Tessiess, I'm sure you're right about hand-watering being OK any day per the Governor's order; but, as my water company (Golden State) stated in a leaflet that any "irrigation" had to be on certain days depending upon one's address, I e-mailed the customer service desk of the company asking them to specifically clarify what they meant by "irrigation"--and, most specifically, whether they included hand-watering under that head. What I anticipated was that they would respond "no, hand-watering is OK any day," which I'd then print out and have in my pocket in case any drought jihadists challenged me if I were watering on the "wrong" day. To my astonishment, they responded that hand-watering is regarded as irrigation, and so hand-waterers would have to hew to the stated days. Now, I'm sure they're wrong if they're just trying to implement the Governor's orders, and perhaps their customer service desk is just guessing or misinformed; but, as you might imagine, this answer of theirs puts me in a delicate and difficult position. I'm going to contact the water company again, gently challenging their interpretation; and meantime I'm going to see if there's anything on-line from the Governor's office clarifying this. Though I manage, it's an extreme hardship to hand-water my whole property on the stated days within the stated hours (and I refuse to use the sprinkler system in the drought). Thanks for your posting--it gives me something to refer to when I contact my water company. My experience shows the problem in such unusual situations: The ill-informed and the ignorantly over-enthusiastic make a bad problem worse!

You are right that some water companies (particularly small ones like mine) are not really sure what they're supposed to do.

As it happened, we had a problem this morning with water pressure.

I called the water company, and asked the lady on the phone if I could please come to her house to shower and wash my hair -- since it was not possible here . . . LONG SILENCE. (Then, she laughed.)

Annnny-how . . . After they fixed the problem, one of their guys stopped here to check our water pressure. I took the opportunity to ask him how things are being "policed" (since I have seen some whopping violations). He said that they have had a few problems, but a gentle reminder has been enough in most cases. I think it's still a work in progress -- and the deep green lawns are becoming easier to spot with every passing day.

We are not restricted as to which days we water, only as to how much water we use, overall. To me, that seems sensible. After all -- it should be usage that counts -- not when you do it. (So, I am safe to go on hand-watering my pot-ghetto.)

That is pretty funny Brent, because my water company is also Golden State. However, my city is in the process of taking it over via eminent domain.

I know for sure that MY city won't do that. Just like they won't try to bring us into the City. They told us years ago -- "Oh, no! We don't WANT you!" And it's true. We would be too expensive for them to absorb.

Tessiess, yes--funny in both the "peculiar" and "ha ha" senses! My suspicion is that the fine worker who responded to my earlier e-mail at something like 1 a.m. was just winging it without looking into the matter. I duly sent off my calm, concise, and reasoned re-enquiry to Golden State after I made my earlier posting here (checking the Governor's pages on the drought yielded nothing pertinent); we'll see what the response is (to my surprise, last time they responded within 24 hours). I'm perfectly willing and able to get up at daybreak or before to give my garden what care I can; but I do not go gentle into that good night; I rage against the dying of the light!

If we can hand water a few things on the off days I would be so grateful. Its hard for the potted plants to go from Friday to Tuesday with nothing and I'm trying to move them into more shaded places or plant them as I find places. Some of the special things from Vintage I've been watering anyway early early just as the sun comes up with a bucket. I'm cutting m,y water use way back and I hate feeling like someone can get after me for hand watering a few rare roses. I don't have any sprinklers spraying into the air or anything wasteful like that.

I have 4 things in 1-G pots. 1 of them needs daily water. The others can go a couple of days.

I can water most of them with dish-rinse water, so no one really could (or should) complain --- particularly since our neighbor is running a river of over-watering runoff down the street every couple of days.

I have in my recently de-lawned areas some new plants which need a little extra aqueous help in their first week or two as they get established. I have a one-gallon jug which I lug out to dab them with some extra water as needed--and fie on any drought faddists who would quarrel with this. The fifty-some (new) Gazanias now don't need the help; but the supposedly drought-tolerant Agastache aurantiaca cultivar strain 'Floral Carpet' seems decidedly thirsty in its youth. In my newest bed, just a week old, and "especially special" because it surrounds the water meter, I'm trying out the Viola odorata idea I mentioned here not so long ago; after a week, they're looking very promising indeed, as are a trio of Aquilegia longissima and a big drift of Geranium 'Biokovo'. Here too is another patch of the Agastaches; and they seem much happier in the semi-shade with some direct morning sun in this bed than the other "in the all sun all the time" bed. The shade is from a beloved old Locust tree, the flowers of which are one of the delights of Spring. Here too is a drift of seedling Eucomis humilis, their parents flourishing nearby in an older and shadier bed, poking through a sea of Scutellaria diffusa.

