Don’t Penalize the Conservers in a Water-Use Reduction Plan

To those of us who have been environmentally conscious for years, the prospect of a forced 10% reduction in water consumption looms on the horizon as a frightening specter.

We who have bricks in our toilet tanks, never hose down our driveways and otherwise use our water responsibly, may face fines if we are unable to reduce our water consumption by 10% compared to a previous “base” year. While people who have been flagrantly wasteful will have no problem finding places to cut back, we’re already at minimum consumption.

When Orange County inevitably follows Los Angeles and implements the 10% reduction, a review process must be part of the plan. Studies have already been done determining how much water the average person uses per month, for drinking, bathing, laundry, etc. If someone can prove that they are already consuming less than the statistical average for the number of people in their home (which could easily be accomplished by reviewing past water bills), they should be exempted from mandatory compliance.

There should also be a way for adjustments to be made when household size increases, or even when a toddler gives up diapers and starts flushing.

And what about provisions for temporary changes? Suppose during the “base” year you were on vacation an entire month, and in 1991 you’re not? What if your in-laws descend on you for a month, or a student comes home from college for the summer?

I heartily agree that something must be done to conserve water in Southern California. Mandatory water rationing may be the answer. But if it is, it must be implemented in a manner that does not penalize those of us who have already been conserving for years.

KAREN McCAULEY, Seal Beach