Letters to the Editor: The drought isn’t temporary. Make water cutbacks permanent

A man stands at a lectern next to a map of Southern California
Adel Hagekhalil, general manager of the Metropolitan Water District, speaks Wednesday during a news conference about Southern California’s water shortage emergency.
(Wally Skalij / Los Angeles Times)

To the editor: If it were not so serious, the ineffectiveness of our water officials would be laughable. For years many of us have been saying that the time to save water is when you have it, not when it’s almost gone. And yet we keep seeing decisions made as if the shortage is only temporary and not permanent. (“Parts of Southern California don’t have enough water to meet demand, sparking sweeping cuts,” April 27)

It isn’t going to rain or snow a lot anymore. Scientists have been telling us this for a very long time. Drought and heat are here to stay, but we keep watering away while some agricultural fields are flooded, Caltrans waters the weeds on the freeways, and municipalities water whatever they want whenever they want.

Now, in a panic, people will be told to use some percentage less than before, which rewards the water wasters. Naturally, there will probably be financial penalties, so our wealthy neighbors in gigantic estates will continue to drench their tropical rainforests without regard to the cost.


By the way, it probably isn’t going to rain next year either. We should have anticipated this in 2020 or before.

Andy Marias, Westlake Village


To the editor: The Metropolitan Water District’s decision to impose unprecedented water restrictions is the latest shoe to drop in the slow-motion catastrophe that is our climate crisis.

Like increasingly apocalyptic wildfires and the cavalcade of high temperature records being set one after another, water restrictions are previews of the future that climate scientists have been warning of for decades.

Perhaps rather than squander our energy on the inevitable finger pointing and haggling over who is to blame or how to apportion what water is available, we might instead invest it in the radical energy overhaul required to reduce our reliance on the fossil fuels that are the cause. Or not.

Jordan Sollitto, Pasadena



To the editor: Yes, the water conservation measure may result in dead lawns and trees. However, the lawns and trees that will suffer the most are the very ones that should be eliminated from our landscaping.

Drought-tolerant ground coverings, plants and trees require little to no water. Drip irrigation applies water to the root zone where it’s needed with no waste. Mulch reduces evaporation, insulates the soil and prevents weed growth. California native plants require no summer water.

This is our future. Get used to it and get onboard — the sooner the better.

Kathy Horbund, Venice


To the editor: We are at the end of April, and Southern California residents are already being asked to water our yards one day week beginning June.

Recently I visited two public institutions, and both locations had bathrooms with toilets that flush automatically once before using and once after use.

The MWD should tell public institutions to inspect their automatic-flush toilets to stop water waste.


Cindy Yee, Monterey Park


To the editor: Your article says, “With the state’s major reservoirs at low levels, the MWD has been left without enough water in parts of Southern California.”

Assuming that this is true, may I also assume that there will be a halt to construction of new houses? It seems as though one would logically follow the other, or am I just some sort of simpleton?

Jay James, Pico Rivera