I continue to await a response from the water company to my e-mail. The fact that a response is taking longer than last time is--I'm optimistically hoping--perhaps a sign that the responder is actually looking into the matter, or referring it to a higher-up, rather than just tossing off a glib answer. I'll of course report here the response when (I won't add "or if") it comes . . .

I HOPE YOU GET A REASONED ANSWER!

We have a bunch of 5g buckets sitting by the plants that need a bit extra. Not sure if it is cheating to use the water poured on an okay day on a not so okay day, but pretty sure no neighbor would stay anythings since we probably use less than most anyway

As do we. Since our neighbor is running water down the street every other day.

It has now been a week, and I have received no response to my e-mail to the water company asking for a clarification of hand-watering time/day restrictions vs. sprinkling time/day restrictions. Consequently, I just sent them another message informing them that it was their own representative who told a public meeting that hand-watering had no time/day restrictions, and that I would take that (i.e., no restrictions on hand-watering) as being correct unless they responded telling me their public meeting representative was wrong, and/or explaining the discrepancy between in-person answers and e-mail answers. I will inform y'all of their response, if one comes; and I encourage those reading this to contact their own water company and ask them about time/day restrictions on sprinkling vs. those on hand-watering, and to post the answers here. It's possible that different agencies have different rules; but it seems to me that the nature of this aspect of the response to the drought makes it something which should be uniform throughout the State.

The only reasonable way to make it uniform throughout the State would be to calculate the square-footage of each property, and allot an allowed-amount for each parcel. I think that would be very fair -- but I doubt it will happen. (This is akin to my opinion that EVERY swimming pool should be covered when not in use.)

As for days of use, I think it's a mistake to make EVERYONE on a system water on the same day at the same time. It would be better for the overall system if you AT LEAST did "odd/even."

The hand-watering thing is really important. I ALWAYS have some roses in pots, and those for the most part need hand-watering or hand-supplementing. I have at this time 4 roses in 1-G containers, and it's my aim to pot ALL of those up, before much more time passes.

Here is a new report of the drought meeting held by Golden State on May 28, 2015 at El Roble in Claremont. Drought Meeting May 28. The article doesn't mention the hand watering (with auto shutoff) information that I posted about earlier. It was Ben Lewis, from Golden State, who made the statement in response to a question from someone in the audience.

I am uneasily aware that some of my drought friendly changes could be resulting in a temporary bump up in water usage. I've been moving plants to fewer beds, removing some of the less valued plants that were there previously. But newly moved plants need more frequent watering for the first month or so, especially in warm weather, and especially those of some size. So while my irrigation timer is on far less frequently, my hand watering hose is seeing more use. I think I'm done moving plants, at least for now, so this should ease off in a few weeks at most.

I don't think you can possibly avoid that.

Still waiting for the water company to respond to my question. Meantime, here's the statement which I'll be carrying in my pocket when I hand-water:

At a drought/water use meeting on 5/28/15 called by Golden State Water
Company, company representative Benjamin Lewis Jr. said in answer to a question
that hand watering (with auto shut off), drip, or micro-irrigation could
be done any day of the week. It is the use of sprinklers that is restricted to
particular days of the week.

Well, that seems pretty definite, Brent. I don't see how there can be any misinterpretation.

OH, WAIT! That ALSO includes drip! (What is micro-irrigation?) and I wonder if it could be interpreted to cover bubblers, which we have.

HURRAH! SUCCESS! The water company just e-mailed me confirming that hand watering, drip, or micro-irrigation can be done any day of the week. It is the use of sprinklers that is restricted to particular days of the week. Presumably this provision for hand-watering is uniform state-wide, as the rules are under the control of the California Public Utilities Commission.

I suspect "micro-irrigation" means watering potted plants or a small well-defined plot of flowers or vegetables.

And in today's mail, I received an "advice letter" which is being sent to all water-users in the company's domain, announcing implementation of the stage 1 rules, and informing readers of how to protest the letter to the State government. I of course immediately protested the letter, as it only discussed "irrigation" without making any mention that hand-watering is not the irrigation meant (sprinkler-watering is the irrigation meant), and not stating that hand-watering is exempt from the time/day restrictions. Presumably everyone already has received or will be receiving such an "advice letter" from their water agencies. Please read it carefully, and if it does not state the exemption for hand-watering, please send in a protest (the letter tells you how; it's easy).

