Amid drought, California declares war on lush lawns

Aug 03, 2014 by Veronique Dupont
A resident's brown lawn can be seen in the city of Glendora, east of Los Angeles on July 29, 2014 in California, where a neighbor made headlines after receiving a letter from the city threatening fines if they didn't water their lawn

Lush green lawns, a symbol of the American way of life, are under attack in California, where "cash for grass" programs have sprouted like weeds amid a severe drought.

With the western US state struggling to conserve water, locals are re-landscaping their outdoor spaces as attitudes shift about what constitutes an attractive yard.

And municipal monetary incentives—reflecting the dire circumstances depleting reservoirs and underground aquifers—are making it that much easier for many to make the switch.

Los Angeles, for example, is offering $3 for every square foot of grass that is replaced with more water-efficient options such as drought-tolerant plants, rocks and pebbles.

Under the "Cash in Your Lawn" incentive, property owners can get up to $6,000 for making the conversion.

"People forget we live in the desert—why do we try to make it the Midwest?" asked Larry Hall, a jazz musician and LA resident as he ripped up his front lawn to replace it with a more environmentally friendly one.

His wife Barbara said the city's program made it possible to actually follow through and foot the bill for the project.

"We've thought about it, we've had estimates on re-landscaping but they were a little bit too high," she said. "So the rebate made it more of a reality."

Similar programs have sprung up elsewhere in California as the three-year drought shows no signs of abating and threatens the water supply of the state's 38 million inhabitants.

Two weeks ago, Governor Jerry Brown took emergency measures aimed at the watering of lawns, forbidding residents from doing so more than twice a week.

A resident's lush green lawn can be seen in the city of Glendora, east of Los Angeles on July 29, 2014 in California

He has also temporarily prohibited fines that some communities and homeowner associations typically impose on people who let their lawns turn brown during the summer months for tarnishing a neighborhood's image.

In local media, meanwhile, readers and editorials calling for banning the watering of lawns and especially golf courses have multiplied of late as farmers face restrictions.

'Traditional' taking backseat?

Anne Phillips, owner of Go Green Gardeners hired by the Halls, said it was time to let go of what was once considered the norm.

"You know the 50s, 60s image of the traditional ranch style home with the lawn and ... you know there is something maybe in our childhoods or whatever about the way our house should look," she said.

"I think we just need to kind of move beyond that."

For Phillips, the "cash for grass" programs have proven to be a windfall, with her company seeing a 30 percent spike in business.

To make a garden more ecological, she replaces sprinklers—which result in a large amount of evaporation and water loss—with systems that are precisely placed and emit water sparingly.

In terms of plants, she favors succulents, herbs, lavender and agaves, among others.

Anne Phillips (R), owner of Go Green Gardeners talks with landscapers David Puac (L) and George Navoretti during the installation of a drought-tolerant landscape at a house in the San Fernando Valley area of Los Angeles on July 17, 2014

"It isn't something that has to be just boring and unattractive and really dry looking," she said.

Spawned by either increased environmental awareness or soaring water bills, dry or desert gardens are gaining ground in Los Angeles, especially in chic parts of town.

But they're still not standard.

Stephanie Pincetl, director of the California Center for Sustainable Communities at the University of California Los Angeles, said she received an anonymous letter asking her to remove hers.

"But then, as I was starting to do it, a neighbor saw me and told me 'stop!' This is my favorite garden of the neighborhood!"

Pincetl suggested two meters—"a meter for indoor water use, where water is priced affordably, and a meter for outdoor water use that reflects water scarcity"—was the way to get "Angelenos" to cut back.

"It's a bill for all water use so one understands that 60 percent at least of the that you are billed for is used outside," she added as a large puddle formed on the sidewalk opposite hers due to a badly placed sprinkler.

Explore further: 'Tailored' water—the latest in lawn care

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

When the grass isn't always greener

Aug 09, 2012

Worries about Pennsylvania facing a severe drought seem to have faded with recent rainstorms, but the question of how to care for your lawn during this summer's heat is still important.

