IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/iwt/jounls/h049626.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of hydrologic impact of an irrigation curtailment program using Landsat satellite data

Author

Listed:
  • Velpuri, Naga Manohar
  • Senay, G. B.
  • Schauer, M.
  • Garcia, C. A.
  • Singh, R. K.
  • Friedrichs, M.
  • Kagone, S.
  • Haynes, J.
  • Conlon, T.

Abstract

Upper Klamath Lake (UKL) is the source of the Klamath River that flows through southern Oregon and northern California. The UKL Basin provides water for 81,000+ ha (200,000+ acres) of irrigation on the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Klamath Project located downstream of the UKL Basin. Irrigated agriculture also occurs along the tributaries to UKL. During 2013–2016, water rights calls resulted in various levels of curtailment of irrigation diversions from the tributaries to UKL. However, information on the extent of curtailment, how much irrigation water was saved, and its impact on the UKL is unknown. In this study, we combined Landsat-based actual evapotranspiration (ETa) data obtained from the Operational Simplified Surface Energy Balance model with gridded precipitation and U.S. Geological Survey station discharge data to evaluate the hydrologic impact of the curtailment program. Analysis was performed for 2004, 2006, 2008–2010 (base years), and 2013–2016 (target years) over irrigated areas above UKL. Our results indicate that the savings from the curtailment program over the June to September time period were highest during 2013 and declined in each of the following years. The total on-field water savings was approximately 60 hm3 in 2013 and 2014, 44 hm3 in 2015, and 32 hm3 in 2016 (1 hm3 = 10,000 m3 or 810.7 ac-ft). The instream water flow changes or extra water available were 92, 68, 45, and 26 hm3, respectively, for 2013, 2014, 2015, and 2016. Highest water savings came from pasture and wetlands. Alfalfa showed the most decline in water use among grain crops. The resulting extra water available from the curtailment contributed to a maximum of 19% of the lake inflows and 50% of the lake volume. The Landsat-based ETa and other remote sensing datasets used in this study can be used to monitor crop water use at the irrigation district scale and to quantify water savings as a result of land-water management changes.

Suggested Citation

  • Velpuri, Naga Manohar & Senay, G. B. & Schauer, M. & Garcia, C. A. & Singh, R. K. & Friedrichs, M. & Kagone, S. & Haynes, J. & Conlon, T., 2020. "Evaluation of hydrologic impact of an irrigation curtailment program using Landsat satellite data," Papers published in Journals (Open Access), International Water Management Institute, pages 34(8):1697-.
    • Handle: RePEc:iwt:jounls:h049626
    DOI: 10.1002/hyp.13708
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/hyp.13708
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/hyp.13708?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ji, Lei & Senay, Gabriel B. & Friedrichs, MacKenzie & Schauer, Matthew & Boiko, Olena, 2021. "Characterization of water use and water balance for the croplands of Kansas using satellite, climate, and irrigation data," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 256(C).
    2. Bawa, Arun & Senay, Gabriel B. & Kumar, Sandeep, 2022. "Satellite remote sensing of crop water use across the Missouri River Basin for 1986–2018 period," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 271(C).
    3. Wallander, Steven & Hrozencik, Aaron & Aillery, Marcel, 2022. "Irrigation Organizations: Drought Planning and Response," USDA Miscellaneous 316790, United States Department of Agriculture.
    4. Wallander, Steven & Hrozencik, Aaron & Aillery, Marcel, 2022. "Irrigation Organizations: Drought Planning and Response," Economic Brief 327233, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:iwt:jounls:h049626. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chandima Gunadasa (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iwmiclk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.