So, YES! HAND-WATERERS--FREE AT LAST! Spread the word!

Stage 1 rules?

Interesting your town is in Stage 1 and we are in Stage 3.

And we have no idea where we are. Seriously.

Stage 3? Ye gods. Orange County has a fairly fat and happy aquifer, which has been steadily recharged since 2008, so that may be why we're just entering Stage 1 in my area. But it's probably some arcane formula beyond human understanding which determines local stages.

I think it DOES have a lot to do with groundwater.

I don't even know what stage we are in -- our teeny water company is SO small that it is almost un-regulated as to water use. We are asked to cut 20% and we have cut 30%+ ...

No one much cares when we water. All that counts are totals. But WE know that our aquifer is far from healthy, so there is much to be concerned about.

We seem to be at stage 2, looking over the menu of escalating measures and what has been announced as the current rules. Glad to hear of your success, Odinthor. I have been wondering.

Of course, it makes no sense at all to mandate specific days of the week for irrigation. Intuitively, though, I think the rules are set up that way by the agencies because most people are fairly clueless about the amount of water actually needed by the plants they are growing and limiting days is a simple, prescriptive way to limit irrigation.

I don't know what stage we are in. I thought it was because the dog ate our water company letter (actually true), so I called the water company. They didn't know what stage we were in, either.

Ah, they just got back to me. We are at stage 3 here, despite near-average rainfall in our immediate area.

Info on microirrigation from UC Davis: Microirrigation Systems

We have a nice aquafer too. And are in the lists of areas who have reduced the most. But they want to make sure we have water for next year if the drought goes on

"I think the rules are set up that way by the agencies because most
people are fairly clueless about the amount of water actually needed by
the plants . . . "

*** I WISH that I didn't think that was the case, but I think it is very true. Down here, at least, more people than not have "mow-n-blow" maintenance crews who mow their lawns ... and as like as not also installed their watering systems. These folks will tell you that they don't know how to re-program their systems. I'm sure that is true, but they are also not very motivated to do so.

"Presumably this provision for hand-watering is uniform
state-wide, as the rules are under the control of the California Public
Utilities Commission."

Not necessarily. The CPUC oversees only investor-owned utilities, e.g, Southern California Edison, Golden State Water, PG&E. The CPUC has no authority over municipal (public) providers, e.g., Los Angeles DWP. I don't think the CPUC is doing the mandating. It's the State Water Resources Control Board.

California cut water use by 29% in May, exceeding the 25% cut required.
LA Times article on May water consumption

Disappointingly, the L.A. Times has returned to its fixation on residential water use, which is where the 29% cut occurred. How much of a cut in water use has Agriculture made, L.A. Times?--Agriculture, which uses 80% of the State's water?

CA has a million acres of irrigated alfalfa hayfields. Alfalfa uses around 40 inches of water per season in hot-summer areas.

This just came by email from the city manager's office: "May 2015 water use figures indicate that Livermore California Water Service Company customers reduced their water consumption by 52% while Livermore Municipal Water uses saw reductions at the 44% mark."

It was a rather cool May (especially for Livermore!) and we had a couple of small but strategically timed rainstorms that helped out. Still, it looks like folks were paying attention, for once, to how much and what they were watering and not just operating on auto-pilot as usual. In fact, city manager's office went on to urge people to not let trees die and to use water within their budget (which is calculated individually based on 2013 use) if trees look stressed.

Yes, michaelg, alfalfa is THE single top fresh water use for crops in California. One chart that shows that here. Always hard to believe. Edit to add that total domestic use of water (the water supplied to residences) in CA in 2005 was approx. 1640 billion gallons per year -- about the same as the 1600+ billion gallons used for alfalfa alone in 2010!

A lot of the Alfalfa is shipped to China, too. How do you like them apples?

Exporting the Colorado River to China

The Los Angeles Times reports a 90%-100% chance of a strong El Nino (= "lots of rain" normally) this upcoming Winter. Story at: http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-chance-for-strong-el-nino-20150710-story.html

So it's a matter of just keeping things alive until the raindrops start falling . . . in six months . . . Those who need to be wary of flooding and/or mudslides should start preparing NOW.

