Estimating irrigation water use in the humid eastern United States

Sara B. Levin; Phillip J. Zarriello

doi:10.3133/sir20135066

Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · sir20135066

Estimating irrigation water use in the humid eastern United States

Sara B. Levin·Phillip J. Zarriello

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Accurate accounting of irrigation water use is an important part of the U.S. Geological Survey National Water-Use Information Program and the WaterSMART initiative to help maintain sustainable water resources in the Nation. Irrigation water use in the humid eastern United States is not well characterized because of inadequate reporting and wide variability associated with climate, soils, crops, and farming practices. To better understand irrigation water use in the eastern United States, two types of predictive models were developed and compared by using metered irrigation water-use data for corn, cotton, peanut, and soybean crops in Georgia and turf farms in Rhode Island. Reliable metered irrigation data were limited to these areas. The first predictive model that was developed uses logistic regression to predict the occurrence of irrigation on the basis of antecedent climate conditions. Logistic regression equations were developed for corn, cotton, peanut, and soybean crops by using weekly irrigation water-use data from 36 metered sites in Georgia in 2009 and 2010 and turf farms in Rhode Island from 2000 to 2004. For the weeks when irrigation was predicted to take place, the irrigation water-use volume was estimated by multiplying the average metered irrigation application rate by the irrigated acreage for a given crop. The second predictive model that was developed is a crop-water-demand model that uses a daily soil water balance to estimate the water needs of a crop on a given day based on climate, soil, and plant properties. Crop-water-demand models were developed independently of reported irrigation water-use practices and relied on knowledge of plant properties that are available in the literature. Both modeling approaches require accurate accounting of irrigated area and crop type to estimate total irrigation water use. Water-use estimates from both modeling methods were compared to the metered irrigation data from Rhode Island and Georgia that were used to develop the models as well as two independent validation datasets from Georgia and Virginia that were not used in model development. Irrigation water-use estimates from the logistic regression method more closely matched mean reported irrigation rates than estimates from the crop-water-demand model when compared to the irrigation data used to develop the equations. The root mean squared errors (RMSEs) for the logistic regression estimates of mean annual irrigation ranged from 0.3 to 2.0 inches (in.) for the five crop types; RMSEs for the crop-water-demand models ranged from 1.4 to 3.9 in. However, when the models were applied and compared to the independent validation datasets from southwest Georgia from 2010, and from Virginia from 1999 to 2007, the crop-water-demand model estimates were as good as or better at predicting the mean irrigation volume than the logistic regression models for most crop types. RMSEs for logistic regression estimates of mean annual irrigation ranged from 1.0 to 7.0 in. for validation data from Georgia and from 1.8 to 4.9 in. for validation data from Virginia; RMSEs for crop-water-demand model estimates ranged from 2.1 to 5.8 in. for Georgia data and from 2.0 to 3.9 in. for Virginia data. In general, regression-based models performed better in areas that had quality daily or weekly irrigation data from which the regression equations were developed; however, the regression models were less reliable than the crop-water-demand models when applied outside the area for which they were developed. In most eastern coastal states that do not have quality irrigation data, the crop-water-demand model can be used more reliably. The development of predictive models of irrigation water use in this study was hindered by a lack of quality irrigation data. Many mid-Atlantic and New England states do not require irrigation water use to be reported. A survey of irrigation data from 14 eastern coastal states from Maine to Georgia indicated that, with the exception of the data in Georgia, irrigation data in the states that do require reporting commonly did not contain requisite ancillary information such as irrigated area or crop type, lacked precision, or were at an aggregated temporal scale making them unsuitable for use in the development of predictive models. Confidence in the reliability of either modeling method is affected by uncertainty in the reported data from which the models were developed or validated. Only through additional collection of quality data and further study can the accuracy and uncertainty of irrigation water-use estimates be improved in the humid eastern United States.

Explore related subjects

Scientific Investigations Report Report

Source-reported bounding extent: 30° to 33.08° latitude; -85° to -81° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Sara B. Levin, Phillip J. Zarriello. 2013. Estimating irrigation water use in the humid eastern United States. https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20135066

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2026

Analysis of groundwater geochemistry in the Lansing, Michigan, area

Groundwater resources in the Lansing, Michigan, area are protected by a wellhead protection plan, but previous studies have indicated that groundwater in this area may be susceptible to surface contamination. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Lansing Board of Water & Light, analyzed geochemical and aquifer characteristics to assess the potential for contamination of groundwater resources. Recharge age categories were determined from tritium concentrations for some wells, and by using ternary diagrams and principal component analysis for other wells. These age classifications, combined with hydrogeologic and geochemical data, were analyzed by using statistical methods to identify trends that may indicate areas of increased groundwater susceptibility. Wells with modern recharge tended to have higher sodium, chloride, and chloride:bromide ratios than did wells with mixed recharge, suggesting greater surface connectivity and potential influence from anthropogenic sources such as road salt. In contrast, wells in the mixed age category exhibited more stable geochemistry and lower constituent concentrations. Classification and regression tree models identified aquifer geometry—particularly the thickness of the uppermost bedrock unit and presence of confining layers—as key predictors of recharge age and geochemical indicators. The trends identified from these analyses could help to reveal locations in the Lansing area that are among the most susceptible to contamination.

