Like all industries, the irrigation industry leans on certain buzzwords. Terms such as “Flow Management”, “Central Control”, or “Smart Irrigation” are used to set regulations, describe technologies (guilty), and implement services, but they are very rarely defined.
Water management is one such concept. What can be considered true water management? What is the value of a water manager? We sat down with Tom Raden & Jon Peters, two of the irrigation industry’s most respected voices, to get their take.
Tucor: What is water management?
Tom Raden: Here is how I define it: an irrigation manager manages the irrigation delivery system (infrastructure). A water manager manages the amount of water used by a landscape. Sustainable water use – that’s what water management is all about.
Jon Peters: I define it as a professional understanding of irrigation-related supply & demand. A good water manager needs to understand plant water requirements (demand) and apply irrigation to meet that demand.
Tucor: What are the issues you see with the concept of water management in the irrigation industry today?
Tom Raden: I’ll lead with this from Richard Restuccia, widely known as the godfather of water management, “Being a water manager is the worst job you’ll ever have. No one will see value in what you do unless you can quantify what it is that you do”.
If I sit contractors down who claim to do water management, I’ll ask them how many controllers they manage are running in automated or “smart” mode. For a variety of factors, it’s usually about 10%. One of the issues I see is that these companies focus on controller sales rather than water management. That’s where the incentives are, and unless they change, I’m not sure anything will change.
Jon Peters: The term “water manager” is overused in the irrigation industry, creating confusion. It can refer to skilled professional irrigators or people with little knowledge of effective practices. For instance, when I ask contractors how much water they apply to a turf zone, many respond with run times like “10 minutes for sprays, 30 minutes for rotors,” without understanding how this translates to actual water applied, distribution uniformity, or soil absorption, let alone actual plant demand on their site.
Sadly, this lack of expertise makes it hard for clients to distinguish qualified professionals from less capable contractors, and too often this discrepancy undermines the credibility for all of us in the irrigation industry.
Tucor: What benefits can a true water manager provide?
Jon Peters: Professional water management can reduce water use while enhancing plant health. For clients, the benefits are most evident on large sites where water is costly or limited. On these properties, automated irrigation systems can be used to manage many zones efficiently, lowering monthly costs per zone and accelerating the return on investment for the client.
Another benefit of a skilled water manager is to determine the root cause of irrigation problems and offer practical solutions. One common example is sites where brown spots in turf are treated by applying more water, without considering the actual plant needs. A good manager assesses the size of the irrigated area and the water applied, making adjustments to balance the two. By focusing on supply and demand, they can clearly explain to clients that zones receive enough water to stay green, and poor uniformity is the true issue.
I seize these opportunities to teach clients basic irrigation principles. For instance, when a client requests an adjustment to their irrigation, I link the corresponding change in water usage to highlight the impact of adjusting run times or watering frequency.
Tom Raden: My goal is to teach more contractors the basic principles of plant water use and delivery. I consider myself a resource and advisor to clients. I teach contractors to understand what water usage was, will, and should be for a site. For instance, I’ll have a client that wants to extend irrigation by adding an additional day to a program. Part of my job is to get them to get in the water manager mindset – i.e. adding a fourth day to a 3-day-a-week watering schedule increases water usage by 25%.
I also help them with troubleshooting for a given control platform. What does X alert mean, and how can they resolve it?
Tucor: What would you say is your water management philosophy?
Tom Raden: For me, it’s about what is simple and effective. In Nevada, evapotranspiration (“ET”) can be so variable: factors like wind and heat can lead to drastic changes from day to day. I try to avoid tight parameters and manage consistently across controllers in a way that reduces water use.
I also focus on educating customers. I take the time to explain how much water they used & why.
Jon Peters: Again, it’s all about supply meeting demand. I look at the irrigated area and the amount of water it needs to keep the plants healthy. I start by setting the system up to meet peak ET, then use the features available in the control system to dial it back from there. Also, as an agronomist, I prefer deep, infrequent watering whenever local water restrictions or site use allow.
Tucor: As water managers, how do you use irrigation control technology?
Jon Peters: The core principle of water management – matching supply to demand, remains the same, whether someone drags a hose and sprinkler around or uses an advanced control system. The controller’s job is to help manage more sites and zones efficiently. Available control systems vary widely in their ability to contribute to efficient water management due to differences in platforms and available sensors. For effective water management, a controller must support remote management from the start. My next priority is flow monitoring, followed by flow management. Automating adjustments for changes in water demand also expands the irrigated area one manager can oversee. To make these adjustments, I prefer soil moisture sensors, but on-site weather stations are a close second. However, any automated tool can significantly boost efficiency if it is consistent and reliable.
Tom Raden: I use control technology to automate water management without being dogmatic about individual parameters. Every control manufacturer says they have the best ET. Who is truly right? As a water manager, if I know ET is consistent for a given platform, then I can manage it.
I try not to get into the weeds in the algorithms of a specific control platform. There is so much variability from controller to controller. For instance, a control system may have preset settings that set drip zones at a precipitation rate (“PR”) of 1-2 inches/hour. A drip system that is installed perfectly will give you a DU of 90-95%. This never happens – I see PR closer to 0.28 to 0.45 inches/hour for drip. So, if I used those preset values, I wouldn’t be irrigating as I intended.
Another example would be setting plant & soil profiles. Realistically, I can segment a site into ~5 groups. It’s not realistic to set a hydrozone for every specific plant & soil type.
Again, it’s about finding what is simple and effective.
——————————————————-
Jon Peters
Jon has over 33 years of experience in agronomy and irrigation as a technologist, consultant, water manager, and business leader. Jon’s company, Lake City Consulting, supports water management & consulting clients across the western US.
To learn more about Lake City Consulting , visit www.lakecity.id or contact Jon at jon@lakecity.id
Tom Raden
Tom has over 40 years of experience in irrigation as a contractor, water manager, advisor, and business owner. Tom is on the board of the Southern Nevada Irrigation Association and advises irrigation professionals across Nevada via his company, Water Smart Technology Group.
To learn more about Water Smart Technology group, contact Tom at admin@saveyouwater.com