Brief Summary of Minutes of Annual Meeting

Due to personal circumstances, Ted Sammis (Chair), was unable to organize the meeting that was originally scheduled around spring 2001. Ted asked Joe Henggeler to fill in and get this meeting rescheduled in San Antonio. The meeting was opened at 7:00 PM on Saturday, Novebmer 3, 2001. Materials passed out were today's agenda, Appendix H, minutes from the last meeting, committee member list, original WCC petition drafted after 1st meeting, reports (MO, US Bureau). Ed Martin reported on Objective 1 (dissemination methods). Tom Spofford reported on Objective 2 (identifying existing methods). Ted Sammis had been putting more URLs on his website. High Plains used a FAX method that was reported as working well. Discussions to clarify objectives took place. Two or three versions of the objectives existed (the original petition document, the submitted petition document and the agenda notes). Objective 1 was meant to deal with the medium or general methodology used to evaluate various methods in terms of rate of adoption (e.g., FAXing information, websites, computer programs internal to a user's computer, charts, radio PSAs, etc.). Objective 2 was to locate specific methods/tools being currently employed (e.g. the USDA/ARS and TAEX's High Plains FAX service, the AZSCHED program, US Bureau program, WATERRIGHT (with SIMIS), etc.) There were discussions to combine the two objectives. Further discussions on the objectives were tabled and will be discussed at the next meeting to get a concensus. The group discussed Objective 3. Tom Spofford reported that he, Terry Howell and Rick Allen had been in touch with the Irrigation Association in regard to the standard ET method. Neil Israelsen said that Campbell Scientific had FAO-59 coding that could be used to directly calculate ETo and be output in the .dat files. Some of the bigger weather station users like Rainbird and Toro had their own methods of calculating ETo. Objective 3 was something the group was going to keep abreast of, and support when adopted. The group was not going to actively evaluate ET methods being used and how they predicted water use of crops. Ed Martin was nominated as secretary and asked to organize another meeting sometime in March 2002 in the Reno, NV area. The meeting was adjourned at 9:00 PM. Individual state reports from MO and the US Bureau of Reclamation were on hand, but not discussed due to time constraints.

Objective 1 - Presentation of dissemination methods ~ Develop an interactive Internet site to construct Woodruff irrigation charts ~ Disseminate PC-generated Woodruff charts to growers ~ The USBR is working with CSU Fresno Center for Irrigation Technology on "Wateright: An Educational and Irrigation Scheduling Resource for Water Managers" (http://www.wateright.org). This website (under development) allows the user to input specific information about their crops and irrigation systems while tying into AgriMet or CIMIS for crop ET information. Objective 2 - Review of medium or general methodology and identification of currently used methods and tools ~ Conduct research on cotton and soybean using 8 scheduling methods (computer program [Arkansas Scheduler], Woodruff charts, infra-red temperature, gypsum blocks,tensiometers, tub evaporation, visual symptoms and graphical shape of soil moisture data. A dryland check was also included. ~ Conducted research on corn using Arkansas Scheduler, Woodruff charts and "traditional" method with a dryland check. ~ Survey irrigators regarding irrigation scheduling data: 18% of respondents are using scheduling methods and 14-bushel per acre yield increase for corn irrigators using Woodruff method over those irrigators that did not. ~ Conduct research on watering post-flowering soybeans with ideal amount, drought amount, or excessive amount of irrigation. Objective 3 - Contacts with Irrigation Association on Standard ET methods - FAO-59 coding used to directly calculate ET - Review of ET calculations by weather stations Objective 4 - Conducted research on corn (3 Relative Maturities) with 3 planting dates, soybean (row-planted and drilled)with 3 planting dates, and cotton (row-planted and drilled) with 3 planting dates to develop crop coefficients for ETo. - AgriMet, with the assistance of USDA ARS, implemented a new crop curve in 2001 for grass hay. AgriMet crop curves are available on the internet at http://mac1.pn.usbr.gov/agrimet/cropcurves/About_Crop_Curves.html.

None