Key Takeaways

• Early-season water is the biggest constraint in 2026. Crops must rely on stored soil moisture and rainfall until late June, creating varying levels of pre-canal water deficit.

• Crop choice and planting timing directly affect risk. Sugar beets face the largest early-season deficit, while dry beans align best with delayed canal water delivery.

• Adjust inputs to match realistic yield expectations. Lower plant populations and nitrogen rates can help conserve water and reduce unnecessary costs under limited irrigation.

• Water timing matters as much as total water. Capturing early precipitation and managing irrigation timing can significantly impact yield outcomes.

• Irrigation system adjustments can stretch limited supply. Practices like managing cutoff ratio, skipping rows in furrow systems or applying deeper pivot passes can improve efficiency.

• Fewer, better irrigation decisions outperform more frequent, inefficient ones. Strategic water use throughout the season will determine how far limited supplies can go.

With limited canal delivery expected in 2026, pre-plant planning and in-season irrigation management matter more than in a typical year. This article — Part 4 of a four-part CropWatch series recapping the April 8, 2026 Yonts Water Conference — translates the weather, historical yield and crop-response information from Parts 1–3 into specific decisions producers can act on this spring: a pre-canal water-budget worksheet, crop-by-crop agronomic adjustments, irrigation-system adjustments for furrow and center pivot, and Nebraska Extension tools available for the 2026 season.

How Much Water Do You Need Before Canal Water Delivery?

Based on the historical rainfall and crop responses to irrigation in best and worst cases, the practical question is how much water the crop need before the canal water delivery. 

Because the final delivery date is not set until May, the following analysis uses June 25 as the delivery date, assuming water won’t be available to producers until then. For canal-water-only producers, this means the period from planting through late June is supported entirely by stored soil moisture plus any in-season rainfall.

Table 1 lays out scenarios for corn, dry beans and sugar beets using typical planting dates of May 15, June 1, and May 1, respectively, and calculates the water budget. Rainfall from planting to June 25 can vary widely depending on wet or dry year. Using sugar beets as an example, in 2002, rainfall in Scottsbluff from May 1 to June 25 was only 1.1 inches, whereas in 2009, rainfall was 6.5 inches. Table 1 uses 2 inches as stored soil moisture and 1 inch as worst-scenario rainfall before June 25. The water budget results differ substantially by crop. 

For corn planted May 15, crop ET through June 25 is estimated at 3.4, 5.3, and 5.6 inches in a wet year (2009), similar year (2002), and dry year (2012), respectively — translating to a deficit of 0.4 to 2.6 inches depending on weather. 

For dry beans planted June 1, the shorter pre-canal water delivery window (only 24 days) keeps crop ET at 1.9 to 3.4 inches, leaving at most a small deficit of 0.4 inches even in the driest scenario. Sugar beets are by far the most exposed: with a May 1 planting and 55 days before canal delivery, crop evapotranspiration (ET) ranges from 5.7 inches (2009) to 8.8 inches (2012), creating a deficit of 2.7 to 5.8 inches before any canal water arrives. As presented in Part 2 of this series, sugar beets suffered the largest yield loss in 2002 — not because they are less drought-tolerant, because their long pre-canal window coincides with the most constrained period for water delivery.

Crop Management Recommendations

The sections below translate the research findings from Part 3 of this CropWatch series into specific agronomic decisions for the 2026 season.

Corn

• Reduce plant population by 15% to 20%. Research shows that at a low irrigation level, lower population corn can produce similar yield to high population corn. For example, dropping from 32,000 to 26,000 plants per acre leaves more water per plant (Hergert, 2012).
• Lower your yield goal and cut nitrogen accordingly. Fertilizing for a 220 bu/ac yield goal on a field that will realistically produce 140 bu/ac is wasted money and wasted nitrogen. Adjust N rate downward in proportion to the reduced yield goal.
• Consider delaying planting. Most rainfall in the Panhandle occurs in late April to May. Delayed planting might allow producers to capture precipitation that will be critical for emergence. Late planting may also better align with water availability.

Dry Beans

• A 25% deficit (75% of full water) is tolerable. Research shows that keeping beans at 75% of full water needs does not significantly reduce yield (Gradiz et al., 2025).
• Avoid severe stress at any stage. Unlike corn, where one stage (VT–R1) dominates, dry beans are roughly equally sensitive at several stages.
• Consider drought-tolerant varieties. UNL Dry Bean Breeding Program (Carlos Urrea) has identified several commercially available drought-tolerant varieties:
  • Great Northern: SanCarBer (NE1-17-36), Matterhorn
  • Pinto: USDA-Rattler, Charro, Stampede

Sugar Beets

• Do NOT reduce plant population. Reducing plant population for sugar beets doesn’t generate similar benefits as corn. With a reduced population, sugar beets can develop larger root systems, which may increase yield loss at harvest.
• Sample soil nitrogen to 4 feet, not 2 feet. Under water stress, sugar beet develops a deeper root system and extracts nitrogen from lower in the profile. If you credit only the top 2 feet for available N, you will overapply. Unused N deeper in the profile can also reduce sucrose content and increase impurities later in the season.
• Reduce nitrogen rate per ton of expected yield. Use 6.5 pounds of N per ton of expected sugar beet yield instead of the traditional 8 pounds per ton (Ghimire and Maharjan, 2024). Combined with a lower yield goal, this can reduce fertilizer investment.
• Delay planting if conditions are extremely dry. As early water stress is most critical to sugar beets, consider delaying planting to capture precipitation.