'Tailored' water—the latest in lawn care

Jul 11, 2014

In Santa Fe, Albuquerque, and other major cities in New Mexico, nearly every public golf course is now watered with treated municipal wastewater rather than precious potable water supplies. Across the U.S. ...

California's drought-resistent gardens are hot

Mar 16, 2009

Even grinding recession has not undone growth in one corner of California's drought-parched landscaping sector, where Robert Cornell has spent more than two decades fine-tuning climate friendly gardens.

Recommended for you

Toolkit for ocean health

1 hour ago

The ocean is undergoing global changes at a remarkable pace and we must change with it to attain our best possible future ocean, warns the head of The University of Western Australia's Oceans Institute.

Tool kit for ocean health

4 hours ago

The ocean is undergoing global changes at a remarkable pace and we must change with it to attain our best possible future ocean, warns the head of The University of Western Australia's Oceans Institute.

Researcher studies interactions between land and water

5 hours ago

Early one morning last January, MIT undergraduate Theresa Oehmke was eating breakfast at the Kilauea Military Camp on Hawaii's Big Island when a colleague burst into the room, yelling, "Oh my god, the plume, ...

Geoengineering our climate is not a 'quick fix'

6 hours ago

The deliberate, large-scale intervention in the Earth's climate system is not a "quick fix" for global warming, according to the findings of the UK's first publicly funded studies on geoengineering.

User comments : 40

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

alfie_null
not rated yet Aug 03, 2014
How do things look in Beverly Hills? Any xeriscaping?
dtxx
not rated yet Aug 03, 2014
How do things look in Beverly Hills? Any xeriscaping?


I agree the "cash for grass" program probably won't give much of a financial incentive to anyone, especially in the more affluent areas. However, Beverly Hills does have quite a bit of xeriscaping. The only reason? It's trendy to be green around here. I see quite a bit of "drought friendly" landscaping every day in LA. It's just like how it's not that uncommon to see someone here making well over 6 figures but driving a prius.
Anda
2.3 / 5 (3) Aug 03, 2014
Drought was too scary of "Governator". Now it fights back! :)
Mayday
3.2 / 5 (6) Aug 03, 2014
I frankly can't imagine the defense argument. People pay excessive sums for a tiny piece of land that is seldom if every used, then plant a covering that consumes water, gasoline(electricity if mower is so powered. Both fuels produce pollution), toxic fertilizers, money, and time. Each home owner/renter must buy, store, and maintain their own numerous pieces of lawn equipment, plus provide the water and fuels. And everyone has to schedule untold hours to do the work. The result is a surface that is, in essence, invisible because it merely duplicates its neighbors. But god help you if you fall behind on any of the above. Almost any other option would be a better choice. I live in a townhome community where the noise, clatter, and smell of said weekend maintenance routines is stupefying.
Mayday
3.7 / 5 (3) Aug 03, 2014
I would be curious as to how much money and time are spent in the US each year on artificial landscaping -- by that I mean landscaping that involves any plant, scrub, or tree that is modified to look differently than it would naturally, including additions of water & chemistry. Okay, I'll look it up. Sheesh.
Milou
1.3 / 5 (3) Aug 03, 2014
Gardeners and landscapers are also very responsible for the excess watering. We had ours give slight excess water/treatment to our trees and plants so they would grow faster and they would come more often to take care of it. What will now happen when they are not needed as often and Home Depot/wholesales do not sell lawn mowers/etc.? Personally, I am glad the drought has come yet, not soon or hard enough!
DDBear
2.2 / 5 (5) Aug 04, 2014
Uncontrolled population growth, mostly from illegal immigrants and their offspring, is to blame for the exponential increased in water use. It is very simple. One person needs X amount of water for basic needs, like washing hands, toilet, and showering etc. Multiply X by N population, and there is the increase in water use. Will the US allow an unlimited number of illegal immigrants ("undocumented" is the politically correct term) so that we eventually run out of water and we are allowed only one toilet flush per day? If these are "undocumented" immigrants, we can call this "undocumented" water use.
Vietvet
3.8 / 5 (5) Aug 04, 2014
@DDBear
I've read some ignorant comments from some really stupid people on these threads. I see you've joined their club.

