Viewing post #670629 by Xenacrockett

tink3472 said:

I know we don't lose 72% of the water to evaporation with our sprinklers, there is just no way. We would have to water each area for hours to get everything saturated if this was the case. I've tried other ways to water and they don't work as well. I've done it by hand (would take me 2 full days to actually get it water properly) and I've tried drip hoses (don't last one full season), I've made drip lines from PVC but since we use pine bark for our snoring medium it does not saturate the area but goes right through the bark where the holes are). Plus 50% of our plants are in pots and overhead watering is the only way to get them watered good.
During non-bloom season we water early in the morning so nothing stays wet very long for it to cause issues. Even watering early evening they don't. The plants stay wetter for longer from the natural moisture here than when we water.

Perhaps your situation is different. I have sat through several Water Management District meetings and this 72% irrigation water loss number was given by knowledgeable speakers. This was in objection to a request by a Florida landowner to withdraw initially 13.5 million gallons of water per day to irrigate grass for his cattle. Perhaps it was for this irrigation type:



A fast Google search did say this about homeowner sprinklers:

"Sprinklers waste 30 to 50 percent of water through evaporation and other factors. Water from sprinklers evaporates before it reaches the ground and from the soil surface...

http://homeguides.sfgate.com/t...

Hand Watering
Losing little water to evaporation, hand watering is more efficient than automatic irrigation with timers. Households that water with watering cans and garden hoses use 33 percent less water outdoors than homes with automatic sprinklers or drip irrigation systems."

I have been hand watering, but know this can't continue as I get more plants.
Fortunately, I have good soil that doesn't dry out quite as fast as some.