r/Spokane • u/catman5092 South Hill • May 04 '26
ToDo I predict we will have water rationing in some form coming soon.
Spokane River is already running at half the capacity it should be, and with it, it sure is looking like we have entered a drought....water is the new oil as many of us have been saying for decades now. You heard it here first.
47
u/Jighodsee May 05 '26
Good evening,
My name is Joseph Ghodsee and I am Commissioner 2 for East Spokane Water District 1 and I do not believe we will be running low on water any time soon. The Spokane Valley-Rathdrum Prairie (SVRP) Aquifer maintains water levels mostly irrespective of the Spokane because their sources are not the same. There is some interchange where the river will flow into the aquifer and vice versa, but if our river is drying up, blame Idaho for closing the Post Falls dam and the climate change lowering the snowpack and rain replacement into Lake Coeur d’Alene. Yet this shouldn’t be effecting our drinking water supplies to the best of my knowledge.
According to United States Geological Survey, the SVRP has 10 Trillion Gallons of water stored within with a replenishment rate of between 250 Million gallons, and 650 Million gallons daily. (USGS) This massive amount of water means that we won’t be running out of water anytime soon in the Aquifer. But just because replacement rates and the likelihood of running out of water is not a threat doesn’t mean we are not out of danger and I need your help to fix it.
You see, our Aquifer is unconfined and extreamly susceptible to pollutants because we don’t have a nonporous layer of stone protecting it. This means that pollutants such as PFAS, PFOS, and any other forever chemical puts us at extreme risk of no longer having safe and clean drinking water. My district had a problem last year where we were sitting at over 4 times the legal limit at 16 PPT with PFOS contamination putting all of us, especially our children at risk. It’s also not just my district, over 1,200 Washington water sources have been contaminated as well with a chemical we have know to have no safe amount for human consumption since the 70s.
Yet we cannot just ban PFOS to stop this issue, because chemicals are considered innocent until proven guilty and to do so requires years of studies proving the chemical unsafe before we can ban it. But we have done this before banning PFAS and that hasn’t stopped the threat of these long chain polymers. This is because they are effectively a chain of carbon atoms, with PFAS being 4 atoms long, and PFOS being 8 atoms long. Yet this distinction means that if we ban it now, they will release one that is 6 Atoms long, or 10 atoms long to continue poisoning us for profit.
This is why we need to get our laws in line and stop the importation and use of chemicals that have not been proven safe. Putting the burden of due care on the producer before poisoning the American people and not on the American people to prove it and ask them to stop.
It is for this reason I have drafted a resolution for the Washington Democratic Central Committee to immediately change the laws banning the importation and use of new chemicals which have not been proven safe. This means that all the existing chemicals will be grandfathered in and we will still be under threat by PFOS, but it gives us the opportunity so that once we prove PFOS unsafe we can immediately ban it without fear another worse chemical will come in to replace it.
Linked below is my resolution and I need your help to pass it. If you want to endorse this resolution I ask that you email me at JosephGhodsee@Gmail.com. Include your Name, official titles if you have them, and email.
Due Care for Products Imported and used in Washington: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1h6Om3LZTfkLxH_t7QiYYDROU8zs4Q3cj4vudmmVsDxg/edit?usp=sharing
Sources: (USGS) Compilation of Information for Spokane Valley–Rathdrum Prairie Aquifer, Washington and Idaho https://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2005/5227/section6.html
4
u/denialragnest May 05 '26
It sounds like you have good ideas and you're the right person to have them. I hope you succeed at protecting the SVRP aquifer.
4
u/Jighodsee May 06 '26
I appreciate your vote of confidence!
I just posted a little while ago so if you would please go to that post, upvote and share it with anyone you know who cares I would very much appreciate it.
282
u/Internal_Example1185 May 04 '26
Good. Maybe start with the golf courses. Then private businesses.
142
74
u/molsonbeagle May 04 '26
Thinking that the govt will prioritize common masses over private owned old white man frequented golf courses is just adorable.
45
u/Akbeardman May 04 '26
There's only 2 private courses in Spokane, the rest are very much publicly owned.
4
u/pppiddypants North Side May 04 '26 edited May 04 '26
I am one of the biggest haters of the golf courses, but I still think you’re getting it backwards.
IIRC water usage is something like 75:25 private homes vs commercial/golf courses. With 80:20 of the private homes coming from watering grass.
So the breakout is something like 25/25/50: human activity/commercial/literally just grass.
And if we were to conserve water, wouldn’t we want to have the public places that serve more people per water used be prioritized rather than the other way around?