DDBear
2.4 / 5 (5) Aug 04, 2014
@Vietvet, I'm talking about real, verifiable factors that will have a major influence water resource planning. Your post, on the other hand, has absolutely no substance and is childish.
supamark23
3.8 / 5 (5) Aug 04, 2014
Uncontrolled population growth, mostly from illegal immigrants and their offspring, is to blame for the exponential increased in water use. It is very simple. One person needs X amount of water for basic needs, like washing hands, toilet, and showering etc. Multiply X by N population, and there is the increase in water use. Will the US allow an unlimited number of illegal immigrants ("undocumented" is the politically correct term) so that we eventually run out of water and we are allowed only one toilet flush per day? If these are "undocumented" immigrants, we can call this "undocumented" water use.


You're not just stupid, you're racist stupid.
SkyAbove
5 / 5 (3) Aug 04, 2014
Dr. Paul Ehrlich (Stanford Professor) and others have been warning of massive droughts for 50+ years. He predicted over population and overcrowding would lead to all kinds of environmental troubles. However, California governments kept passing out building permits like there was no tomorrow. So here we are with massive droughts, deadly viruses spreading and the Polar Ice Caps melting. All predicted by Professor Ehrlich and colleagues half a century ago.
DDBear
2.5 / 5 (4) Aug 04, 2014
@supamark, There is nothing racist about pointing out ILLEGAL entry into a country, using up natural resources. In theory these people could be coming from any country, and in recent news you can see that the number of countries are expanding. This is more about LAWS and the effect of violating those laws on public policy and resource planning. You are racist for saying that this is racist! I agree with the post above by SkyAbove, that overpopulation leads to environment troubles and California is enabling this will too much development as well.
Captain Stumpy
4 / 5 (4) Aug 04, 2014
There is nothing racist about pointing out ILLEGAL entry into a country, using up natural resources
@DDBear
so... where do you sit on the Indian Wars of the united states? with the invading and occupation armies of Europe that seceded and formed a new nation or with the indigenous tribal people who lived there?
You forget... by your standards above and by your comments, then any white settler living in the US of European or NON TRIBAL NATIVE descent is also an "illegal"...

IOW - either prove the correlation AND causation of your statement using the scientific method and empirical data or retract it. (IMHO - anyone can blame an illegal and forget that MOST water usage goes to factories, farms and other commercial oranizations...)
You are racist for saying that this is racist!
no... he is trying to get you to THINK

WHERE is the water usage going to and WHY is it so low? don't just THROW out a remark without proof... it is unproven conjecture and personal, not scientific
kochevnik
2.2 / 5 (5) Aug 04, 2014
There is nothing racist about pointing out ILLEGAL entry into a country, using up natural resources
@DDBear
so... where do you sit on the Indian Wars of the united states? with the invading and occupation armies of Europe that seceded and formed a new nation or with the indigenous tribal people who lived there?
You forget... by your standards above and by your comments, then any white settler living in the US of European or NON TRIBAL NATIVE descent is also an "illegal"...
Not so in the Western territories. There was little rule of law prior to settlers, so no basis to define an illegal any more than there is currently a basis in the Arctic Circle. The East was already settled by native Americans much more advanced than the Pilgrims who came seeking gold and then starved to death, digging up their relatives to cannibalize the flesh. In any case, Native Americans are mostly insulted you compare them to illegal Mexicans, latter whom employ biological warfare
Captain Stumpy
3.3 / 5 (3) Aug 04, 2014
Native Americans are mostly insulted you compare them to illegal Mexicans
@kochevnik
1- NO, I AM NOT INSULTED, nor are any other tribal native of North America that I know

2- it wasn't a comparison of illegals to them, it was a comparison of flawed logic based upon a fallacious claim which is only supported by prejudiced thinking

IT was a POINT being made about how to think logically using the scientific method etc

TRY reading the whole post and take it all in context.
DDBear
1.3 / 5 (3) Aug 04, 2014
Ok scientific data: number of illegal immigrants in California = 2,550,000 as of 2010 (Per Hispanic Research Center). Average household water use for each California resident in gallons per capita per day = 123gpcd (California Single Use Water Efficiency Study).

