribu-tor are all key team members playing theirappropriate roles in providing technicaland educational support for all irrigation

systems. No matter how simple or com-plicated an irrigation system is, one thingis for certain, it is very difficult to meas-ure improved water efficiency practices

without first establishing the water usebaseline. Remember, you cannot effec-tively manage that which has not been ef-fectively measured. ♦


USE IT OR LOSE IT: BMPs FOR WATER MANAGEMENT

Use it wisely or lose it should bethe real slogan here. The goal isto provide turf with the rightamount of water when it is neededand at the lowest cost and the least

impact on the environment. There arenegative consequences when turf receivestoo little or too much water. Not enoughwater can result in drought stress, thinning,localized dry spots and dormancy. Toomuch water, on the other hand, can resultin shallow root growth, increased soilcompaction, susceptibility to disease,leaching of nutrients, wet wilt and a wasteof water due to runoff or drainage.

Turf & Water InteractionsA turfgrass plant is composed of 90%

water. Water is also needed in every stageof plant growth. If water levels within aplant get below a critical level the plantwill die. As little as a 10% reduction inturf water content may be sufficient tocause death. Water is needed for photo-synthesis, cell division, temperature con-trol and nutrient movement. The equationfor photosynthesis showing the role ofwater (H

20) is below:

6CO2 + 6H

20 C

6H

12O

6 + 60

2

Photosynthesis and cell division ac-count for 1% of a plant’s water needs. Themajority of a plant’s water needs are fortemperature control and nutrient move-ment and these account for 99% of a

plant’s water need. Allnutrients are moved

into plants throughthe soil solution.This nutrient richsolution is taken

up by the roots andtransported via the xy-

lem in solution. This move-ment occurs from the roots to all parts ofthe plant.

Cooling of turfgrass plants is madepossible because of water loss from theplant through transpiration (as a vapour).

Ninety percent of the water loss is throughthe stomates. In a turf system, water is alsolost from the soil through evaporation.There is a combined loss of water fromthe soil by evaporation and by the plantthrough transpiration and this is calledevapotranspiration (ET). ET is difficult tomeasure, but it can be estimated. It is in-fluenced by sunlight, soil and air tempera-ture, relative humidity, wind speed,turfgrass species, height of cut of turf andrainfall. It is measured in inches/day,inches/week or mm/day. Evapotrans-piration is used to calculate plant waterrequirements. It is estimated with a devicecalled an evaporation pan. This gives theamount of water that evaporates from aflat shiny surface. It must then be adjustedfor each crop and for each microclimate.One equation that is used to estimate plantwater requirements is below:

PRW = ET x Kc x K

mc

PRW = plant water requirementET = evapotranspirationK

c = crop coefficient

Kmc

is the microclimate factor

Crop coefficients vary with each typeof grass species and the height at whichthey are maintained. Most crop coeffi-cients are based on seasonal averages.Some cool season turfgrass crop coeffi-cients are listed in Table 1 (see insert).

Microclimates may also vary from areato area and for the purpose of this article,from sports field to sports field. Themicroclimate factor is a correction factorthat relates to things such as proximity tobuildings, paved surfaces, slope, shade andwind. A microclimate factor in a full sunsports field with heat reflecting and heatgenerating buildings nearby that is ex-posed to the prevailing winds would havea high K

mc and a microclimate with shade

and no wind would have a low Kmc

. Ingeneral there are three K

mc microclimate

correction factors: high = 1.4, medium =1 and low = 0.5.

An Alternative Method of EstimatingEvapotranspiration

Some work done at the CambridgeResearch Station by Dr. Robert Sheardcame up with a way to estimate panevapotranspiration based on observedweather conditions. This is an alternativemethod to having your own evaporationpan, which is easier, but may be a bit lessaccurate. Table 2 gives the estimated panET in millimeters based on weather ob-servations at 1:00 pm.

A combination of the visual estimatesof humidity and wind in addition to an ob-served temperature gives the estimate ofpan evaporation. This then needs to be cor-rected for grass with the season correc-tion factors found in Table 3.

ET calculation example:Date – JulySun – SunnyTemperature – 27ºCHumidity – lowWind – lowEstimated pan evaporation from Table 2(7.5) x seasonal correction factor fromTable 3 (.75) = estimate of grass ET (5.5mm) for that day.

Soil and Water InteractionsThe amount of water a plant needs is

influenced by soil particle size, soil parti-cle size distribution (soil classification)and root zone depth. Soils can be classi-fied according to their particle size intosand, silt and clay. Sands can be furtherdivided into five categories: very fine sand,fine sand, medium sand, coarse sand andvery coarse sand. Table 4 shows the parti-cle size diameter of coarse sand down tosilt and clay.

