Landscaping and water usage/conservation (Denver, Fort Collins: loans, live in, stats)

[bullfish15]

Originally Posted by Josseppie

Unlike Fort Collins Pueblo has enough senior water rights for a city close to 500,000 people. To be honest, and this is selfish, but Pueblo has our reservoir, paid by the federal government, so I don't care if the state builds anymore or not lol

That is the epitome of what is wrong in this country anymore. "The federal government has to take care of me and I don't care how self serving that is". You are preaching a doctrine of selfish waste at everyone else's expense. I said it once and I will say it again. SHAME ON YOU.

[Josseppie]

Originally Posted by bullfish15

That is the epitome of what is wrong in this country anymore. "The federal government has to take care of me and I don't care how self serving that is". You are preaching a doctrine of selfish waste at everyone else's expense. I said it once and I will say it again. SHAME ON YOU.

How is conserving water when a city has more then enough water going to save the planet?

[bullfish15]

In this case I don't care about saving the planet. I care about people who think it is totally acceptable to take federal money for a reservoir and waste the water in a region that needs water conservation, not for the sake of "being green" but because there just ain't enough water to go around.

But hey, who really cares? Everybody else is paying for your "endless" water supply.

[Josseppie]

Originally Posted by bullfish15

In this case I don't care about saving the planet. I care about people who think it is totally acceptable to take federal money for a reservoir and waste the water in a region that needs water conservation, not for the sake of "being green" but because there just ain't enough water to go around.

But hey, who really cares? Everybody else is paying for your "endless" water supply.

So let me see if I understand you right.

You are up set that Pueblo has enough political pull to get a reservoir built that enables us to have enough water for our residents and future growth as well as dramatically reduce the chance of a major flood from the Arkansas river that could potentially cost thousands of lives and cost millions of dollars in damage?

By the way keep in mind that this project, the Fryingpan-Arkansas project, was seen as important enough that President Kennedy came out for the signing of it and gave a speech at Dutch Clark Stadium in Pueblo.

A link to the web page: http://www.usbr.gov/dataweb/html/fryark.html

[bullfish15]

Congratulations. You should get a job at msnbc. You put spin city on what I said. But that is typical of your posting style.

Perhaps if I repeat what I already wrote you can read it much more slowly to let my words sink in.

In this case I don't care about saving the planet. I care about people who think it is totally acceptable to take federal money for a reservoir and waste the water in a region that needs water conservation, not for the sake of "being green" but because there just ain't enough water to go around.

But hey, who really cares? Everybody else is paying for your "endless" water supply.

It's not so much the fact it is federally funded that is disturbing, it's the carefree attitude that "I got it, you bought it and I'm gonna flaunt it" that will someday come back to haunt you.

[Josseppie]

My attitude is Pueblo has enough water so I do not have to conserve as much if that changes for any reason, growth beyond our water supply, then I will change my ways. Until then there is just no need here.

[jazzlover]

Originally Posted by Josseppie

My attitude is Pueblo has enough water so I do not have to conserve as much if that changes for any reason, growth beyond our water supply, then I will change my ways. Until then there is just no need here.

And you don't have one iota of concern about how many productive farms and ranches were dried up, how many wetlands drained, or how many canyons flooded so that your blessed town (and you) has water to waste. I call that just plain selfish, nothing less.

Maybe should read this from the Denver Post while you are comtemplating that bluegrass lawn of yours.

http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_11744306

[Josseppie]

I read the article and respect the fact he does not want a lawn in his yard.

I come from the camp where I want a mix, a nice lawn and trees and shrubs and flowers, in my yard. I don't do it to be the envy of anyone, who cares we all have our likes and dislikes, I do it for me. If I did not like grass and the look of it and walking on it in the summer I would get rid of it as fast as you can say zero scape. The fact is I do like it so until Pueblo has water issues, I will continue to have my lawn as well as my shrubs, trees and flowers.

This summer I will post a picture of my yard on here, not everyone will like it and that's ok.....

[Katarina Witt]

Josseppie, I agree with you about the KY bluegrass; I do like it better than the other grasses for all the reasons given here (cold tolerant, soft underfoot, hardy for kids playing on it, does OK in shade, and such). However, we only water every other day at most unless it's very hot, and we do have some "zones" in our yard, plus a large garden (which of course also has to be watered).

The thread is about landscaping and water conservation, not necessarily about getting rid of KY bluegrass.

[Josseppie]

I agree but keep in mind where I live and I do my best not to over water my lawn, that would be a waste of money. In the Spring and fall I water less but I have found that once the heat of summer gets here and the temps are mainly from 95 to 105 with the dry winds Pueblo can get watering it twice a day but short times each zone works best to keep the grass green. If, however, I find that I am watering it to much, and its easy to tell, I make the required changes to the system for that zone...