Howdyall:

As I roar home from the Dark Tower, I note the lawns that have gone unwatered, and are turning brown. (No pictures; if you need one by now, you need a skeptectomy . . . . )

The lawns in front of homes should grow right back, especially if they're the infamous Bermudagrass, which supposedly survived ground zero at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. (Supposedly. Makes a good story.)

Much more worrisome is the fate of lawns in parks. They're not watered, and they don't regenerate when trod, made out, or played soccer upon by multitudes of lummoxen.

So, does anyone know what cities, etc., plan to do?

Some of us work for political subdivisions responsible for such things. Maybe you can share ideas, plans, etc.? Not sure what La Habra's going to do, to avoid a Sea of Mud.

Really curious to know!

P.S. Palms are too big to walk on, so a palm garden won't have the problem that a nice lawn will have. My half acre of palms (and a few weeds) has about a third the water bill versus that incurred by a lawn of similar size. Another reason to plant more palms!

 

Attended a seminar last month with Don Hodel as the first speaker. I've never seen Don so adamant about any topic as he was discussing the drought. It's sheer bs and he had the facts and numbers to back the claim.

In facto ipso Dave, he was up in La Mirada I believe recently and was discussing the sad state that many of the pocket parks were in with a City worker. The fellow sez to Don "Hey, we're doing our part, down to one day a week watering." That's when Don mentioned the purple pipes leading to the irrigation to the guy...

The majority of people in charge don't even know the regulations between reclaimed and potable!

what's bs? the drought? kinda missed it there . . ..

1 hour ago, Gonzer said:

Attended a seminar last month with Don Hodel as the first speaker. I've never seen Don so adamant about any topic as he was discussing the drought. It's sheer bs and he had the facts and numbers to back the claim.

In facto ipso Dave, he was up in La Mirada I believe recently and was discussing the sad state that many of the pocket parks were in with a City worker. The fellow sez to Don "Hey, we're doing our part, down to one day a week watering." That's when Don mentioned the purple pipes leading to the irrigation to the guy...

The majority of people in charge don't even know the regulations between reclaimed and potable!

As a former governmental employee I find your last sentence sadly plauseable.

The 'bs' comes from the media-created hysteria over how we lowly home-owners are taxing our resources (water) to the point where we bear the brunt of cut-backs, penalties, and raised rates. if I may paraphrase Don,'7% - 9% of California's water usage is the total sum that all homes, public parks, medians and a few other offenders use per annum. Over 80% is dedicated to farming/agriculture.' How many of these farms are government subsidized...to grow crops then plow 'em under. The revenue in lost jobs, air quality, aesthetic value, plus any future replacement costs for dead trees and shrubs outweighs the pitiful amount we use and would surpass the savings. Notice not once did I mention grass. Lawns are also included in the percentage above. It was a fascinating lecture by Don and others who  presented numerous evidence of false representations made by local and state governments. We all respect Don's ability and experience when dealing with palms but this was a whole different side of the drought I was not aware of. Write him and ask for his notes, I'm sure he'd oblige.

P.S. Moose, I just saw your reply. Sad but true and I hope that our other forumites who are not affected by this will see the irony in that City worker's statement.

Edited December 10, 201510 yr by Gonzer

2 hours ago, Gonzer said:

The 'bs' comes from the media-created hysteria over how we lowly home-owners are taxing our resources (water) to the point where we bear the brunt of cut-backs, penalties, and raised rates. if I may paraphrase Don,'7% - 9% of California's water usage is the total sum that all homes, public parks, medians and a few other offenders use per annum. Over 80% is dedicated to farming/agriculture.' How many of these farms are government subsidized...to grow crops then plow 'em under. The revenue in lost jobs, air quality, aesthetic value, plus any future replacement costs for dead trees and shrubs outweighs the pitiful amount we use and would surpass the savings. Notice not once did I mention grass. Lawns are also included in the percentage above. It was a fascinating lecture by Don and others who  presented numerous evidence of false representations made by local and state governments. We all respect Don's ability and experience when dealing with palms but this was a whole different side of the drought I was not aware of. Write him and ask for his notes, I'm sure he'd oblige.

P.S. Moose, I just saw your reply. Sad but true and I hope that our other forumites who are not affected by this will see the irony in that City worker's statement.

Okay. Certainly agree, and then some. Crop price supports are as vibrant as ever while infra structure goes begging. Among much else.

But back to my original question -- what will happen to the ravaged lawns in the parks? Re-seeding? Just curious, more of an administrative thing. If it does rain as expected something will grow.

Lawns of the Doomed

Anyone have any thoughts?

Saw a lawn worn to the sod netting.

Plant some kikuyu plugs. New lawn in a month, whether you want it or not!