For every field that you are responsi-ble for irrigating within your municipal-ity, it is very important to know the soilclassification or particle size distributionof that field. Without this information, itis almost impossible to accurately deliverthe right amount of irrigation. One wayof obtaining this information is to have a

PAM CHARBONNEAU, TURFGRASS SPECIALIST, OMAFRA

TABLES/FIGURES★★as an insert

IMPORTANT

AVAILABLE

light➞


soil laboratory run a soil texture analysisof every field. This is a useful exercise andonly needs to be done once in the life of asports field. A cheaper and quicker methodis to simply use the mason jar test and asoil texture triangle. Just follow the stepsbelow. Figure 1 shows a mason jar withroughly 80% sand and 20% silt.

1) Fill a mason jar 1/3 full of a randomsample of soil from one field.2) Pack it down and mark the level with apermanent marker.3) Add water to fill the jar 3/4 full.4) Shake vigorously.5) Let sit for 5 minutes.6) Measure the sand layer (the one on thebottom of the jar) as a percent of the depthof the original soil.7) Measure the silt layer (the one abovethe sand layer) as a percent of the depthof the original soil.8) Add the percent sand and percent silttogether and subtract that from 100 to getpercent clay (the clay is still suspended inthe water).

loamy sand area of the triangle. Soil tex-ture affects plant available water and wa-ter infiltration rates. Both of these areimportant factors in determining efficientirrigation scheduling.

Infiltration rate is a measure of howquickly water enters soil. It is greatest atthe beginning of an irrigation event or rain-fall event and again it is influenced by soiltexture. Infiltration rates of each soil oreach field can be measured in one of twoways. A double ring infiltrometer is themost accurate way of measuring infiltra-tion rates. Another way is to simply puton the irrigation system and measure thetime until runoff. Infiltration rates can alsobe estimated if you know the soil texture.Table 5 gives a list of the basic infiltrationrates of six different soil classifications.

Another important aspect of a soil isits available water. This is the amount ofwater stored in a soil between field capac-ity and permanent wilt. Another way tothink of it is the amount of water that theplant can extract from the soil. In fine tex-tured soils such as a clay loam, some ofthe water is held so tightly onto the soilparticles that it is not available to the plant.In a coarse textured soil, some of the wa-ter applied to a soil is not available to aplant because it is lost through drainage.Table 6 gives the available water in mmbased on soil texture. If you are using thecalculation based on soil texture, the plantavailable water is the available water mul-tiplied by the active root zone depth. Thereare two instruments that can be used inthe field to measure plant available water:a time domain reflectometry probe (TDRprobe) and a frequency domainreflectometry probe (Theta probe). Bothof these methods measure volumetric wa-ter content.

Plant available water is the availablewater which can be measured in the fieldor it can be calculated based on soil tex-ture. To calculate plant available water:

Plant available water = available water(from Table 6) x root zone depth

Example:Sandy loam soil with a 300 mm root zonePlant Available Water (PAW) = (availablewater from Table 6) 0.12 mm water/mm

soil x (soil root zone depth) 300 mm soilPAW = 36 mm water

Another important concept in the fieldof irrigation is how much water can bedepleted from a soil before there are ad-verse affects to the plant. This is calledthe maximum allowable depletion. In gen-eral, it is agreed upon that if plant avail-able water is allowed to deplete to 50%before re-applying water that there will beno harmful effects on the turfgrass plant.

Below is an example to help put all ofthe pieces together. Table 7 shows an ex-ample of a water budget. The assumptionsin the example are:

• A sandy loam root zone• Rooting depth 300 m• Plant available water is 300 mm x 0.12mm/mm = 36 mm• Want to irrigate when 50% of availablemoisture is depleted (ie. at 18 mm)• Assume field capacity on day 1 = 36mm plant available water

This example shows that this particu-lar field, when ET rates are high, the fieldneeds only to be irrigated every second orthird day.

Sprinkler PerformanceNow that the plant side is taken care

of, let us look at irrigation system perform-ance. In order to irrigate efficiently, youmust have an irrigation system that is per-forming properly. Irrigation system per-formance can be determined by anirrigation audit. This can be done in-houseor you can hire an irrigation auditor to per-form it. An irrigation audit will ensure thatall sprinkler heads are level and that thepressure is relatively uniform. It will alsodetermine the distribution uniformity(DU) of the irrigation system and this iscalculated by measuring catch device vol-umes in the field. An irrigation audit willalso determine the precipitation rate (PR).This is the rate at which water is appliedper unit time (in/hour or mm/hour) and itis often referred to as the application rate.With this information you can determineyour run time multiplier and finally yourmaximum run time cycle.