Estimate of average water use per day per California illegal immigrant population = 313,650,000 gallons per day.

This is 114,482,250,000 (114 BILLION) gallons per year attributed to illegal immigrants.

The California Energy Commission is now trying to implement strict new standards that would reduce water use by 86 billion gallons per year.

The question is, can California afford this 114 billion gallon number to grow exponentially with unenforced immigration laws? Will we have enough water under current loose policies? When will this get some attention, when it reaches a trillion gallons per year?
Captain Stumpy
3.8 / 5 (4) Aug 04, 2014
Ok scientific data
@DDBear
NO... scientific data looks more like this: http://www.waterp...nces.pdf
your data seems off compared to the publication Wiki used in their page about it... try reading that link

then there are the links supporting THIS comment
The majority of California water is used by the agricultural industry. About 80-85% of all developed water in California is used for agricultural purposes. This water irrigates almost 29 million acres (120,000 km2), which grows 350 different crops. Agricultural water usage varies depending on the amount of rainfall each year. Urban users consume 10% of the water, or around 8,700,000 acre feet (10.7 km3).[8] Industry receives the remnant of the water supply.[9]
[sic] https://en.wikipe...lifornia
DDBear
2.7 / 5 (3) Aug 04, 2014
@CaptainStumpy, my data is straight from the study publications. I did not see the wiki page. You can't dismiss the study results, and the numbers, just because water is also used for agriculture. I suppose we could also stop producing food in California because the exploding illegal immigrant population is projected to use up all the water, but a better solution would be to focus on the root cause, rather than redirecting it to food producers.
Captain Stumpy
4 / 5 (4) Aug 04, 2014
The question is, can California afford this 114 billion gallon number to grow exponentially with unenforced immigration laws?
@ddbear
it appears that you are posting out of FEAR rather than logic... You will see that MOST of Cali's water goes (like I said) to FARMS, factories and commercial industry... just like most everywhere else.

Blaming it on illegal aliens is just a ruse (or a political stand) being made to make you angry about it
TAKE A LOOK at the NUMBERS
California home average is 23,275 gallons per month. [10] A 2011 study of California single-family water consumption estimated that the average California household used more than 360 gallons of water per day
pretty much the national standard. Work out THOSE numbers, the population of Cali.... then re-read what I posted about farms
About 80-85% of all developed water in California is used for agricultural purposes
those farms aint illegals!
they are in Cali!
Not Mexico!

try again sport
Captain Stumpy
3.7 / 5 (3) Aug 04, 2014
my data is straight from the study publications. I did not see the wiki page. You can't dismiss the study results, and the numbers, just because water is also used for agriculture.
@ddbear
the link to the specific report that you used?
I am also linking... hoping that I can get the same back... I see where you wrote a lot out, but there was NO link to a study... or did I miss it?

there is a SIMILAR issue being done here about water, even though we sell a LOT to other states around us...
a better solution would be to focus on the root cause
now THIS I can agree with... but only what I quoted!

FOCUS on the ROOT CAUSE
not on a peripheral cause designed to anger you

P.S. we have an exploding immigrant population here too, from Mexico, the Carribean and more... maybe not as bad as Cali, but still the same argument
DDBear
1.3 / 5 (3) Aug 04, 2014
Here is a link to the water study:

http://www.irwd.c...2011.pdf

Agricultural water use is relatively constant. We are not going to have a major growth spurt in strawberry fields and orange groves, as the agriculture industry in California is projected to shrink.

A porous southern border, however, puts the water supply at high risk because it has the potential to increase water consumption exponentially.

The people looking for opportunity don't bother me. Instead what I find crazy is that policymakers ignore a key contributor to vanishing water supplies just because it's not politically correct to point this out.
Vietvet
1 / 5 (1) Aug 04, 2014
@DDbear

The California Energy Commission is now trying to implement strict new standards that would reduce water use by 86 billion gallons per year.

