| Here in Southern California, they say that if you want to grow anything, the first thing you need to "plant" are irrigation pipes (or hoses). We've got the perfect temperature year-round to grow food, but we don't have the perfect amount of rainfall. And - despite the six straight days of near-constant rainfall we just had - this year is predicted to be a dry year for us.
Where the rainfall from those six days wasn't causing floods or mudslides, the majority of it was squandered. In our yard, we collected a tiny fraction of the rain in our 60 gallon rain barrel. Significantly larger rain barrels cost hundreds of dollars, like the 1300 gallon barrel a friend has, which ran her $1300. For us and for so many others, most of the rain that fell on our yard went down the drain. Our roof, our yard, and our driveway are all set up to direct the rain right into the sewers. So are most other yards around here. Once the water runs into the sewers, I believe it is channeled into the ocean.
But ever since that six day deluge, we've had precious little rain. I can't remember the last time it rained, and the weather forecast now predicts 10 days of sunshine. As a gardener, I'm getting frustrated. I've been watering the plants with my watering can, but nothing beats rainfall. The effect rain has on plants (compared to watering, and assuming the rain doesn't result in a flood) is simply magical. Drip irrigation is pretty good, but rainwater comes without any of the salts that are in irrigation water. (Drip irrigation using rainwater collected in a rain barrel would work well, I suppose. But that brings us back to the need for an expensive rain barrel.)
What I'm learning about water as a gardener has major implications for my entire region. Living soil can hold more water than dead soil. Last summer, one particular part of our garden with very poor soil could hardly grow a thing. Most everything I planted there died, and it was more than a problem of nitrogen, although that was likely a problem too. When plants didn't die, they grew very slowly. This is even true of plants with low nitrogen needs, like beets.
Watering this part of the yard was impossible. The water could hardly penetrate the soil, and instead it evaporated off the top. This meant that the plants got very little water, and it would require a ridiculous amount of water (losing a lot to evaporation) just to get the plants what they needed.
When the rainy season came this year, I was ready. I planted cover crops all over that part of the yard - a mix of rye grass and hairy vetch, with a fava bean planted every 8 inches. With the rain, the cover crops thrived. I am now in the process of killing them and leaving them on the soil as a mulch for when I plant my brassica plants there. We'll see if the brassica plants survive this time around. I noticed we've also got some volunteer lettuce and dill growing there. I plan to add worm castings and compost to the top few inches of the soil after I harvest my brassica plants, and then I want to grow corn, beans, and squash in that area this summer. And hopefully, by then, the soil will have some ability to hold water. Hopefully, when I water that area this summer, the water won't just evaporate off the soil's surface as it did last summer.
What all of this says to me is that we will be a lot better off if for having less water in advance than if we wait until it's too late. If the climate crisis is going to bring extremes like droughts and floods (not just here, but all over the world), then it's true that an ounce of preparation is better than a pound of cure. When there's plenty of water supplied by moderate rainfall (and no flooding), it's no big deal if your soil can't hold much water. So what if the water runs off or evaporates? It'll rain again soon. But once you've got extremes (droughts and floods), good soil that holds water is crucial. And at that point, it will be a lot more difficult and resource-intensive to improve your soil than if you had done it before when the weather was less extreme. |