Irrigation System Recommendations

The research data above shows what crops do under different total amounts of irrigation. Equally important is how that water is delivered. The two major irrigation systems in the Panhandle — furrow and center pivot — require different adjustments under a short water supply.

Furrow (Gravity) Systems

• Consider conventional or minimum tillage. Heavy residue can slow water advance down the row, increasing deep percolation at the upper end and starving the lower end. Conventional or minimum tillage can improve water advance uniformity (Yonts et al., 1991).
• Irrigate every other row. Skipping alternate rows typically reduces applied water by 30% to 50% per set while still wetting each plant’s root zone from one side. The tradeoff is some reduction in peak water availability per plant, but it dramatically stretches a limited supply.
• Pack the rows. Firming the furrow bottom reduces intake and allows faster, more uniform advancing of water (Yonts and Eisenhauer, 2007).
• Control the cutoff ratio. The cutoff ratio (the ratio of advance time to set time) is one of the most cost-effective adjustments you can make. See the CropWatch article "Using Cutoff Ratio to Fine-Tune Furrow Irrigations" for field-level guidance and adjust cutoff ratio accordingly. Yonts (2008) showed that applying the recommended cutoff ratio reduced water applied by an average of 1.4 acre-inches per irrigation (range: 0.1–3.2 ac-in).
• Use surge valves if available. Surge flow improves water advance uniformity in most soil types and is particularly valuable on longer runs.

Center Pivot Systems

• Increase application depth per pass. Instead of running the pivot fast at 0.75 to 0.80 inches per pass, slow it down to deliver 1.25 inches or more per pass. Larger applications:
  • Infiltrate deeper and store water farther down in the profile.
  • Reduce the wetted surface area relative to total applied depth.
  • Cut evaporation losses from the wet canopy and soil surface between passes.
• Fewer, heavier passes beat many light passes. Under hot, windy conditions, fewer heavier passes generally deliver more water to the root zone per inch applied than many light passes.

Tools and Resources Available from Nebraska Extension

Several tools and services are available to help you manage irrigation under a limited water supply in 2026:

• ACREE Irrigation Scheduling App. A mobile app (iOS and Android) developed at UNL that supports field-specific water budgeting leveraging the Nebraska Mesonet weather station network. For registration details and more information, see this article.
• Weekly Crop Water Use Reports. Nebraska Extension publishes weekly ET and crop water use data during the growing season on CropWatch.
• Capacitance Soil Moisture Probe Network. Fifteen telemetry-enabled soil moisture probe stations will be available in the Panhandle this season. Contact Xin Qiao, 308-632-1241.

Summary

The PREEC Irrigation team will continue to monitor conditions through the 2026 season and share updates via CropWatch, the PHREC Irrigation website and the ACREE app. 

About This Series

This article is part of a four-part CropWatch series recapping "Growing Crops with Limited Water in 2026," presented by Xin Qiao, UNL Biological Systems Engineering associate professor, at the Yonts Water Conference on April 8, 2026. The full series includes:

• Part 1 — How 2026 Compares: Panhandle Precipitation, Reference ET and Pre-Plant Soil Moisture Relative to 2002, 2009 and 2012
• Part 2 — What 2002, 2009 and 2012 Yields Tell Us About Drought Years
• Part 3 — How Corn, Dry Beans, Sugar Beets and Alfalfa Respond to Deficit Irrigation
• Part 4 — Managing the 2026 Season: Pre-Canal Water Budget, Crop Decisions and Irrigation System Tips

Acknowledgments: Many of the data sets presented in this CropWatch series come from long-term research programs led by Gary Hergert, Dean Yonts, and other UNL and regional researchers. Their work provides solid foundation of the irrigation management recommendations available to Panhandle producers today.

References

• Ghimire, D., and B. Maharjan. 2024. Optimizing nitrogen management to enhance irrigated sugar beet yield and quality. Agronomy Journal 116(5): 2564–2572. https://doi.org/10.1002/agj2.21617
• Gradiz, A., X. Qiao, S. Taghvaeian, W. Liang, D. Rudnick, A. Katimbo, J. Wang, and S. Palle. 2025. Responses of dry edible bean crop growth and water productivities under different irrigation scenarios in the U.S. high plains. Agricultural Water Management 308: 109280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2024.109280
• Hergert, G.W. 2012. Corn Populations and Deficit Irrigation in Western Nebraska. CropWatch, University of Nebraska–Lincoln, December 20, 2012.
• Yonts, C.D. 2008. Using Cutoff Ratio to Fine-Tune Furrow Irrigations (Save $14/acre). CropWatch, University of Nebraska–Lincoln, November 25, 2008.
• Yonts, C.D., and D.E. Eisenhauer. 2007. Firming Irrigation Furrows to Improve Irrigation Performance. UNL NebGuide G1720. University of Nebraska–Lincoln Extension.
• Yonts, C.D., J.A. Smith, and J.E. Bailie. 1991. Furrow irrigation performance in reduced-tillage system. Transactions of the ASAE 34(1): 91–96.