Water Conservation Planning FAQ

Q. Our agency has developed what we consider to be great water conservation programs. We encourage local landscape professionals to promote them to their customers, but we get very little support. Why?

A. This is a common problem. Quite often we try to “sell” conservation programs to contractors pushing the “long term” approach. We say things like, “This will help your business in the long run,” or “If you don’t do these things today you may not have a market to work in the future.” While these statements may be true, albeit exaggerated, you are not really putting yourself in the contractor’s shoes when you develop your programs.

You might respond with, “Wait! We have focus groups and meetings with contractors and they support our ideas when they are presented to them.” True, perhaps you do. However, it is usually the upper tier contractors that respond to these requests for meetings and input on programs. The real meat and potatoes contractors are the ones you need to reach and get their opinions and they are rarely represented at committee meetings and focus groups.

Most contractors are small business people who are quite often living from job to job. They are concerned about making payroll and feeding their families. What you are asking of them is beyond their capability at this time. If you will focus on designing water conservation programs that put real jobs and dollars in their pockets, then you will see support.

Most programs have such low dollar amounts (per rebate) and such large amounts of paperwork and regulations that the average contractor can’t be bothered with it. Either they are too small to take the time to mess with it or they are too busy and successful to spend all of the time required to meet the bureaucratic stipulations for the small rebate amount allotted.

Q. We wish to steer the market towards ET or soil moisture based systems, but we are not seeing a lot of support from the end users or the industry. Why?

A. Probably because you are moving much faster than the market is. While this technology is wonderful, the average homeowner and contractor is not familiar with it and even if they are they do not trust it yet. Back up and move slower. Remember the contractors and consultants you consulted on the program are at the cutting edge of what is happening in the industry. The average person that you want to use it, is not. Focus some of your dollars and resources on some lower tech solutions for the next few years as you try to phase in more high tech options.

Q. We have been recommending ET or soil moisture based controllers as solutions for many large water users to help them use less water. After an analysis of the site water use after one year there has not been measurable savings. In fact, some sites used more water. Why is this?

A. This happens because you applied a solution that did not match the problem. ET or soil moisture control systems only solve scheduling problems. There are many other reasons why sites waste water. ET or soil moisture control systems can’t fix poor designs, bad installation & maintenance and inadequate products. Match the solution to the problem.

Q. We have a sight that we know is wasting water. However, when we calculate the water budget it comes out that they are watering under budget. Why?

A. Check your math. Usually there is an error with the acreage or the estimated system uniformity. Also, there are quite often mistakes made in the calculation of the historical water use. Things such as improper deducts on mixed use meters, and bad data and/or data entry can cause this. Go back and check your input data again. 99% of the time you will find an obvious error.

Q. We have been promised by a sales rep that their product will save 30% off the water bill. Is that realistic?

A. Yes, no, maybe. What you should do is average your site historical use and then calculate a site water budget. Convert this to a percentage and see what is your potential savings percentage. If reducing your water use to budget (which is usually very hard to do) drops your water usage by 30%, then I would be suspicious of any one product that claims to solve all of my site’s watering woes.

Q. What are the most common things that waste water on most sites?

A. People waste a lot of water because of human error (which, by the way, can sometimes be greatly magnified by some technology). Pressure variations are big issues. No rain switch is a huge problem. Bad irrigation designs and poorly designed landscapes are in the top ten as well. One of the biggest problems that is most often overlooked is a lack of awareness by the end user of how much water they are actually using vs. what they should be using.

One of the top five reasons sites waste water (maybe even the top 3) is that sites waste water, because they can. Either water is perceived to be plentiful or it is so cheap it does not warrant any extra effort or expense to try to reduce it.

Q. We have pushed landscape irrigation auditing in our area with little success. It seems like a great program, but there is little or no buy-in by the industry or end users. What are we doing wrong?

A. Auditing is a great program. However, it is only one of many, many tools that need to be used to reduce site water use. End users need to be shown a business plan, or Return of Investment report showing what kind of return they will see if they invest on water conservation measures. Auditing does not do this. Only by presenting the owners of a property with a professional site water management plan can you expect to get buy-in from the end user. Regulation will always produce the bare minimum results. Show contractors how to develop business-oriented water management plans and they will sell conservation as a profit maker in their businesses.

Q. We have money in our conservation funds to offer rebates. Year after year we have seen very few people or contractors take advantage of this funding. We always have most of the money left over at the end of the year. Any ideas?

A. Yes, offer fewer rebates for more money per rebate. In addition, streamline the paperwork process to get a rebate. Finally, shorten the time to get the rebate checks out to the participants. You might also require that the program involve installation by a contractor. Sometimes contractors might talk their customers out of participating in a rebate program if they are being by-passed by the rebate program.

Q. We have been told that we should use .80 in our water budget calculations. Is that right for anywhere in the country?

A. No, it is not. The .80 reduces the ET by 20%. Depending on what your reference crop ET is, and what variety of turfgrass is predominantly used in your area, the .80 may or may not be correct. In addition, the level of sophistication of your market place in regard to landscape water conservation plays a big role as well. This should be researched before recommendations and regulations are put in place for a water budget.

Q. The market says that automatic systems save water. Our experience is that hand-watering used less water. Which is true?

A. Both versions are true, to a point. Hand-watering absolutely uses less water than an automatic system. However, you need to ask yourself, why? The reason is that most people do not want to drag hoses around and hand water. Therefore, they do it as little as possible. The end result being a landscape of much poorer appearance that that of an automatic system.

An automatic system that uses high quality parts, is designed for water efficiency, is maintained well and scheduled correctly, will use less water than a hand- watered site that is producing the same quality appearance. The problem is that the automatic systems that meet all of the above criteria are in the minority.