|
| So I decided to try overhead watering to save myself some time. In doing so I wanted to see how much water I was actually using.
Typically I water the plants directly with a soaker attachment. Last year's plants get watered to the drip line and this year's plants just get a general soaking in the center. It takes 8 hours to water these plants but I haven't tracked how much water I use during this time. I plan to do that later next week. Back to overhead watering. It took 15 hours to complete the watering. Basically enough water to get a few inches (or more) worth of soil moist. I used 488 cu. ft. or roughly 3,600 gallons of water. That is unbelievably embarrassing if you ask me. Very curious to how it shakes out the other way around. My inital swag would be half the amount of water. So 1,800 gallons per week could be wasted by me using the overhead watering method. The point of my post? I don't know I guess I just wanted to ramble or perhaps point out that overhead watering appears to be a terrible idea for new plantings. |
Follow-Up Postings:
|
- Posted by wisconsitom 4/5 WI (My Page) on Sat, Jul 21, 12 at 0:37
| Well, yes and no. I noticed on our most recent unbelievably warm night that when I felt foliage of plants, it was hot! Crazy stuff. So if overhead water was also serving to cool things down, that's not really a waste. Just saying........+oM |
|
| Well, sure, it is the least efficient method in terms of water use. That's why drip is used so extensively in places where water supply is really short. But I "cheat" once in a while, too, when I just don't have time, or a couple of days when it was extremely hot, and hook up a small sprinkler to do my container plants. I can't do it very often or very long, or everything would be coated in rust colored lime deposits. I redid my one major planting bed along the side and front of the one house, and hooked it up to drip. What I can tell you about water use by this method versus a sprinkler is that my well pump runs constantly when I use a sprinkler, versus cycling on and off over the course of about 3-4 minutes when I run the drip. So it must be using a lot less water to actually do a larger area than my sprinkler waters. This year is it, I've had it, since I actually didn't even plant a lot of garden space, seeing this coming back in early June. I'm not going to get caught off-guard next year, everything critical is going to be drip-enabled by spring planting season. FWIW, I do fear that this is the "new normal". Not necessarily drought per se, but these bizarre climate swings. Probably be an extremely cold and harsh winter this year. Probably be cold and drenched in rain next summer (especially if I'm ready for it to be dry). And it stinks.
|
|
| Tom, good point and I did notice that myself...that being the foilage was hot at night. denn, for some reason I can't grasp the concept of drip irrigation for getting proper coverage on mass plantings. I might have to google a bit too see the various installs. Here is just a snap shot of maybe 20% of my landscape. I just can't imagine winding hose all throughout there. This is from 2 months ago. The turf looks like death now. |
|
- Posted by ken_adrian z5 (My Page) on Sat, Jul 21, 12 at 13:23
Here is a link that might be useful: 660 feet of supply line for $149
|
| Whaas, actually, based on your photo, I think drip would be EXACTLY what you need. It might take just a bit of experimentation with different emitters to get just the "right" amount of water to each plant. But the way drip is now, it is extremely easy to set up, once you get past the basic feeling of being overwhelmed by so many choices of equipment when you first look at a site like Dripworks dot com. And Ken is absolutely right about installing a perimeter supply system. I did that a number of years ago, and it is a godsend to have spigots every 50-75 feet over a couple of acres. Just don't do what I do every once in a while and forget about it when digging and slice into the line. |
|
| Whaas, actually, based on your photo, I think drip would be EXACTLY what you need. It might take just a bit of experimentation with different emitters to get just the "right" amount of water to each plant. But the way drip is now, it is extremely easy to set up, once you get past the basic feeling of being overwhelmed by so many choices of equipment when you first look at a site like Dripworks dot com. And Ken is absolutely right about installing a perimeter supply system. I did that a number of years ago, and it is a godsend to have spigots every 50-75 feet over a couple of acres. Just don't do what I do every once in a while and forget about it when digging and slice into the line. |
|
- Posted by ken_adrian z5 (My Page) on Sat, Jul 21, 12 at 14:19