In your racist and bigoted comments you failed to point out that the California Energy Commission was talking about energy production, not general water use.

Captain Stumpy
3.7 / 5 (3) Aug 04, 2014
Instead what I find crazy is that policymakers ignore a key contributor to vanishing water supplies just because it's not politically correct to point this out
@ddbear
WHICH KEY contributor?
until you get some empirical data supporting your position, you are not going to succeed in doing anything on a science site but pissing off the real scientists and the literate. Your comments, which are UNSUPPORTED even by your own link here, are basically saying that the
114,482,250,000 (114 BILLION) gallons per year attributed to illegal immigrants
is a far greater strain on our resources than anything else, which is NOT TRUE, as I have shown you.
The strain comes from the OVERUSE of a resource ESP during drought and allowing the resource to be depleted...

which do YOU think will deplete a water resource faster?
illegals?
or a farm?
or maybe a factory that needs a continual supply like chemical aluminum etching plants making aircraft parts?

THAT is MY point which IS supported
DDBear
1 / 5 (3) Aug 04, 2014
@Vietvet, your statement is incorrect. The 86 billion gallons projected savings is for water appliances - toilets and faucets. Also, you're trying to obscure the issue by introducing racism and bigotry to something that is about foreign policy rather than any particular ethnic group. In case you're wondering, about half my friends are Mexican. But I do not like when people break the law and it impacts our environment.
DDBear
1 / 5 (3) Aug 04, 2014
@CaptainStumpy, I provided the empirical data: illegal population multiplied by the average water use per capita in California. Uncontrolled development and population growth will impact water resources to a much greater extent than a shrinking agriculture economy and shrinking manufacturing economy in the state.
Captain Stumpy
3.7 / 5 (3) Aug 04, 2014
I provided the empirical data: illegal population multiplied by the average water use per capita in California. Uncontrolled development and population growth will impact water resources to a much greater extent than a shrinking agriculture economy and shrinking manufacturing economy in the state.
@ddbear
forgot to thank you for that link... by the way, it is referenced on the Wiki page too

now about above: lets say AG stays exactly the same for ten years, while the illegal population TRIPLES (it is projected to shrink, but that is NOT a given)

IF the water consumption of agriculture is NOW at 80-85% of all developed water... tripling the population and human intake will only drop THAT mark by approximately 5-10% ... That is assuming a HUGE population, triple the illegals and an INCREASE in water use by ALL Cali residents.

NOW do you see where I am coming from?

YOU see a threat in illegals due to politics
but the THREAT to the WATER is due to AG and INDUSTRY use, etc!
Captain Stumpy
3.7 / 5 (3) Aug 04, 2014
Also, you're trying to obscure the issue by introducing racism and bigotry to something that is about foreign policy rather than any particular ethnic group. In case you're wondering, about half my friends are Mexican. But I do not like when people break the law and it impacts our environment
@ddbear
Vietvet didn't introduce racism into the thread...

and as for your EMPIRICAL data... mine is EVERY BIT as empirical and supported by your link as well as others on that page. Lets not count how empirical one thing is to another... lets look at the reality of the situation:

THE BASICS:
you are having a water shortage
Illegals are a drain on it
Farms and industry are a FAR GREATER strain overall than the pittance amount you are getting from illegals...
Politicians LOVE scary looking numbers
Illegals are ALWAYS a hot topic in Cali
Why denigrate industry and AG when they give politicians lots of money

Stop looking for someONE to blame and look at the ROOT CAUSE of the h2o shortage!
DDBear
1 / 5 (2) Aug 04, 2014
@CaptainStumpy, that makes me wonder why policymakers focus so much on restricting household water use, rather than clamping down on agriculture. Also, I forget to mention I'm concerned about Southern California where 54% of the water use is attributed to household use (California Department of Water Resources), where the majority of the water is imported from the other part of the state, and where we are experiencing this population explosion.
Captain Stumpy
3.7 / 5 (3) Aug 04, 2014
that makes me wonder why policymakers focus so much on restricting household water use, rather than clamping down on agriculture
@DDbear
one reason might be money, another reason might be control... it is easier to control people with a law, which then brings in revenue when violated.
The tight controls on industry might make then leave, which will affect jobs, the economy, and more (like the future budget for running for office)
A lot of reasons are out there for trying to adjust human consumption over industry... I would say most of it is $$ though. in one form or another...
Look at the waste people regularly do with it...

