Leaching requirement for soil salinity control: Steady-state versus transient models

Water scarcity and increased frequency of drought conditions, resulting from erratic weather attributable to climatic change or alterations in historical weather patterns, have caused greater scrutiny of irrigated agriculture’s demand on water resources. The traditional guidelines for the calculation of the crop-specific leaching requirement (LR) of irrigated soils have fallen under the microscope of scrutiny and criticism because the commonly used traditional method is believed to erroneously estimate LR due to its assumption of steady-state flow and disregard for processes such as salt precipitation and preferential flow. An over-estimation of the LR would result in the application of excessive amounts of irrigation water and increased salt loads in drainage systems, which can detrimentally impact the environment and reduce water supplies. The objectives of this study are (i) to evaluate the appropriateness of the traditional steady-state method for estimating LR in comparison to the transient method and (ii) to discuss the implications these findings could have on irrigation guidelines and recommendations, particularly with respect to California’s Imperial Valley. Steady-state models for calculating LR including the traditional model, which is an extension of the original U.S. Salinity Laboratory LR model, WATSUIT model, and water-production-function model were compared to transient models including TETrans and UNSATCHEM. The calculated LR was lower when determined using a transient approach than when using a steady-state approach. Transient conditions and the influence of preferential flow did not have as significant an effect on lowering the LR as salt precipitation for a representative study of the Imperial Valley using Colorado River water (EC = 1.23 dS/m) for irrigation. A valley-wide LR of 0.08 for a crop rotation of alfalfa/ alfalfa/alfalfa/alfalfa/wheat/lettuce, as calculated by both WATSUIT and UNSATCHEM, was concluded to be the most reasonable estimate for the entire Imperial Valley as compared to a LR of 0.13 by the commonly used traditional method. The reduced LR for the Imperial Valley would result in a diminished drainage volume of approximately 1.23 10 m (i.e., 100,000 ac-ft). The most significant conclusion derived from the comparison is that the use of the traditional steady-state model for estimating LR needs to be reevaluated. # 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. avai lab le at www.sc iencedi rec t .com journal homepage: www.e lsev ier .com/ locate /agwat * Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 951 369 4819; fax: +1 951 342 4962. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (D.L. Corwin), [email protected] (J.D. Rhoades), [email protected] (J. Šimůnek). 1 Tel.: +1 951 780 3489. 2 Tel.: +1 951 827 7854. Abbreviations: EC, electrical conductivity; ET, evapotranspiration; LF, leaching fraction; LR, leaching requirement; WPF, water-production-function 0378-3774/$ – see front matter # 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.agwat.2007.02.007 a g r i c u l t u r a l w a t e r m a n a g e m e n t 9 0 ( 2 0 0 7 ) 1 6 5 – 1 8 0 166