Figure 1: Mason Jar Test

Now that you know that you have an80% sand and 20% silt soil you can go tothe soil texture triangle (Figure 2) to de-termine the soil classification. Follow thepercent sand arrow over to 80 and followthe % silt down to 20 and follow each ofthose lines to the point where they inter-sect. In our example, we end up in the


Irrigation SchedulingThe next question should be “How long

do I have to run my irrigation system todeliver 14 mm or 24 mm of irrigation?”.If you have performed an irrigation audit,you can easily determine your run time.To determine this you need to know thefollowing:

• run time multiplier (RTM)• distribution uniformity of the lowerquarter (DU) (from irrigation audit)• precipitation rate (PR) (from irrigationaudit)• base run time( RT

b) RT

b = plant water

requirement/precipitation rate x 60.

With the above information you can then:• calculate the adjusted run time (RT

adj).

RTadj

= RTb x RTM

• calculate the maximum run time/cycle= infiltration rate/precipitation rate x 60

The run time multiplier is a correctionfactor that is used to compensate for non-uniformity of distribution of an irrigationsystem. Run time multipliers can be foundin the Certified Golf Irrigation Auditorworkbook put out by the Irrigation Asso-ciation and they can also be found on theinternet. The infiltration rate can either be

estimated based on soil texture or you candetermine it with a double ring infil-trometer as discussed earlier in the article.

Example run time calculations based onthe water budget example above:• Base run time RT

b = PWR/PR (24 mm/

15 mm (from irrigation audit) x 60) = 96minutes• Adjusted run time RT

b x RTM (96 x 1.22

= 117 minutes)• Infiltration rate – 14 mm (from Table 5)• Maximum run time/cycle• Infiltration rate/precipitation rate x 60 =14 mm per hr/15 mm x 60 = 56 minutes• The maximum time this zone should berun to avoid runoff is 56 minutes. Basi-cally, two run cycles of roughly 56 min-utes will deliver the required amount ofwater to recharge the root zone in thiswater budget example.

Irrigation ChecklistThis checklist below gives a quick over-

view of the information and/or equipmentneeded to be able to apply the right amountof water to turf.

1) Determine soil texture of each irrigatedfield (mason jar or lab).2) Make note of the infiltration rate (based

on soil texture, double ring infiltrometeror observation of time to runoff) and avail-able water (based on soil texture) and rootzone depth for each field.3) Calculate plant available water = avail-able water x root zone depth.4) Perform an irrigation audit to determineprecipitation rate and distribution uni-formity.5) Keep track of ET rates based on tem-perature, humidity and wind.6) Have a method for measuring rainfalland a rain shut off feature.7) Use the water budget to schedule irri-gation.8) Use run time calculations to determinehow long to water.9) Schedule to water only in early morn-ing (low wind and less evaporation).10) Ground truth by inspecting fields tomake sure the turf is getting adequate wa-ter and that there are no over-watered, un-der-watered areas or localized dry spots.11) Have a dedicated knowledgeable staffperson in charge of irrigation.12) Don’t forget other cultural practicesfor maintaining healthy turf:• Mow as high as possible and frequentlyenough to maintain a stress-free plant.• Alleviate compaction (core aeration, etc.)which helps maximize infiltration rate.• Control thatch.• Fertilize according to the plant’s needs.

AbbreviationsDU = disribution uniformityET = evapotranspirationK

c = crop coefficient

Kmc

= microclimate factorPAW = plant available waterPR = precipitation ratePWR = plant water requirementsRTM = run time multiplierRT

adj = adjusted run time

RTb = base run time

References1) Carey, K. C., 2001. Irrigation Schedul-ing Principles: Tools for Dry Times. SportsTurf Newsletter, Vol. 14, pp. 6-7.2) Irrigation Association, 2004. CertifiedGolf Irrigation Auditor, pp. 65-82.3) Sheard, R.W., 1992. A Water Budgetfor Irrigation Scheduling. Sports TurfNewsletter, Vol. 5, pp. 5-7. ♦

Envi

roIrr

igat

ion

Inc.

2nd WATER WORKSHOP Proactive Water Management for Sports...

Documents

Transcript of 2nd WATER WORKSHOP Proactive Water Management for Sports...