Editorial: California should say goodbye to grass that’s only there for looks
1–10 of 45 posts
Re: Editorial: California should say goodbye to grass that’s only there for looks
#2Get rid of golf courses first. I saw many on my road trip from one side of the state to the other.
We also need more water storage because we just had a ton of rainfall and let it run out to the ocean this summer.
Re: Editorial: California should say goodbye to grass that’s only there for looks
#3Get rid of golf courses first. I saw many on my road trip from one side of the state to the other. We also need more water storage because we just had a ton of rainfall and let it run out to the ocean this summer.
Can you report some numbers relative to total water use that justify that statement? Golf is a very popular sport and they often use reclaimed water not suitable for drinking. The grass also has a “function” as its the surface for the sport. Do they really account for that much water usage vs everyone having a lawn that does nothing?
Re: Editorial: California should say goodbye to grass that’s only there for looks
#4Get rid of golf courses first. I saw many on my road trip from one side of the state to the other. We also need more water storage because we just had a ton of rainfall and let it run out to the ocean this summer.
San Francisco alone have 6 public golf courses. And some of them are loosing lots of money, primarily due to cost of upkeep. And they are literally used by a handful of people at a time, while every other patch of land is packed with visitors.
Re: Editorial: California should say goodbye to grass that’s only there for looks
#5Get rid of golf courses first. I saw many on my road trip from one side of the state to the other. We also need more water storage because we just had a ton of rainfall and let it run out to the ocean this summer.
Can you report some numbers relative to total water use that justify that statement? Golf is a very popular sport and they often use reclaimed water not suitable for drinking. The grass also has a “function” as its the surface for the sport. Do they really account for that much water usage vs everyone having a lawn that does nothing?
Golf, he said, consumes less than 1% of all water used in California, but nearly 25% of Coachella Valley water.
https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2021-10-09/steve-lo...
I have mixed feelings about golf courses, but there is a thimbleful of actual data for you.
Re: Editorial: California should say goodbye to grass that’s only there for looks
#6While our water coffers are full, we should look at replacing more of the ornamental, non native plants that people have with natives grassss, flowers, shrubs, and trees. California is a botanical bounty and there's no reason why we need such an artificial monoculture when native plants support local wildlife, require fewer resources and less upkeep, and often look better as well. Not to mention that they often smell great, especially some of the native sage species that grow in the hills.
Fun fact: before the Spanish conquest and aggressive grazing agriculture, the native grasses in California were perennials, greatly reducing the severity of fires.
This won't fix the aggressive consumption of water by agriculture. I'm not sure what to do about that, except allocates strict water allotments and encourage more drought resistant crops with government programs.
Re: Editorial: California should say goodbye to grass that’s only there for looks
#7We should first get rid of farms that take free water and export the goods out of the country. But politicians won't because these billionaires are great donors.
Re: Editorial: California should say goodbye to grass that’s only there for looks
#8Everywhere should be getting rid of grass that's only there for looks.
Re: Editorial: California should say goodbye to grass that’s only there for looks
#9For water, grass doesn’t matter. Golf courses don’t matter. Californians water “shortage”, like its housing crisis, is a political choice. In this case, it’s entirely a problem of agriculture.
(The other arguments against ornamental lawns are valid. As someone allergic to many grasses, I have no love lost for lawns.)
Re: Editorial: California should say goodbye to grass that’s only there for looks
#10For water, grass doesn’t matter. Golf courses don’t matter. Californians water “shortage”, like its housing crisis, is a political choice. In this case, it’s entirely a problem of agriculture. (The other arguments against ornamental lawns are valid. As someone allergic to many grasses, I have no love lost for lawns.)
They could probably dramatically reduce the amount of water used by agriculture while still having plenty of agriculture.
Decades ago, I saw an article about making little basins to capture rain water in the right amount to sustain a tree in the desert to grow fruiting trees in places like the Middle East using natural rainfall in order to increase productivity of arid lands without stressing the environment. I don't believe this is standard practice anywhere in the world, much less a "developed" country like the US, but there's no reason it couldn't be a common practice someplace like California.