Search USGSSearch

USGS · ofr20171082

Agricultural irrigated land-use inventory for Polk County, Florida, 2016

Abstract

An accurate inventory of irrigated crop acreage is not available at the level of resolution needed to better estimate agricultural water use or to project future water demands in many Florida counties. A detailed digital map and summary of irrigated acreage was developed for Polk County, Florida, during the 2016 growing season. This cooperative project between the U.S. Geological Survey and the Office of Agricultural Water Policy of the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services is part of an effort to improve estimates of water use and projections of future demands across all counties in the State. The irrigated areas were delineated by using land-use data provided by the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, along with information obtained from the South and Southwest Florida Water Management Districts consumptive water-use permits. Delineations were field verified between April and December 2016. Attribute data such as crop type, primary water source, and type of irrigation system were assigned to the irrigated areas. The results of this inventory and field verification indicate that during the 2016 growing seasons (spring, summer, fall, and winter), an estimated 88,652 acres were irrigated within Polk County. Of the total field-verified crops, 83,995 acres were in citrus; 2,893 acres were in other non-citrus fruit crops (blueberries, grapes, peaches, and strawberries); 621 acres were in row crops (primarily beans and watermelons); 1,117 acres were in nursery (container and tree farms) and sod production; and 26 acres were in field crops including hay and pasture. Of the total inventoried irrigated acreage within Polk County, 98 percent (86,566 acres) was in the Southwest Florida Water Management District, and the remaining 2 percent (2,086 acres) was in the South Florida Water Management District. About 85,788 acres (96.8 percent of the acreage inventoried) were irrigated by a microirrigation system, including drip, bubblers, and spray emitters. The remaining 3.2 percent of the irrigated acreage was irrigated by a sprinkler system (2,360 acres) or subsurface flood systems (504 acres). Groundwater was the primary source of water used on irrigated acreage (88 percent, or 78,050 acres); the remaining 10,602 acres (12 percent) used groundwater combined with surface water as the irrigation source. The irrigated acreage estimated by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) for this 2016 inventory (88,652 acres) is about 11 percent higher than the 79,869 acres estimated by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) for 2012. Citrus and pasture in Polk County show the biggest difference in irrigated acreage between the USGS and USDA totals. Irrigated citrus acreage inventoried in 2016 by the USGS totaled 83,996 acres, whereas the USDA reported 78,305 acres of citrus in 2012. The USGS identified 6 acres of irrigated pasture and 20 acres of hay, whereas the USDA reported 6,631 acres of irrigated pasture and 1,349 acres of hay for 2012. In general, differences between the 2016 USGS field-verified acreage totals and acreage published by the USDA for 2012 could be due to (1) irrigated acreage for some specific crops increased or decreased substantially during the 4-year interval between 2012 and 2016 because of production or economic changes, (2) the assumption that if an irrigation system was present, it was used in 2016, when in fact some landowners may not have used their irrigation systems during this growing period even if they had a crop in the field, or (3) the amount of irrigated acreage published by the USDA for selected crops may be underestimated as a result of how information is obtained and formulated by the agency during census compilations.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 27.6431° to 28.3619° latitude; -82.1063° to -81.131° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Richard L. Marella, Darbi Berry, Joann F. Dixon. 2017-08-16. Agricultural irrigated land-use inventory for Polk County, Florida, 2016. https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20171082

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Estimating aftershock risk for entry into earthquake-damaged buildings

We present a simple method to estimate the risk of experiencing strong shaking from aftershocks during entry into earthquake-damaged buildings. We compute wait times until the probability of strong ground shaking from aftershocks reaches a predefined risk threshold; for example, a 0.4 percent probability of experiencing Modified Mercalli Intensity 7 or greater shaking during the planned building entry. We also develop a relation between aftershock probability and the probability of strong shaking, so that users can reference the U.S. Geological Survey aftershock forecast during an ongoing aftershock sequence to determine if the risk threshold has been met. We apply our method to active continental regions (for example, the Western United States), stable continental regions (for example, the Central and Eastern United States), and subduction zones (for example, Cascadia or Alaska).

Open-File Report

End-user needs for remote sensing wetlands of the Prairie Pothole Region of North America

The Prairie Pothole Region (PPR) of North America comprises globally important grassland and wetland ecosystems critical for numerous populations of migratory birds. Due to the importance of this region for migratory birds, and particularly waterfowl, and the threats of habitat loss due to intensifying agriculture, there is a mature and diverse system of conservation organizations, agencies, and partnerships that spends hundreds of millions of dollars annually on habitat conservation to support migratory bird populations. Remote sensing can be a powerful tool for observing and evaluating global change at large scales as well as expanding inferences from field studies to the broader landscape with statistical models. However, development and utilization of these tools has lagged behind their demand for several reasons, including concerns over spatial and temporal resolution and accuracy of products; perception of a misalignment with decision-maker needs; technological barriers such as skill sets of conservation professionals, computing resources, data access, and usability. In this report, we summarize the needs of conservation professionals and scientists who use or want to use remote sensing data products to inform science about wetland change and conservation of wetlands in the PPR. We assembled this information through several methods leading up to, during, and following a January 2026 PPR Wetland Remote Sensing Workshop. The workshop included United States and Canadian scientists, conservation professionals, and policy experts. Our goal was to bring together end-users and remote sensing product developers jointly to explore reducing the lag between product development and utilization of products to inform science and conservation. Specifically, we aimed to identify gaps in wetland remote sensing that limit effective monitoring, management, and conservation in the PPR, and to develop a framework that outlines pathways to address these gaps by fostering collaboration, improving communication networks, encouraging discussion, and building on existing and ongoing efforts. This report summarizes our participants’ descriptions of end-user needs and the outcomes of the workshop.

Prairie Pothole region

Bathymetric survey and storage capacity of Upper Lake Mary near Flagstaff, Arizona in 2024

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the city of Flagstaff, collected bathymetric, light detection and ranging (lidar), and land-survey data of Upper Lake Mary in Arizona during the months of April and October 2024. The city of Flagstaff uses a combination of groundwater from well fields throughout the Flagstaff area and surface water, mainly from Upper Lake Mary, for its potable water supply. The purpose of the survey is to update previous surveys using new technology and compare the results to previous surveys to determine if there was a decrease in storage capacity that could affect the city’s water supply. The lakebed was mapped in April 2024 using a vessel equipped with a multibeam echosounder (MBES) and mobile lidar scanner with positioning captured using a real-time kinematic global navigation satellite system (RTK GNSS) base and receivers. In October 2024, areas of the reservoir that were too shallow for the boat and shoreline that were not captured by the vessel-based lidar were surveyed on foot using hand-held RTK GNSS receivers. At full pool (spillway elevation of 6,831.82 feet above NAVD 88 [2,082.34 meters (m)], Upper Lake Mary has a storage capacity of 16,449.80 acre-feet (20,290,611.73 cubic meters) and a surface area of 953.57 acres (3,860,926.075 square meters). The reservoir is 5.7 miles (9.7 kilometers) long and varies in width from 326 feet (99.36 m) near the central, narrow portion of the reservoir to 2,613 feet (796.44 m) in the upper portion. Comparisons between this survey and the previous two surveys from the 1950s and 2006 indicate no apparent decrease in reservoir area or storage capacity. Results of the 2024 survey indicate that Upper Lake Mary’s storage capacity increased by 0.9 percent from the 2006 survey and a 1.6 percent increase in surface area from the 2006 survey.

Arizona