Where I live, water is hard to get and expensive.
I have to pay to truck it in, fill my tanks and any leaks are out of MY pocket. Putting in a well means sinking it 1800 feet. expensive for a poor man.
Piping it uphill is just as expensive (gas, generator, pipe, right of use). overall it is cheapest to truck it in.
My consumption is 10% of yours, likely
Vietvet
3 / 5 (2) Aug 04, 2014
@DDBear

where we are experiencing this population explosion.

Citations?
Captain Stumpy
3.7 / 5 (3) Aug 05, 2014
Also, I forget to mention I'm concerned about Southern California where 54% of the water use is attributed to household use...where we are experiencing this population explosion.
@DDBear
this is ONE reason that the numbers scare you, and you are so willing to jump on the political bandwagon to attack illegals.
Hey... did you see the projected population by 2020? over 50 million... how does that factor into the situation?

I see it all the time around here too. Same arguments... same reasons....

That does NOT mean that the threat to the water supply is the illegals though,
only that they are an effective means to an end

One end being reelection of political leaders
another being revenue and getting something passed easily so that people don't look harder at what is really going on
(I mean.. once you look at the TRUE numbers above for the state... can you really HONESTLY say that Illegals are THE THREAT to your water?)
DDBear
1 / 5 (1) Aug 05, 2014
According to the California State Department of Finance in 2013: " Southern California will lead the State's growth over the next 50 years (2010 to 2060), growing by 8.3 million to 31 million in population." I doubt Southern California will be able to squeeze enough water from Northern California if the current growth trends with illegal immigration continue. People looking for opportunity in the US don't factor water supply in their calculation whether to cross or not. Then it's up to policymakers to perform some calculations and figure out how fast a certain region can grow before water runs out.

Captain Stumpy
3 / 5 (2) Aug 05, 2014
I doubt Southern California will be able to squeeze enough water from Northern California if the current growth trends with illegal immigration continue.
@ddbear
again, you ASSUME that this is the ROOT problem... it is NOT the ROOT or CORE problem... and if you will note, I did say that above (50 mil by 2020 is ONE projection)
Now, if they are predicting THIS already, and know about water usage already, perhaps you should get them interested in fixing problems like: LEAKS, Toilet waste (more efficient toilets) etc as posted here: http://www.homeen.../id/1855

one last comment to you about illegals...
BLAMING an Illegal for the water shortage is like ONLY EVER LOOKING TO THE RIGHT before crossing the street!
You are IGNORING a whole lot of info like that! you ignore other traffic, the possibility of getting killed out of ignorance, and more... which is no different than blaming illegals for your water shortage!

Try fixing the PROBLEM
not the BLAME
DDBear
5 / 5 (1) Aug 05, 2014
The root problem is a rapid increase in development and exploding population growth - specifically, in Southern California. One will never save nearly as much water through fixing toilet leaks, as compared to controlling per capita growth. Then it is logical to look at the root cause of the population growth.

If we look at famine in Africa, for example, population that exceeds the regional carrying capacity is a big contributor. It is not that those people are being wasteful. It has more to do with the population rather than inefficient food preparation appliances. Same is going to be true with diminishing water supplies in Southern California.
rockwolf1000
3 / 5 (2) Aug 05, 2014
@Supramark Re DDBear.

It was unwarranted to accuse DDBear of racism.

He never mentioned any races in his post. He merely mentioned that there exists many people illegally in the country. FACT.

Not only that, but he never mentioned his own race AFAIK. So he very well could be a legal Mexican immigrant himself upset and frustrated with the continued illegal immigration and the associated stigma. Does a Mexican complaining about Mexican's constitute racism??

Just because you don't think you like where a conversation is headed doesn't give you the right to accuse anyone of racism.

