Ask a Hipster — Advice you didn't know you needed
Big Screen — Movie commentary
Blurt — Music's inside track
Booze News — San Diego spirits
Classical Music — Immortal beauty
Classifieds — Free and easy
Cover Stories — Front-page features
Drinks All Around — Bartenders' drink recipes
Excerpts — Literary and spiritual excerpts
Feast! — Food & drink reviews
Feature Stories — Local news & stories
Fishing Report — What’s getting hooked from ship and shore
From the Archives — Spotlight on the past
Golden Dreams — Talk of the town
The Gonzo Report — Making the musical scene, or at least reporting from it
Letters — Our inbox
Movies@Home — Local movie buffs share favorites
Movie Reviews — Our critics' picks and pans
Musician Interviews — Up close with local artists
Neighborhood News from Stringers — Hyperlocal news
News Ticker — News & politics
Obermeyer — San Diego politics illustrated
Outdoors — Weekly changes in flora and fauna
Overheard in San Diego — Eavesdropping illustrated
Poetry — The old and the new
Reader Travel — Travel section built by travelers
Reading — The hunt for intellectuals
Roam-O-Rama — SoCal's best hiking/biking trails
San Diego Beer — Inside San Diego suds
SD on the QT — Almost factual news
Sheep and Goats — Places of worship
Special Issues — The best of
Street Style — San Diego streets have style
Surf Diego — Real stories from those braving the waves
Theater — On stage in San Diego this week
Tin Fork — Silver spoon alternative
Under the Radar — Matt Potter's undercover work
Unforgettable — Long-ago San Diego
Unreal Estate — San Diego's priciest pads
Your Week — Daily event picks
"Jamaican" beer not brewed in Jamaica
Eff theshe gyes can' evun spel Deeayegoe, wha' mkes ya ass u m thay cud git a labul writ rite in th' firshh plashe? Jes' kull it, guyshe, an' hav ennother wun!— August 3, 2015 7:17 a.m.
"Jamaican" beer not brewed in Jamaica
Naw, naw, Donnybowe, ya don' unnerstan; Yew hafta go inna the s, suppermarkit to slepe i' ouf inna cool p, plase. D'd i evver telya 'bout th' tim. Th' tim . . . th' tiem, th' tium . . . ooo, skewer 't, i fergit . . . zzzzzzzz.— August 3, 2015 7:11 a.m.
"Jamaican" beer not brewed in Jamaica
Now puleeze donna tella me tha birra Moretti ish maid bye Hunneyekan! An gues wha kinna wadder goes inna peeroni tu mak itt tase lik Koors!— August 3, 2015 7:04 a.m.
"Jamaican" beer not brewed in Jamaica
Hoo gives a sheeit, long as it RIMES! Hic! Ennybuddie frum the Vest Bank 's a perfesser--jes askum.— August 3, 2015 6:52 a.m.
"Jamaican" beer not brewed in Jamaica
I am shalked, I tel youse, SHALKED, tha a merican cumpany wud a tempt t' tempt ME w' enny kin' uf FALSHE AVERTISHIN' to whish I um avershe! URP!— August 3, 2015 6:42 a.m.
Dr. Seuss gets posthumous front page
I wonder if Gall knows more than the Wikipedia account reveals? This entry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dr._Seuss mentions Helen as little as possible. Perhaps that's best, perhaps not. Is a cloud of suspicion better than a complete revelation? But I reckon it's nobody's business but theirs, and they're all unable to defend themselves against gossip. Or an adult book--of fiction, of course. Unless there's a dirt-daubing biographer out there . . .— August 2, 2015 11:16 p.m.
Papa Doug buys Rhode Island estate
continued from previous post: more "drought tolerant." But give them more water and they will come--they will grow bigger and denser depending upon the kind of management they get. They may or may not be well-enough adapted to the conditions that define the Lower Sonoran Desert, but I trust that the experts will have researched this and even tried test plots before deciding to launch a major project in hopes of saving water. Those experts should, however, be able to explain the basis of their recommendations. Plants do have physiological adaptations to persist under less wet conditions than, say, “turfgrass,” such as reducing their rate of growth, having the ability to dry up without dying, and a lot of other technical stuff I won’t bother to go into unless requested to do so, such as stomatal closure, leaf-rolling, and the cubic volume and depth of soil occupied by the root system. Appeal to authority is simply not equivalent to addressing the facts. “Trust but verify,” as President Reagan so wisely put it. Generalizations also need backing up. Without that, I would only have faith in their omnipotence upon which to rely. Doubt is not the same as disbelief, but belief leaves no room for reason. "And in my opinion, making estimates of water usage, with those same calculations, but without know the size of the area being irrigated is pure folly." I agree. No sizes were given, so I estimated the size of the Annenberg Estate from the map at about 120 acres (x 6 acre feet ETo =720 acre feet x 43,560 cubic feet per acre-foot = 31,363,200 cubic feet for 120 acres x 7.48 gallons per cubic foot = 234,596,736 gallons to minimally provide enough water to keep that much grass alive x (the actual amount of excess water applied) = the total number of gallons used by a 120-acre plot of grass. I used an excess irrigation factor of 2.5, or 250 percent of minimum and arrive at 586,491,840 gallons of ESTIMATED ACTUAL WATER CONSUMPTION. The ONLY way to change that is to change the excess irrigation factor, which, for any given case, can only be determined by the actual amount of water consumed, or by applying additional factors such as reduced application to subsets like sand traps, but that can't be hidden from the actual volume of water applied data. I continue to invite corrections, but frankly, I just don't give a damn about anybody's opinion, including mine. I am always skeptical of everything "officials" have to say. "Appeal to Authority" is a widely-recognized fallacy. Only the facts count, and that depends upon the truth of each case. Best, Twister— August 2, 2015 4:46 p.m.
