Landscape Designing Around Water Restrictions

Posted on June 26, 2009 by Steve

As we watch the Sun Belt’s water problems develop over time, we see varying responses to the issue. There is denial and acceptance, large expansive lawns in weird and inappropriate locales and some encouraging looks at adaptation in using more native plants as well as innovative and more miserly irrigation systems, servicing all this. It is called embracing reality.

Some projects have a certain stark beauty in being left sparsely-planted, if done right:

(click any image to enlarge hugely)

Other aspects then come into play, such as rocks or other features like mounding or even in representing a desert climate with – who knew? – a desert look!

The above and below pictures will certainly not be everyone’s cup of tea. Naturally, the plants here did and will get a bit larger, depending on how they are fed and maintained, but this particularly severe example of design is probably on the sort of “lunatic fringe” of acceptable for many people who have other ideas for landscaping. However, this particular place offers a minimum of maintenance and most definitely a piddling amount of water cost for a season. Indeed, this one uses barely any water at all. Overall, it does have a consistent theme and it does have the Feng Shui of meandering paths leading to new visualizations and the imaginary prospects of weather events like running water inside the dry creek beds. (which, I might add, are actually functional for that very reason).

On the lusher end of the scale, once again we confront ourselves with the mathematical certainty of water use in terms of quantity. Let’s use this picture as an example for what to expect from a garden at its maturity:

If you enlarge this picture, aside from all else that might gain attention, there are approximately 30 plants in all requiring water. 4 of them – the trees -require double of what the shrubs require. Some of the perennials, one half of that. Essentially, we have placed 2 gallon per hour emitters under the ground, feeding the roots of all the shrubs. Because of the far larger root bases, the trees have 2 – 2 gallon per hour emitters. The perennials all have a one GPH emitter. When this landscape was first run, we ran it for 20 minutes, twice a day, and we felt extravagant. Therefore, this particular section used up about 40 gallons of water per day, less than a bath. The entire yard – and it is rather park-like and large – used up about 200 gallons a day, the truth is. Having said that, this is hardly a normal place inasmuch as it was a higher budget scenario. Just the same, even using 200 gallons per day, we found we were able to cut the times when it was cooler and adjust it upwards for the heat. That amounts to 4 baths, according to the standard of 50 gallons in a bathtub.

Below is a more normal sized yard. I often feature this landscape because it was one of our best, in my opinion and also because, in many ways, our most successful adaptation to using less water than ever before. This one features perennials, most noteworthy. They tend to do marvelous things with little care and they also tend – depending on the species – to require less water in general.

This one, all-in-all, is a “2 Bath affair”. We used rock mulches to keep the moisture in and to shade the water access to prevent evaporation and to hold the humidity tightly within the plants’ parameters.

Another look. 😉

This project is a water-saver deluxe, actually, in spite of its rich look. My point in all this – and it always is – is that water, placed judiciously and correctly, can be delivered in small enough quantities to be nearly insignificant. Not only are we being responsible citizens by using less water, but we get our cake too! And not only are we saving a precious resource, but we pay less “at the pump” as it were.

Here are just a few other 2- and 3- bath a day watering spectacles:

This one is the under side of –

This one –

That’s about it today. Drink your water!! 😉

Musical Interlude – Joe Zawinul 1932-2007

Posted on June 17, 2009 by Steve

Just a quick break from all the irrigation and blooming talk for a look at someone I always felt deserved a wider audience.

Joe Zawinul won Best Keyboardist in the Jazz magazine “Down Beat”, 30 times. A young prodigy who came to the US to learn music at the Berklee School of Music, he was told he was already so good he needed to “Go out and play for a living.”. He soon joined Cannonball Adderly, then wrote for Miles Davis and then formed the groundbreaking band Weather Report, with Wayne Shorter.

Joe liked melody and he liked his music up beat. He was a serious experimenter with electronics as this clip shows. But what he loved best was a red hot band he could play with. Famous for a world beat sort of lyrical weirdness – just try to figure any of the languages sung here – even the voices are instruments, including the lady in this song who began with Zap Mama. He always played with the best in the business and they enjoyed working with this hero of mine.

This song is insanely upbeat. The youtube synch here is bad but I really don’t care. The music wins this race – and it does cook. Enjoy, Joe Zawinul, a giant in music. Here’s what a 75 year old bopster does. 😉

3 – My Take On Drip Irrigation – And Some Water Math

Posted on June 14, 2009 by Steve

Which picture below is the landscape that has irrigation? One of these pictures is irrigated by buried pipe and the other has no irrigation supply whatsoever.

This? (click all images to enlarge)

Or this?

If you answered the second picture, you would be correct. The top picture – from Vancouver, British Columbia – is from a project we did many years ago, obviously, which has performed spectacularly and grown thanks to the local climate – which is quite wet.

The second picture is from Reno, Nevada – smack in the middle of the Great Basin high desert and not quite a year old yet at the time of this picture. It is very irrigated, by means of buried pipes in the ground and small emitters which produce a designated amount of water to each individual plant. One thing about planting stuff in Reno is that, if somehow the watering regime is not right, you will find out fast! A pounding and relentless Sun mixes with an utter lack of humidity to expose any deficiencies pretty much immediately. For the record, here are later looks at that project, 2 years later:

This latter property is completely irrigated. Yes, as time has gone on, additional emitters were added, adding marginally to the water bill. Many times and in many places, this is the case, especially in neighborhoods such as this which were subdivisions, completely terraformed by excavators and bulldozers to conform to planned needs. Other places in this dry region where drip is used – in, say, homes built on more established existing soils, sometimes the drip irrigation merely acts to get roots to a water table which literally takes over from there. In these cases, the irrigation system, at least for trees and for many plants, can take a hike.