 

On December 9, 2015 at 14:47:03, Gonzer said:

Attended a seminar last month with Don Hodel as the first speaker. I've never seen Don so adamant about any topic as he was discussing the drought. It's sheer bs and he had the facts and numbers to back the claim.

In facto ipso Dave, he was up in La Mirada I believe recently and was discussing the sad state that many of the pocket parks were in with a City worker. The fellow sez to Don "Hey, we're doing our part, down to one day a week watering." That's when Don mentioned the purple pipes leading to the irrigation to the guy...

The majority of people in charge don't even know the regulations between reclaimed and potable!

Found this article by Hodel which seems to lay out what Gonzer mentions.

On 3/23/2016, 1:27:20, Matt in OC said:

 

Found this article by Hodel which seems to lay out what Gonzer mentions.

Thanks for that link.

Very educational.

What if say half of the parks were xeriscaped, and half the parks were irrigated.  So, in theory, the irrigated park could get twice the water, as only 50% of the original park designated space would still need irrigation.  The biggest problem we face is population growth, and the additional infrastructure needed to properly facilitate that growth.  More people need more water.

great thread!

 

52 minutes ago, Sabal Steve said:

What if say half of the parks were xeriscaped, and half the parks were irrigated.  So, in theory, the irrigated park could get twice the water, as only 50% of the original park designated space would still need irrigation.  The biggest problem we face is population growth, and the additional infrastructure needed to properly facilitate that growth.  More people need more water.

Even worse is the policy on this issue coming out of Sacramento.   There are some very low cost common sense measures that could really alleviate the impact of the drought.  But there isn't the political will nor common sense to make it happen.  It doesn't have to be like this...citizens of this state need to start asking some hard questions and demanding real answers...and fire those who refuse to act.

On 3/29/2016, 10:07:53, Sabal Steve said:

What if say half of the parks were xeriscaped, and half the parks were irrigated.  So, in theory, the irrigated park could get twice the water, as only 50% of the original park designated space would still need irrigation.  The biggest problem we face is population growth, and the additional infrastructure needed to properly facilitate that growth.  More people need more water.

Sounds like a great idea . . .

But parks have many purposes. I've never heard of xeriscaped soccer or baseball fields, for example.

Repurposing -- and education about that -- will likely be necessary.

On 3/29/2016, 10:59:46, Hammer said:

Even worse is the policy on this issue coming out of Sacramento.   There are some very low cost common sense measures that could really alleviate the impact of the drought.  But there isn't the political will nor common sense to make it happen.  It doesn't have to be like this...citizens of this state need to start asking some hard questions and demanding real answers...and fire those who refuse to act.

Good luck with this.......

On 3/29/2016, 10:07:53, Sabal Steve said:

What if say half of the parks were xeriscaped, and half the parks were irrigated.  So, in theory, the irrigated park could get twice the water, as only 50% of the original park designated space would still need irrigation.  The biggest problem we face is population growth, and the additional infrastructure needed to properly facilitate that growth.  More people need more water.

 Last couple sentences are right on point, as is the rest your opinion Steve. Here in Phoenix, a lot of the parks are landscaped in just such fashion..and look great though some could use more palms, rarer species of course. Sure you have grassy areas for playing fields and such things as spots to picnic but i've noticed that many of these areas are designed in such a fashion that they act as a place where any curb/street-side runoff drains directly into these areas.

There was a you tube video id seen several years ago where a homeowner in Tucson had changed the design of their curb so that runoff was channeled off the street directly into their landscaping.. What a smart idea.  While CA argues about water, you notice, for the most part, there hasn't been near the same level of  discussion here in Arizona.. and the state has been in a drought for far longer than Cali.

Many residential/ business properties here are also xeriscaped vs. using much, if any, grass and imo, i enjoy the look vs looking out the window at the Medical park across the street and seeing half dead grass. As far as places like Golf courses.. i'll refrain from sharing my opinions.. My thoughts on that subject aren't appropriate for any discussion.

Soccer fields?.. think about where most kids/people play "Football" in other countries.. Usually a neighborhood dirt lot.. Best place to play, imo.. Then again, i like getting dirty.

When all is said and done, the debate about water allocations back in CA will never be solved,  there will always some group complaining about having to change their habits/ not wanting to- the it's my right to.. wash down the driveway/sidewalk  crowd... I'm personally glad i don't have to waste time tending to an aspect of a landscape that really has little value compared to where else i can spend my time and money. I used to laugh at some of the homeowners back in Cincinnati who had lawns that took anywhere from a half hour to over an hour to cut,rake,fertilize, etc.. Why the heck would you want nearly an acre ( or more, if you lived in the wealthiest parts of town) of lawn for?..