The agonizing about water usage may be put to rest, at least for a time, with the more than 90% chance that we will have an El Nino winter, which may begin as early as October, and an 85% chance that it will carry over into spring 2016. The fact that it was snowing in the Sierras yesterday may also be taken as a good (although almost unprecedented) sign. As time goes on the predictions are on an ever-firmer basis, although it's not known whether all parts of California will be affected. It is expected to be so severe that flooding will occur in many areas. We now have the choice of killing our plants by the drought or drowning them later in the year. Actually, this should be a great relief to the drought problem if it indeed comes to pass as predicted. I think this may rejuvenate a lot of malingering gardens, mine in particular.

I've been hoping for this. If it turns out to be true, I intend to plant ceanothus, manzanita, and hollyleaf cherry this fall in the former Pine Tree Garden where I removed the tea roses. That way I'll be prepared for the next drought. One thing you can count on in California. There will always be another drought.

I'm not going to expand my watered area, and even with a good El Niño.

We just got our water bill, and it looks as though all our efforts reduced our water use by 20%. We are supposed to reduce it by 30%, so if the drought does continue, I'll have to do more somehow. That would definitely require taking another bed out, probably the Olive Tree Garden. I was going to take it out this year but Tom had put a lot of work into it and wanted to keep it. I had to respect that.

Rosefolly

I don't know. A friend who is an ocean-current scientist showed me the charts she is seeing. It shows SoCal certainly getting more rain than we got last year, but to be honest, we could get twice what we got last year, and still be in a drought.
And there's no way that our horribly-depleted groundwater reserves are going to be significantly helped. We've been sucking that dry since the 1960's, and one blip of a rainy year isn't going to help.
So, yeah. We're prayin' for a generous El Nino, and we're preparing our hillside for lots of water. And I think folks in NoCal will really be helped. Also, if we get a good winter of rain, I think it will set our roses up to handle another year of heat. But I doubt if we're ever going to see a long-term return to a wetter, cooler climate, or the ability to plant a hillside of 400 roses in our coastal desert.

For the individual, possibly dead rose....

What I saw this spring after really drenching rains was that some roses, apparently dead above ground, would regrow from their roots. I'm not talking about marginally dead roses, I'm talking about not any scrape on any cane showed green or even fresh looking cambium. This may have an application in your gardens.
The other thing that came as a major shock was an maple tree. A massive maple planted too close, next to a 150+ year old house...owner of land burned the house down to make it a more desirable lot ( stupid is as stupid does, lot remains unsold). The fire was so intense that it appeared to have killed half of the majestic maple tree. On the fire side of the tree, total leaf loss and even loss of smaller stems and some branches. Next year, that side of the tree was still dead. Then this spring, with our deluge of an April (Frozen March and then 9" of rain in April), branches that had been 'dead' started putting out leaves. Not all of them, but some of them.

There's not anything I've been able to find in plant literature about temperate zone plants pushing growth back through cells that had no 'life', but this might have some application if you have a very wet El Nino winter.

Ann

Ann -- I think it might. I sure hope so!

I just encountered the following article, and thought it might interest some of you:

http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/9/8/084012/article

At any rate, I have my fingers crossed that you'll have some of that wet stuff falling out of the sky this winter.

Virginia

I just heard on the radio that while not all regions of the state have met the water usage reduction goal, the state as a whole has done so. NorCal has done a better job of cutting water than SoCal has, but that is only to be expected given that NorCal has more rainfall. It is difficult to reduce what is already scarce.

I still think the pipeline from Oregon to CA is an interesting idea. Fresh water that would otherwise flow into the ocean for less than the cost of building de salinating plants.

I was pleased for our area, I think the rate goal we were supposed to conserve was 12% (we already save a lot) and instead it was 40%

We hit the mid 30's. I was pleased with that.
NOT as pleased with the water our neighbor runs down the street every couple of days.

Jerijen,

What you need is the billboard that is posted along the 60 heading to LA. It's a closeup of a brown bear's face and reads " I see you water wasters ".

Put it up right where they can see it. Does anyone know if the CA bear has a name?

I like that idea. Might give that some thought.

Or, I might just report them.

Monarch is the bear's name: http://www.scpr.org/programs/take-two/2012/10/24/28981/monarch-the-sad-amazing-story-of-the-bear-on-calif/

Thank you Anne

I like this one better -- The Grizzly Bear on the grave of young Jacob Zeisz, in the Placerville Union Cemetery.

Jacob died in 1890 at age 25 years, 9 Mo., 26 days. His father was the first Brewer to establish a Brewery in CA. Jacob was a member of Native Sons of The Golden West, and the bear was their symbol. On the back of his stone, it says: "His friends paid for this monument."
Someone planted a lovely white Noisette rose on his grave.