Two large swales vs many fishscale swales?

Hello Permie community!

I finally got my own property where I can do permaculture without compromise (after doing „permaculture light“ in an allotment garden for three years).
The area I want to start first is a 10-13 degree slope with grass on it. We are in a drought right now and the soil is incredibly hard and dry - no water stays here. I have to implement some form of water catchment.
After debating with myself whether terraces or swales would be the best option I decided on swales. But - I‘m not very keen on growing my trees more or less in rows due to the swale structure. I would prefer some form of „fishscale swales“ which I saw in „Gaia‘s Garden“. That would enable me to plant my trees more flexible. But at the same time I want to maximize water catchment.
So here comes my question: are larger swales more effective or overall „better“ than many smaller swales? Or is there no notable difference?

Thanks in advance!

Larger swales are easier to build and manage…with machines.

There can be minor differences in how long it takes water to infiltrate due to how deep the swale gets into the subsoil and volume vs surface space.

But the biggest question is how you plan to use and manage it afterwards. If you want to mow it with a machine, large swales have advantages but if you plan to scythe or leave it natural then micro swales are great.

Ava Morgan wrote:Hello Permie community!

I finally got my own property where I can do permaculture without compromise (after doing „permaculture light“ in an allotment garden for three years).
The area I want to start first is a 10-13 degree slope with grass on it. We are in a drought right now and the soil is incredibly hard and dry - no water stays here. I have to implement some form of water catchment.
After debating with myself whether terraces or swales would be the best option I decided on swales. But - I‘m not very keen on growing my trees more or less in rows due to the swale structure. I would prefer some form of „fishscale swales“ which I saw in „Gaia‘s Garden“. That would enable me to plant my trees more flexible. But at the same time I want to maximize water catchment.
So here comes my question: are larger swales more effective or overall „better“ than many smaller swales? Or is there no notable difference?

Thanks in advance!

Good question! It, of course depends. Generally, however, I would prefer on-contour big swales. They are really good at spreading moisture evenly between the ridges and the valleys, and storing it under the ground. They are a whole-landscape solution. Fishscale swales are more for creating a concentration of moisture at one spot.

R Scott wrote:Larger swales are easier to build and manage…with machines.

There can be minor differences in how long it takes water to infiltrate due to how deep the swale gets into the subsoil and volume vs surface space.

But the biggest question is how you plan to use and manage it afterwards. If you want to mow it with a machine, large swales have advantages but if you plan to scythe or leave it natural then micro swales are great.

Thank you for your answer!
Since I am in Europe and our properties are the size if a towel compared to many places in e.g. North America I won’t use machines - I will (have to) dig it all by hand. Since it will be rather concentrated I guess I will scythe or chop and drop.
Thanks for your thoughts, I did not take management imto consideration!

Myron Platte wrote:

Good question! It, of course depends. Generally, however, I would prefer on-contour big swales. They are really good at spreading moisture evenly between the ridges and the valleys, and storing it under the ground. They are a whole-landscape solution. Fishscale swales are more for creating a concentration of moisture at one spot.

Thank you!
Unfortunately there is not so much valley at my place :-) The area I plan to start with is maybe the size of a backyard. So when I concentrate moisture on selected areas and use the rest for plants that tolerate drier areas well I should be good I guess.
Thanks, that helped!