Furthermore, complaining about illegal immigration is not racism no matter to what race you belong.

DDBear might be Mexican, might not be, he may be a racist, maybe not. I saw nothing is his post to confirm or refute either possibility.
kochevnik
2.3 / 5 (3) Aug 05, 2014
California will always be a magnet for overpopulation. The benevolent climate and abundant inland desert could accommodate the entire US population were sufficient infrastructure built. US citizens thought that illegals would stay for a short time then return to Mexico, driven away by housing prices. But the Mexican culture has a different view than the US citizen. The Mexican will stay in one place for generations, while the US citizen will migrate every seven years. Consequently the Mexicans gained a foothold due to a fluke in tax law. If a house is never sold the tax base does not change. Consequently many Mexican families pay no property taxes in their community and rent out their garages and closets to new illegals and pocket the rent. Consequently there is practically free housing available to the illegals and a ladder of legal hooks by which they can attach themselves to California. Moreover since they don't pay property taxes they will replace US citizens in CA
supamark23
5 / 5 (1) Aug 05, 2014
@supamark, There is nothing racist about pointing out ILLEGAL entry into a country, using up natural resources. In theory these people could be coming from any country, and in recent news you can see that the number of countries are expanding. This is more about LAWS and the effect of violating those laws on public policy and resource planning. You are racist for saying that this is racist! I agree with the post above by SkyAbove, that overpopulation leads to environment troubles and California is enabling this will too much development as well.


@DDBear - did you just use the "I'm rubber, you're glue" defense? Really? Are you like 8 years old? Also, as has been pointed out, CA's water is almost all used by agriculture and industry. By your logic, all Americans without native heritage (I got some, you?) are illegals. Did you know pretty much all Mexicans who come here have substantial native heritage?
supamark23
3 / 5 (2) Aug 05, 2014
@Supramark Re DDBear.

It was unwarranted to accuse DDBear of racism.

He never mentioned any races in his post. He merely mentioned that there exists many people illegally in the country. FACT.

Not only that, but he never mentioned his own race AFAIK. So he very well could be a legal Mexican immigrant himself upset and frustrated with the continued illegal immigration and the associated stigma. Does a Mexican complaining about Mexican's constitute racism??

Just because you don't think you like where a conversation is headed doesn't give you the right to accuse anyone of racism.

Furthermore, complaining about illegal immigration is not racism no matter to what race you belong.

DDBear might be Mexican, might not be, he may be a racist, maybe not. I saw nothing is his post to confirm or refute either possibility.


Yeah, no. He's a racist, dislikes Mexicans (SoCal's illegals ~are all hispanic) enough to blame them for things they couldn't possibly be responsible for.
Captain Stumpy
3 / 5 (2) Aug 05, 2014
It was unwarranted to accuse DDBear of racism
@RockWolf
Not to make you angry, Rock, but IMHO, I am not so sure

he talks about uncontrolled population growth of illegals but only draws info from here
number of illegal immigrants in California = 2,550,000 as of 2010 (Per Hispanic Research Center)
Now, he did say above that he was talking about ALL illegals, but I see NO input about Asiatic aliens or such... only about porous border problems
A porous southern border, however, puts the water supply at high risk because it has the potential to increase water consumption exponentially
now THAT is racist... where is the head count from Asia, India, Eastern block etc etc etc ?

now, considering that the BULK water use (90% +) is predominantly agricultural and commercial... the THREAT is NOT from illegals or people (personal consumption) but from over use from ALL users, predominantly COMMERCIAL

so why is he focused on illegals?
politics, fear and ignorance.
DDBear
1 / 5 (1) Aug 05, 2014
54% of the water use is in Southern California is attributed to household use (California Department of Water Resources).

Illegal immigrants use 114 billion gallons of water per year for household use, on average, in the state of California (calculations and references above). The vast majority of illegal immigrants are in Southern California where this 54% of water use is for household use (again, agricultural and commercial use is not the dominant use in Southern California).

The talk about this being racism is ridiculous, and is a weak attempt to distract from the foreign policy and natural resource issue.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.