Search Ask the Experts
Q/A Archives
April 2008
| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| « Mar | May » | |||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | |
| 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 |
| 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 |
| 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 |
| 28 | 29 | 30 | ||||
Sign-up for RSS
subsurface irrigation vs overhead systems
Posted by Jane A. from Wimberley,, TX, US on April 21, 2008
We are currently evaluating alternatives to irrigate our coastal bermuda field in the Texas Hill Country. Subsurface irrigation seems logical as it promotes the least “waste” of water… however, our soils are clay-loam, and may not allow sufficient movement of water from the 12″ deep tapes with the normal spacing of approximately 40″. Since we seem to be in experimental territory, we are seeking the opinion of as many experts as possible… including those with tons of experience and strong opinions [smile].
"I visited with several coworkers about this and our consensus is that there would be several problems," says Gerald Evers, a pasture management specialist with Texas AgriLife Research and Extension Center, Texas A&M. "A bermudagrass trial in Uvalde, TX, had problems with rodents chewing the underground drip line seeking the moisture. When there is a break in the drip line one has to dig to find and repair it. Salt in the water could stop up the emitters. The 40" spacings are not a problem because bermudagrass roots can grow down to 6-10' deep if the soil is that deep. Because of the expense, we would suggest doing an acre or two to see how it works before doing a large area."
