Corey Schmidt wrote:thanks for the thorough explanation! it would seem that the advantage of swales is in their relative permanence, while the keyline plowing (i'm assuming yeoman's system?) is more advantageous for cropping? Or would you say that a perennial system established on kpc treated land would be as absorptive as a swaled landscape in the long run (once tree growth precludes more plowing)? ripping the downhill side before the swale is built and even ripping the swale trench itself, potentially, if possible, should lead to a bit higher infiltration rate bumping those swale numbers up a bit, right? Very fascinating calculations.
Dan Grubbs wrote:Okay, highly opinionated and only partially informed comment below:
I've always found this "debate" between swale and KPC a bit dissatisfying. As I have examined both approaches, shouldn't I believe that my goals and objectives married with my particular landscape and its composition should help me choose options for enhancing the landscape and building soil? ... Am I making any sense here?