Guide to Estimating Irrigation Water Needs of Landscape Plantings

More documents

Recommendations

Info

erate (star jasmine), and high (dichondra). To maintain the dichondra in good condition, a ks value of 0.8 is needed. This means, however, that both the rockrose and star jasmine will receive more water than they need. Obviously this is not a water-efficient planting. Both the density and microclimate conditions are average and were assigned values of 1.0. Case 4—A widely-spaced planting of camellia on a university campus in San Francisco. Canopy cover of the planting is 40% to 50%. A 4-inch mulch covers the ground throughout the planting. It is in full sun and no extraordinary winds occur. ks = 0.5 kd = 0.5 kmc = 1.0 KL = 0.5 x 0.5 x 1.0 = 0.25 Analysis: Camellia is classified as moderate in the WUCOLS list and is assigned a midrange value of 0.5. This is a low density planting of a single species and a kd value of 0.5 is assigned. The microclimate is average and given a value of 1.0. Case 5—A planting of leatherleaf mahonia and Burford holly in an office park in Pasadena. The planting is full, but shaded in the afternoon by an adjacent building. The building also blocks afternoon winds typical for the area. ks = 0.5 kd = 1.0 kmc = 0.6 KL = 0.5 x 1.0 x 0.6 = 0.30 Analysis: Both species are classified as moderate in the WUCOLS list and are assigned a midrange value of 0.5. The canopy cover is full and since only one vegetation type occurs, it is classified as average density. Since the building shades the planting and protects it from wind, the microclimate is low and a kmc value of 0.6 is assigned. Case 6—A mixed planting of sweetgum, Rhaphiolepis sp., Wheeler's dwarf pittosporum, Raywood ash, and English ivy at a zoo in San Diego. The planting is mature (canopy cover is 100%), in full sun, and exposed to continual strong winds not typical for the area (i.e., windier than the reference ET location). ks = 0.5 kd = 1.2 kmc = 1.3 KL = 0.5 x 1.2 x 1.3 = 0.78 Analysis: All species in this planting are classified as moderate in the WUCOLS list and are assigned a midrange value of 0.5. Since the canopy cover is 100% and all three vegetation types occur, this is a high density planting and a kd of 1.2 is assigned. Since the site is atypically windy for the area, the microclimate is classified as high and a kmc of 1.3 is assigned. Case 7—A new planting of rockrose, manzanita, pink melaleuca, and bushy yate along a freeway in Monterey County. All plants are 5-gallon container stock, planted in full sun, and are not exposed to extraordinary winds. Canopy cover is 20 to 30%. A 4-inch layer of mulch covers the ground throughout the planting. ks = 0.2 kd = 0.5 kmc = 1.0 KL = 0.2 x 0.5 x 1.0 = 0.1 Analysis: All species in this planting are classified as low in the WUCOLS list and a midrange value of 0.2 is given. Since this is a new planting and canopy cover is not full, it is placed in a low density category and assigned a kd value of 0.5. The micro- 24
climate is average and assigned a value of 1.0. (See Chapter 8 for information on irrigating new plantings.) These field examples should provide an understanding of how values for each of the landscape coefficient factors are assigned and used. In addition, an appreciation for the diversity of species, differences in vegetation density, and variation in microclimates which exist in landscapes should be realized. In many cases, there will be a different landscape coefficient for each irrigation zone. For discussions of the following special planting cases, refer to Chapter 8: • New Plantings • Trees in Turf • Individual Specimens • Vines • Herbaceous Plants Landscapes vary considerably in species composition, vegetation density and microclimates. 25
Page 1 and 2: A Guide to Estimating Irrigation Wa
Page 3: A Guide to Estimating Irrigation Wa
Page 7: Contents Part 1—The Landscape Coe
Page 11 and 12: Introduction Part 1 leads you throu
Page 13 and 14: Chapter 1— Estimating Water Requi
Page 15: ation (ETo) for July in Monterey an
Page 18 and 19: In this example, a landscape coeffi
Page 20 and 21: The Landscape Coefficient Factors:
Page 22 and 23: Table 2— Irrigation Needs of Well
Page 24 and 25: in vegetation density, or leaf area
Page 26 and 27: Assigning Density Factor Values Can
Page 28 and 29: Plantings in a well-vegetated park,
Page 30 and 31: lar planting which is located on th
Page 35 and 36: Chapter 4— Using the Landscape Co
Page 37 and 38: Chapter 5— Irrigation Efficiency
Page 39: Total Water Applied Regardless of t
Page 42 and 43: Worksheet for Estimating Landscape
Page 45 and 46: Chapter 7— Using Water Estimates
Page 47 and 48: Chapter 8— Special Planting Situa
Page 49 and 50: As root development increases into
Page 51 and 52: considerations apply for individual
Page 53 and 54: Part 2 WUCOLS III* 1999 Edition L.
Page 55: REGIONAL COMMITTEES 1992 Front: B.
Page 59 and 60: Getting Started If you are using th
Page 61 and 62: assessment of species needs. If the
Page 63 and 64: Plant Types The species list includ
Page 65: As a result, species which are list
Page 68 and 69: species which can be grown in full
Page 70 and 71: Species Evaluations The three plant
Page 72 and 73: Species Evaluation List--1999 REGIO
Page 82 and 83:
Species Evaluation List--1999 REGIO
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Page 109 and 110:
Common Names Index COMMON NAME Aaro
Page 111 and 112:
Common Names Index COMMON NAME bamb
Page 113 and 114:
Common Names Index COMMON NAME brak
Page 115 and 116:
Common Names Index COMMON NAME carr
Page 117 and 118:
Common Names Index COMMON NAME cone
Page 119 and 120:
Common Names Index COMMON NAME Dutc
Page 121 and 122:
Common Names Index COMMON NAME Fire
Page 123 and 124:
Common Names Index COMMON NAME gold
Page 125 and 126:
Common Names Index COMMON NAME horn
Page 127 and 128:
Common Names Index COMMON NAME Keni
Page 129 and 130:
Common Names Index COMMON NAME Marg
Page 131 and 132:
Common Names Index COMMON NAME nect
Page 133 and 134:
Common Names Index COMMON NAME phlo
Page 135 and 136:
Common Names Index COMMON NAME red
Page 137 and 138:
Common Names Index COMMON NAME sea
Page 139 and 140:
Common Names Index COMMON NAME spri
Page 141 and 142:
Common Names Index COMMON NAME toog
Page 143 and 144:
Common Names Index COMMON NAME whit
Page 145:
Turfgrasses _______________________
Page 148 and 149:
where ETo measurements are being ta
Page 150 and 151:
Appendix A—Table 2 Calculations o
Page 152 and 153:
Hedera canariensis—Coastal and in
Page 154 and 155:
Microclimate Factor (kmc) One of th
Page 156 and 157:
Lindsey, P. and N. Bassuk, 1991,“
Page 158:
• Species list on the Internet: w
show all

Guide to Estimating Irrigation Water Needs of Landscape Plantings

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?