This week we received two notices from SIN, services industrielsde Nyon prohibiting auromatic watering of lawns and gardens. Some things are allowed, hand watering, topping up of pools, etc.
Then it says:
Les contrevenants seront sanctionnés.
We fully intend to comply with the ban, stopping watering of the lawn and hand watering flowers and plants.
But while we are away for 3 weeks we are thinking using the watering system minimally to give a little water (5 mins per day)at 03h to plants and flowers. The system has a sensor to not turn on when it has rained recently.
We’re thinking this is a lot less water than we would use if we had not been away. Showers, washing up, dishwasher, washing machines.
But it says sanctions can be imposed for contravention. Is this actually true? Is this a crime?
Ironically the nearby Signy Centre is planning a water park for August!
Why would they say it if it was not true. And the watering system you use when on holidays is called a neighbor.
That was our Plan A, but for various reasons it isn’t possible this year.
Soaker system with an emitter for each plant at soil level, on a timer? No one knows it's even on...easy and fairly cheap to install.
Before sanctions I would hope they send a strongly worded letter. And if you explain what kind of system and show the decreased water consumption while you were away they really should be reasonable.
But it depends from city to city...
Amusing that on the shores of Lac Léman there's a water shortage but I know the drinking water comes down from the Jura and not much is pumped up out of the lake.
It can be a crime, a fine levied if that's what the town council has decreed. They'd have to catch you and prove it though and unless it was flagrant, you'd imagine a warning first. It might depend how nosy your neighbour is.
That's what I was going to suggest -- one of those "pearl drip irrigation hoses" on a timer. They lie so close to the ground that no one would would even know it's on. They can even be covered with a bit of mulch. Sneaky, but effective.
Well, our water comes from the lake. They say the reason is the water table is low!
I live in a very small village, so small we don't have a city council we have a Conseil Général, which we are members. At our quarterly meeting last week there was no notice of this from the municipalité. So there isn't a decree from the town council. This SIN notice came as a bit of a surprise.
But I'm not disputing the necessity for a ban I'm just curious if I can be fined for using a watering system that actually is putting water back into the water table.
Well my conscience is clear. We may be doing no more than we would do by hand if we were here.
You haven't quoted volumes of water or areas of plants but if you are being frugal then generally, 15 minutes of water every third night is going to benefit the plants more than 5 minutes every night as the water will have more of a chance to get down to the roots of the plants and do it's job.
This is a weaker argument/defence than your "We're using less than we'd have used (for household use) had we been here." After all, the water you are putting on the plants is being sucked up by the roots and then transpired through the leaves. Now, you could construct an argument that allowing the plants to die could expose the soil to transpiration at a greater rate (thus lowering the water table), plus the fact that beneficial outgassing from the (now nonexistent) plants is no longer happening. Hah!
For the long term I can recommend a water tank fed by a bypass fitted into a rainwater down pipe. These are cheap and easy to install - I am assuming you own a flat or house, if not you would have to get permission from the management.
What is the definition here of “automatic” ? Would, for example, the manual pressing of a button on a smartphone qualify as a manual watering ? Clearly, setting a timer would be considered an automatic watering. Maybe some technical ingenuity could get you out of trouble. Here, incidentally, is a similar application of technology to get around a requirement of law (Kosher Switch): https://www.haaretz.com/jewish/2015-…f-f7f559b70000
I’m not looking to get around the rule. I accept it’s necessary. However we have enriched Migros and Schilliger this spring and we would like to protect our investment while we are away.
Our usual thing is to ask neighbours to pop in every couple of days - we reciprocate, of course. It is a few balcony plants in our case.
This year, the neighbours are away when we are, so I’ve ordered a timer-driven solar-powered Gardena thingy from Galaxus that gives the plants water from a reservoir. We’ll see how well that works.
Not much use to someone with a full sized garden, I’ll grant.
Cheers,
Nick
Just curious, but is anyone else receiving similarity bans?
We’ve had nothing here so far.
Hauswart is still using a sprinkler on the lawns.
So the Gardena thing arrived. Got it all set up - all balcony plants have a nozzle installed. Bloody useless this week re the torrential rain the last few days. But it does work - solar powered and you can programme duration and frequency of dribble. The big box on the end I might install a nozzle but also go with plastic bottles with small holes drilledin the caps for that.
If our plants are still alive when we return from our hollibobs I’ll let you all know.
Cheers,
Nick