San Diego Speaks: No Grass?
Download this video (12.1 MB, MP4 format)
June 5, 2009 – KPBS reporter Sharon Heilbrunn asks whether we should be using so much water to grow grass in San Diego County.
Video Transcript:
GLORIA PENNER (Host): If you're a homeowner, chances are you have a lawn. And it's getting harder and more expensive to keep that lawn green. So should we be doing away with grass altogether in San Diego? KPBS digital reporter Sharon Heilbrunn has the story. SHARON HEILBRUNN (Reporter): Lisa Martin was tired of watering a lawn that never seemed to be green. So, she replaced two-thirds of her lawn with gravel, a project that cost about $600. Now, she's saving money. MARTIN (Homeowner): We easily had a 50 percent reduction in our water bill from April of last year to April of this year. HEILBRUNN: She's also saving water, something that's important to the Martin family. MARTIN: It's a priority for our family not to waste any water. We've replaced a lot of our toilets, but this appeared to be the biggest water waster. HEILBRUNN: Lisa, like many other homeowners, is faced with trying to maintain a green lawn despite severe water cutbacks, expensive bills, and, let's face it, our climate. San Diego is, after all, a semi-arid region, even though many locals feel it should look lush, and tropical. In Las Vegas, a city that is truly a desert, they've adopted a sod-free mentality. Since 1999, the water district has offered a rebate -- $1.50 per square foot -- to homeowners who replace their lawns with more water-friendly landscaping. This "Cash for Grass" program has resulted in more than 125 million square feet of lawn removal, from residences and businesses to golf courses and resorts. We wanted to know, do you think San Diego should be more gravel and dirt than lawn and lush? DOROTHY CRISCI (North Park Resident): I don't think we should have less grass. I don't think that each homeowner needs to water a golf course, if you will. But I think a limited amount of grass, the average grass size of the average home, I think that should be allowed. KIM IMLAY (Normal Heights Resident): Yes, I think they should take the grass out of some environments. Not the park environment, because we need that for the kids to play, and some of the dog parks need grass. But as far as just regular landscaping, I think we could do a better job at being more eco-friendly to our desert environment. KURT EAKIN (Clairemont Resident): I mean, we've been conscience of our water usage and try to reduce it as much as possible. We're not getting rid of our grass altogether, we like our home and our landscaping very much the way it is, but you know, we have made changes to try to conserve more. HEILBRUNN: Now, Las Vegas is already saving seven billion gallons of water every year just by implementing their Cash for Grass program. We want to know: Do you think we should follow in Nevada's footsteps? Log onto kpbs.org/sdweek and leave us a comment. And be sure to look for me next week, when I take on another local issue and get your response to it. For kpbs.org, I'm Sharon Heilbrunn.
Comments
jcwathey // June 5, 2009 at 7:34 p.m. ― 5 months, 2 weeks ago
Yes! No grass!
Drought tolerant plantings of succulents and native plants can be beautiful, and express the character of our lovely San Diego landscape. Grass is boring and inappropriate.
( comment permalink | suggest removal )
dgmandkm // June 10, 2009 at 11:24 p.m. ― 5 months, 1 week ago
Before moving to San Diego, we have often lived in cities under water restriction rules. It is appalling how much of our precious water goes to golf courses used only by a limited portion of the population, and to other water-wasting landscapes. Xeriscaping with gravel, bark, and drought tolerant ground covers of local native plants or succulents can make a lot of sense, especially when drip irrigation is used. "Cash for Grass" sounds like a great carrot vs. stick approach.
( comment permalink | suggest removal )