Papa Doug buys Rhode Island estate
Well, Dan, old man, let us examine this more closely then. "The fact that you have included a waste/over-irrigation factor of 2.5, from studies you read over 40 yrs ago, is, in my opinion, irrelevant." I can understand your point, but as Robert Ruark would say, when you take something away, you must replace it with something else, preferably something superior. If that factor is irrelevant, with what shall replace it? Please remember that I left this door wide open, and it's still open. 2.5 would apply only to those cases in which two and a half as much water is needed was used--or, if it was the average for a population under consideration. I contend that most people with lawns irrigate at far higher rates than the minimum, and that most people have no idea of the principles of optimal irrigation. Gardeners as a class are burdened with a significant sub-population of casual "waterers" that are so extremely stubborn that one might suspect that they might suffer from hydrocephaly. Such folks are not interested in learning the principles of "The Water Relations of Plants and Soils" (by Kramer, ______) which book can be purchased today. My neighbor's "professional" gardener is a member of that sub-population, and the neighbor's property continuously drains, subsurface, onto my property, causing a swamp near the property line. This is unfortunate, because many other gardeners are well-meaning enough to sacrifice their lawns and gardens upon the altar of the spin-meisters who blame the water shortage on the drought rather than the waste fraction. "During that renovation, 60 acres of turf grass were replaced with 28-acres of native meadow grasses and 32-acres of mulch, all to help to reduce water use; I have read that they put in Purple Three Awn, Sideoats Grama and Blue Grama, which alone could reduce water usage in those areas planted by as much as 50 percent." It takes about the same amount of water to produce a unit of biomass (dry weight of production), regardless of the species. If the replacement species produce as much biomass as the "turf" species, their water requirement would be about the same. If they are managed differently, i.e., irrigated less, then the area so managed would use less water, and thus produce less biomass. The western Great Basin grass species you mentioned do grow in areas that receive somewhat lower rainfall than the central and eastern portions in the rain shadow of the Rockies, as evidenced by their lower stature (shortgrass prairie) and lower density, thus their lower biomass. They are, in that sense, continued . . .— August 2, 2015 4:44 p.m.
Papa Doug buys Rhode Island estate
I remember contacting a building supervisor (ca 50 years of age) because one of his men was spraying chlordane around the building (for ants). That stuff won't hurt you (sissy); I been doing it all my life and I ain't dead yet. Next year he was. Cause of death unknown.— August 2, 2015 3:25 p.m.
Papa Doug buys Rhode Island estate
We're not deserting you, Don. And it ain't rocket science, just simple arithmetic. A cubic foot of water (1/100th of the hcf [hundred cubic feet on your water bill) is the same as 7.48 gallons. An acre is 43,560 square feet, so an acre-foot is 43,560 cubic feet. In the desert, the amount of water required to barely keep alive and acre of grass is about 6 acre feet. Those are the basic facts. There's always a little wiggle-room around figures like the amount of water required because of variables like hotter or windier years, months, or days, so one might say only 5 acre feet would be the minimum requirement, and some data might indicate more than 6, but 7 or 9, while reported, are in the realm of needing verification. Anybody claiming "usage" in the realm of perfection invites scrutiny and calls for real data and serious questioning. No need, however, to jump to conclusions either way, just examine the facts. In San Diego where the annual ETo is around four feet, I use about 1.3 feet on the average (range: about 1 to 1.5), but if it was all grass, I would be using well over four feet. Now this claim is suspect, right away, right? IF I had lawn, but I don't. Most of it goes to fruit trees. All anybody has to do is read their water bill and figure it out. Fear not; it's easy. The water company now provides some useful information right on the bill.— August 2, 2015 3:21 p.m.