government until now doesn't act like it is
Rufus Laggren wrote:
I think most officials don't lead so much as follow the least path. Speaking publicly about problems, how people are causing them and how we need to stop it and what it will cost... A guy could lose the next election!
Rufus Laggren wrote:
That sounds like something that would help. It's pretty simplistic but a whole lot of people just really want to be told, over and over again, what they should do.
Dave Burton wrote:I do not know what I would do if I could say anything on TV. I see it as more useful to have projects and people on the ground than to be on TV for a day or two. It is harder to avoid things when they are right in someone's neighborhood.
Maybe having a permaculture design course could be taught over TV if someone were interested in doing that?
One thing that we're covering in AP Gov. right now is the Bureaucracy and how it is essentially the fourth body of government. I think it would be more effective to straight up design and implement a permaculture design project at a person's home and get the HOAs and city bureaucracy's feathers ruffled. Then when they come to inspect your property, you can explain the entire system to them and change their minds. If that doesn't work, public support could leveraged by taking the stand that you have the right to grow your own food and take the issue to court.
Serge Leblanc wrote:This is a large scale issue, I don't pretend to understand it completely.
What seems odd to me...
In the news I noticed;
1. Farms with dry, dead crops had monoculture with zero ground cover, just dead dirt. Wouldn't some simple mulch or ground cover plants help conserve whatever moisture can be found?
I'm sure some are doing that already
2. Are they really replacing grass with rock landscaping ? State paid?
Wouldn't dead sod protect the soil better than rock landscaping?
Whenever I hear of these California issues I can't help but think of this story;
Peter Ellis wrote:
... The rock replacing grass - is better than dead sod on a number of levels (somewhat dependent n how they are doing the rock landscaping) . Dead sod is going to sheet water off and not infiltrate anything. Rock formations can create much better infiltration, as the rainwater is tumbled around passing by the rocks, slowing it down and giving it a chance to soak into the soil below. Also, in parts of California, fog can be a major source of water and a pile of rocks can serve to capture water from the fog in ways that dead sod simply cannot do. ...
tiffany thrasher wrote:hi, first off, i'm new here. hello! anyways, me and my dude are moving back to CA (central valley, merced) this summer, from VA, which is pretty much the exact opposite climate, lol.
i'm planning on planting tons of food at whatever house we move to, but since we will be renting, im not sure how to set up a greywater system..
leslie has the awesome idea to catch all the shower water, but i'd love to be able to divert all the water (dishes/laundry etc.. ) in an easy way..
i really dont think whoever we are renting from is going to be cool with me replacing pipes to divert water flow, so i guess im stuck with having buckets/tubs etc.. to catch the water from the sink/shower and not being able to divert the laundry water..
any ideas would be awesome..
elle sagenev wrote:But look, CA is getting a new water park!!!
elle sagenev wrote:California seems to have approached this whole thing a big oddly. Now, my state isn't bright by any means but more years than not there are yard watering restrictions. CA doesn't seem to have any idea what they should be doing.
Aaron Goodwin wrote:This is some really good discussion!
One of the biggest difficulties with California, in general as well as with this specific issue, is that it's a very large state covering very different areas. The northern part of the state receives substantially more rain than the southern; and the weather is much more temperate on it's west side than it's east side (this is what happens when you have a mountain range running through the middle of a coastal state. There's a real sense for Northern residents that Southern California is steeling their water and wasting it, but at the same time most of the food is grown in Southern California so it's just all a recipe for catastrophe.
Also, on the black plastic—a major reason it's used (at least in the desert regions I'm more familiar with) is that the small amount of shade, cover, and retained moisture offered by rocks creates a boon for weeds. Since most people don't have the importance of soil on their radar, and most aren't looking to create more productive environments for food, they just throw down the plastic and say to hell with it. It's really sad.
In my neck of the woods you used to see a lot more front yards that hard dirt and shrubs and more native plants, but not anymore. Having dirt anywhere is viewed by people, as well as municipalities, as a poorly maintained yard and you'll get cited for it.
Aaron Goodwin wrote:I think the most important change we need is for better-informed local governments. They stand a much better chance of actually incentivizing water-wise choices from the populace. In many places it's downright illegal to do most of what we've discussed. There are tons of codes having to do with waste water, grey water, and other things seen as a public nuisance, but which are actually beneficial.
Sheri Menelli wrote:
I think another reason there is such a division among the northern and southern regions of California is that north has a lot more lakes, streams, ponds, etc. When they start to dry up, you notice it. Down here the only way most of the public knows there is a drought is because they said so on TV.