this post was submitted on 20 May 2024
226 points (99.1% liked)

Gardening

3506 readers
16 users here now

Your Ultimate Gardening Guide.

Rules

  1. Be respectful and inclusive.
  2. No harassment, hate speech, or trolling.
  3. Engage in constructive discussions.
  4. Share relevant content.
  5. Follow guidelines and moderators' instructions.
  6. Use appropriate language and tone.
  7. Report violations.
  8. Foster a continuous learning environment.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Having never owned a house or really had a yard of my own, I got pretty excited and decided to do some ad-hoc landscaping. Built some raised beds for vegetables, and just laying in some organic shaped in-ground beds for low water decorative plants. Gonna fill the rest in with gravel. Any pointers?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Yeah I can’t even think of a secondary or tertiary reason.

Unless it’s to stop people from storing it and using it inside? But even than… so my thought on that one is overall maintenance.

In my city you get charged 30% iirc of your water use for sanitary use, so that pays for waste water treatment and maintenance of sewer lines. It’s not a full 100% because people water the yards and other stuff, and it’s not feasible to measure waste discharge.

So the only reason I could think of with, is so people aren’t getting around water fees and therefore sewer maintenance fees.

But it’s probably capitalism instead of trying to maintaining infrastructure.

[–] Harriet_Porber@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Water rights in the Western US are wild. I wrote a small rant above if you're interested. There is very legitimately not enough fresh water to go around from rivers like the Colorado to support continued agriculture and population expansion. (I blame agriculture 10x more than population, but that's my hot take)

[–] SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Oh yeah shit downstream water would be huge. Retaining that water prevents it from being available from watershed.

I’m right next to the Rockies and we get glacier melt and snow melt. So it’s weird seeing those restrictions elsewhere where we don’t have them but being basically the same geographically. BUT we were on water rationing last year to save the reservoir level, but the city also provides a rain barrel program, and no limits as far as I know/saw.

Linky

[–] Harriet_Porber@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Wow, great to see a government encouraging it instead of saying you can't do it! I'm also right next to the Rockies just far south of you in Colorado, and we get very different messages.

It is weird. Like if every house had 200 gallons of storage, that could add up to a small dam's worth of storage at almost no cost to the government. It makes more sense to me to encourage houses to store it.

It really might come back around to blame capitalism - since like 90% of water is used for agriculture here maybe the downstream money makers are the ones yelling the loudest.

[–] SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

I think we are super blessed where we live. The government actually seems to care about the environment, does stuff about it, pushes for code compliance like no other, and has some of the best resources I’ve seen. You’ve got water data, tree data, a state of the art composting facility with free public compost, programs out the Wazhoo.

Tree database p