| but denn.. this garden is trees.. conifers.. which are trees.. and shrubs ... once established.. they WILL NOT NEED water ... ever ... so the investment in drip would not be recoverable ... IMHO ... but then.. if he is going to continue to build beds.. the drip could be recovered and reused in new beds.. until establishment.. i used the link below.. with a hose connect .. on various plantings .. over the years ... i have seen 250 feet for under $75 .... but the spigots.. the time simply spent dragging.. water filled hose.. i mean really .. its good exercise.. but the mans basic premise.. these last few weeks.. is that it is killing him ... WILL ... insure you only water when they need it.. once out of the blistering heat.. you should not have to be out there every day ... in my one pic above.. with the dwarf .... i would have to spend hours gingerly moving the hoses around the patio.. and that is why that one area.. is on drip .... in one hour.. it is watered to 6 inches deep in my sand ... otherwise.. 2 hours of noodling hose all around.. there is beauty there ... for what you already have invested in plants.. another hundred for the techline.. and piece of mind.. is reasonable. ... which is what denn is saying.. but i am adding the reusable angle ... if you only dripped two of your beds.. then that would reduce and hour or two from you standing there... piddling by hand.. eh... and who cares if it is above the mulch ... ken |
Here is a link that might be useful: link
|
- Posted by franktank232 z5 WI (My Page) on Sat, Jul 21, 12 at 14:40
| Whaas- Yes and no. I wouldn't be embarrassed. You are trying to keep trees ALIVE, not like you are "wasting" it (not that we can really waste water, it either evaporates or goes back into the groundwater source. Its more the electricity and equipment to pump it (are you on a well?). My brother lives in a very fancy subdivision up on top of a hill (he isn't wealthy, just spends his money wisely, except on overpriced housing). I would imagine they all have in ground sprinkler systems. My brother told me he runs his 3hours in the morning and 3 hours at night. His yard his huge (he lives on several acres, with a good portion of that grass. I told him he is probably using a 1000 gallons a day to keep his grass green (he doesn't care because its a community well...nice logic). All of that just to keep his *(&(*&*(& grass green! I've got neighbors down the road that half the sprinkler is going into the street! My God people. I really hope some of these clowns blow out a well pump ($$$), seeing we are all on wells around my neighborhood. Luckily the Mississippi River is a mile away, so I doubt ground water should dry up anytime soon, but still...its grass. In Israel I believe everything is on drip irrigation. Water is so tight in that country that all waste water is reused for agriculture. Those people know what they are doing. I've just been laying a hose by my trees and giving them a good drink every few days. Everything seems to be doing fine. |
|
- Posted by ken_adrian z5 (My Page) on Sat, Jul 21, 12 at 20:32
| most of the irrigation tapes and emitter technology came from Israeli research ... in fact.. i believe my filter.. which looks like a bunch of casino chips with 120 mil tolerance.. was made there .. ken |
|
- Posted by toronado3800 Z6 St. Louis (My Page) on Sat, Jul 21, 12 at 23:25
| I prefer "overhead" sprinkler watering. IMO it more closely simulates rain. Earlier the cooling effect was mentioned. Also it is an area application so my theory is trees do not just have a comfy watered rootball to keep their roots in. After using a rain gauge a few times you get an idea how much rain you are simulating. But as pointed out it waters a whole area so you are bound to use more water to get the tree's roots as much water. Here, no biggie. Next newer county over they have voluntary restrictions. Also this year the goal is just keeping things alive much less encouraging root growth. 0.13 inches of rain in a month or so. I share your pain. |
Please Note: Only registered members are able to post messages to this forum. If you are a member, please log in. If you aren't yet a member, join now!
Return to the Trees Forum
Instructions
- You must be a registered member and logged in to post messages on our forums.
- Posting is a two-step process. Once you have composed your message, you will be taken to the preview page. You will then have a chance to review the contents and make changes.
- After posting your message, you may need to refresh the forum page in order to see it.
- It is illegal to post copyrighted material without the owner's consent.
- HTML codes are allowed in the message field only.
- No advertising is allowed in any of the forums.
- If you would like to practice posting or uploading photos, please visit our Test forum.
- If you need assistance, please Contact Us and we will be happy to help.