Here is a picture of what a project looks like during the course of installing drip irrigation:

Notice the black pipe coursing throughout the plantings. Eventually, it will be buried, as will the smaller distribution tubes that carry a certain pre-allocated amount of water to the roots of the trees and plants. One can actually determine precisely how much water is used over a period of time by use of these regulated devices. Put on a time clock, we can say, for example, that this group of plants has 200 different plants on it. Of these, the trees will have 3 – two gallon per hour (GPH)* – emitters apiece. Otherwise, the plants themselves will have one 2 GPH emitter apiece. (Note: some of the smaller ones will actually have 1 GPH emitters).

If we run it for a half hour, our 40 trees and 160 plants will need a total of:

(Trees- 40 x 6/2 = 120 gallons and the Plants – 160 x 2 / 2 = 160 gallons. Total = 280 gallons of water).

Inasmuch as this big project had some 4 planting zones of a similar make up, we can see that it would use around 1,000 gallons of water per day.

A Caveat: (Once again, this is a 5 acre project, somewhat densely planted. Yes, it must be nice! Bear in mind, for this guy, he had his own well, too, so much of his water went literally right back down into his own water table.)

For the project above this one, where we compared irrigation versus non-irrigation, the numbers for one zone listed here apply to the entire yard. So what is 280 gallons? How does it compare to our daily uses of water, per se?

Bath: 50 gallons
Shower: 2 gallons per minute (15 minutes shower = 30 gallons)
Teeth brushing: 1 gallon
Hands/face washing: 1 gallon
Face/leg shaving: 1 gallon
Dishwasher: 20 gallons/load
Dishwashing by hand: 5 gallons/load
Clothes washing (machine): : 10 gallons/load
Toilet flush: 3 gallons
Glasses of water drunk: 8 oz. per glass (1/16th of a gallon)

As can be seen, the “hardship” of water can be lessened by the proper use of the right irrigation materials. Put another way, if you let a hose run, it puts out around 8-12 gallons a minute. If you have your garden hose running for an hour, watering plants and trees, you will have used 2-3 times what that drip irrigation system supplied to all those plants and trees. The equivalent to using the drip system for 40 trees and 160 plants is to taking 2 baths, flushing 6 times, washing 2 loads of clothes and running the dishwasher.

Now, grass is thirstier. The project below had 12 sprinkler heads using 2 gallons each per minute. They often ran it for upwards of 10 minutes. Just this lawn alone, therefore, used 240 gallons a day! And that’s when they only watered it once. (Many times, they ran it twice.)

They asked us for a method of keeping some lawn but cutting down costs of watering. By using alternative materials instead of lawn, such as brick pavers and by creating planting beds, we were able to save them substantial watering costs. For one thing, we used low trajectory nozzles on their sprinkler heads which minimized how much sprayed water was lost due to wind – in Reno, this is a concern. For another, we placed them in better spots and used a nozzle that has been developed which uses less water in general, yet still delivers to the exact spots they are designed for. What we ended up with was a landscape which cost them 2/3 less money on watering and yet still had some lawn. Here it is:

Any more, we consistently convert what once were huge swaths of grass into more manageable and less water-hogging landscapes. What is most bizarre about the entire scenario is how friendly one can get towards plants and flowers and – frankly – how much more interesting they can be, done right. Irony of ironies, I suppose, even installing a water feature using water recycled by a pump can reduce a water bill.

There are design rules which have also adapted to the new realities surrounding watering shortages and wiser use of this precious resource. That’s what I will address next.

Final Spring Madness – Blooms and More Blooms in Portland, Oregon

Posted on June 6, 2009 by Steve

Yes, it is wrapping up. As if things were not rushing to the inevitable pushy behavior of Summer with more Sun and heat than we imagined possible in January, last night we got visited by near tornado conditions. Big huge winds, some hail, lots of pounding rain just beating the heck out of all those late-hanging blooms. Summer may be arriving with an exclamation point!

Nevertheless, I promised something – blooms of Spring, the “final days” – so, with that ominous designation, I will traipse forth with those remaining stragglers (don’t believe that for a second). 😉 They actually look pretty proud. I dare say, my ‘hood continues to kick bloom butt.

(click any image to enlarge)

The Exbury Hybrid Azalea above is one oversized sucker but whose random poke of itself over and above the mass below it, just begged for some photographic attention. So? I gave it some.

This charming small rhododendron sits at the front door of a local condo and I have always been captivated by its two color bloom.

For 11 months of the year, the rhodies featured blow bedecking this small home in a truly splendorous show of bloomage, are an unremarkable, if generally comely bit of green. But when it comes bloom time, these guys are in a class by themselves. This picture really needs enlarging to fully appreciate just how spectacular they can be.

Other yards as well had their shady rhodies still showing off – and in some of the more exotic colors which tend to bloom late..

The lushness is almost ridiculous, occasionally, such as this place, below. So easy to grow here, they just get bigger and more reliable yearly.

I was caught by the color of this baby last year. It’s a very cool orange and pretty much at its peak right there.

Here’s a happy rhodie!

The deep shade canopy allowed these dogwood trees to bloom later than normal. The pink in the foreground and a gorgeous white in the background make a stunning small tableau, hard by soime apartment complex parking lot.

Meanwhile, back to the local rhodedenrons –

It’s honestly quite a show.

Rhododendrons have adapted to the American North West like a native plant. They thrive and adore it up here. All those hybrids developed in England and now Canada and the US are paying huge dividends opf uncommon beauty. Yes, there are native rhodies here – typically purple-blooming. And, yes, they sure do well. But the ones we are seeing dosplayed here are almost all unviersally hybrids, most actually stemming from genetic permeations of Rhododendrons from Nepal and China.