Scientific Investigations Report↗

USGS2026

Evaluating the number of realizations (train-test splits) necessary to ensure robust estimates of conventional hydrothermal resource favorability using Monte Carlo cross-validation, the Great Basin, Western USA

Supervised machine learning approaches used to produce favorability maps in resource assessments commonly partition an input dataset into training and testing subsets (that is, through train-test splits). However, if a single split is not representative of underlying resource conditions, the resulting favorability map may be biased, particularly with sparse or heterogeneous datasets. To mitigate the potential for unrepresentative favorability maps, recent works by U.S. Geological Survey researchers have used Monte Carlo cross-validation to implement a large number ( n) of randomized train-test splits to produce n realizations. The realizations are then aggregated using cell-wise median predictions to produce the resulting final favorability map, recognizing that the median will remove extreme values that might have been estimated from a comparatively few unrepresentative realizations. Theoretically, the median prediction at every cell converges to a single estimate as n approaches infinity, and the question addressed herein is: How many realizations are necessary to get a robust estimate (that is, an estimate unaffected by additional realizations)? Therefore, convergence metrics are described to identify the number of train-test splits and realizations needed to make a reliable map using the data and supervised machine learning workflow for conventional hydrothermal resource assessment of the Great Basin of the Western United States. For this study, robust prediction occurs with n approximately equal to 600 realizations, and smaller ensembles (for example, n is approximately equal to 200 or even 100) may be suitable during preliminary or exploratory analyses. Although the resulting threshold numbers will vary depending on the data and modeling approach used, the convergence metrics proposed and applied herein are applicable to other supervised machine learning studies that use Monte Carlo cross-validation.

California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah↗

USGS2026

Groundwater budget for the Portneuf River Basin, southeastern Idaho

The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Idaho Department of Water Resources, developed the first groundwater budget for the upper Portneuf River Basin in southeastern Idaho, a tributary of the Snake River. A groundwater budget for the Portneuf River Basin supports water resource and administrative management decisions within the basin and for downstream users of the eastern Snake River Plain aquifer. The analysis quantifies inflows, outflows, and residuals for an aquifer system defined by the Idaho Department of Water Resources under three recent precipitation conditions: an average year (2016), a dry year (2021), and a wet year (2023). The budget was calculated for the basin and for two subbasins delineated by the U.S. Geological Survey streamgage Portneuf River at Topaz, Idaho (13073000): the above Topaz subbasin, which includes the Portneuf-Gem valley, and the below Topaz subbasin, which includes Marsh Valley. Aquifer inflows include mountain-front recharge; areal recharge; recharge from applied water, including recharge from irrigation, canal seepage, and effluent returns; groundwater flow into the basin; and reservoir seepage. Outflows include groundwater pumping for agricultural, municipal, and domestic uses; subsurface outflow through the Portneuf gap; and discharge to streams as base flow. Estimated annual inflows for the full basin ranged from 116,880 acre-feet in 2021 to 154,880 acre-feet in 2023, and outflows ranged from 132,190 acre-feet in 2016 to 158,490 acre-feet in 2023. Basinwide residuals, the change in storage plus uncertainty, were −2,410 acre-feet in 2016, −18,410 acre-feet in 2021, and −3,610 acre-feet in 2023, and each subbasin had a mixture of negative and positive residuals. These basinwide results, interpreted as change in storage plus water-budget uncertainty, indicate minor net losses that increase with dry conditions, consistent with well depth-to-water measurements indicating gradual multi-decadal declines. Patterns in subbasin residuals are driven by irrigation practices and surface-water management; for example, the above Topaz subbasin relies more on groundwater for irrigation, resulting in more negative residuals during dry years. In contrast, the below Topaz subbasin depends more on surface water, producing positive residuals during dry years because of irrigation losses and canal seepage. The analyses for both subbasins indicate decades-long groundwater declines, which agree with the overall negative residuals calculated. The largest sources of uncertainty include climate inputs (precipitation and evapotranspiration) and poorly constrained components such as groundwater inflow and tributary stream infiltration. These findings provide insight into how climatic variables and irrigation practices affect groundwater inflows and outflows within the Portneuf River Basin.

Idaho↗