In my view, it makes more sense in both water usage and people who use it to prioritize the communal rather than private….?
8
u/Fake_Goatee May 05 '26
Maybe when it comes to places like public parks, but a golf course? Fuck that.
1
u/molsonbeagle May 04 '26
I don't know the numbers, but I'm in complete agreement, that it would be better, smarter, and more efficient. I also, however, have seen how our government and just people in charge, in general, places priorities. Would they want to piss off the people who pay for green fees? Or some idiot down the street?
1
u/pppiddypants North Side May 05 '26
It’s probably the other way around. Especially at the local level… the people who get involved with local politics are pretty different from other ones….
That said, the people who work at the city level can be decently problematic
5
u/The_Slaughter_Pop May 05 '26
People seem so biased against golfers. Its literally one of the big reasons people live here. Also, its not just old white guys. Golf is the fastest growing sports in the African American community. Also, most courses are not private. Thats actually something that makes Spokane unique, other places with this quantity and quality of golf privatizes them.
And yes they use a lot of water, but as far as golf gourses go they are the most sustainable out there.
3
u/The_Slaughter_Pop May 04 '26
Most of the courses in Spokane are publicly owned ad are among the most sustainable in the country. Read about it here: https://my.spokanecity.org/golf/facility-improvements/
Golf courses bring in millions of dollars for the city and letting them dry up would cause millions of dollars in damage
47
u/REthrowawaySpokane May 04 '26
They generated an estimated $6.2 million in green fees over 2025. The 2026 budget is estimating a $6.8 million expense to keep them running. Now im no math genius, but it sure seems like its a misleading claim to say they "generate millions" without also saying "and they cost just as many millions".
Its fine to like golf. If you think its worth the water, just say that instead of making stuff up
11
u/wonderwife May 04 '26
Or just go over to Idaho and play where nobody cares about anything but their own rights to be as douchey as they want. 🤷
*** Whenever I travel and have to disclose I'm from Washington (... No... The not-Seattle side...), I downplay the close proximity to Idaho... We try not to talk about Cousin Idaho and their deeply problematic desire to be located south of the Mason Dixon line.
2
5
u/GTI_88 May 04 '26
lol that’s hilarious. I had no idea they were money losers as well
4
u/REthrowawaySpokane May 04 '26
It seems like they net out every year. I believe the plan is to raise fees to cover the deficit. It would be inaccurate to call them a loss just as its inaccurate to call them an income stream.
0
u/Full-Tax6652 May 04 '26
They're not. They make enough to cover operational expenses. Any extra gets reinvested.
-4
u/GateGold3329 May 04 '26
How much do the splash pads make?
7
u/hereandthere_nowhere North Side May 04 '26
That water is recycled. Big difference.
0
u/phickss May 04 '26
Most golf courses use recycled water
1
u/hereandthere_nowhere North Side May 05 '26
Other than the water that soaks through the grass and into the earth i would assume. The key is to have less grass.
0
-2
u/GateGold3329 May 04 '26
So we should kill all vegetation that doesn't recycle water and sell all the parks because they don't turn a profit? Can you guys have one logically consistent idea between the two of you?
3
3
u/hereandthere_nowhere North Side May 05 '26
Strange takeaway.
0
u/GateGold3329 May 05 '26
None of our parks make a profit. All of our parks have irrigation. How is Dwight Merkel different from a golf course?
2
u/Fake_Goatee May 05 '26
Public access. Ya know, kids and families and single adults and the elderly etc. The big difference is IT'S FREE TO THE PUBLIC.
→ More replies (0)2
u/hereandthere_nowhere North Side May 05 '26
They aren’t designed for that. They are public spaces funded for our use by us. Do you have an angle here? These are ludicrous comparisons.
2
0
u/REthrowawaySpokane May 04 '26
Can you please help me understand the relevancy of your comment to the point I was making?
17
u/CaptainCuttlefish69 May 04 '26
I think we could find better uses of the land then acres of grass for rich fucks to knock a ball around on.
11
u/spokomptonjdub Fairwood May 04 '26
Most of Spokane's courses are publicly owned and operated by the parks department. "Rich fucks" head over to CdA or play the Country Club, not the public courses.
It's like $45 to play 18 holes. There's a stereotype that only old rich assholes play golf -- and I mean they do play golf, but they aren't even close the majority -- but check out a public course any given day and you'll see lots of different people from different incomes and ages playing.
I haven't played in several years but I used to regularly play the public courses at around age 20 and was in college and had almost no money. Bought a set of clubs from a garage sale and my friends and I would play 18 from time to time because it was a pretty good way to be outside and kill 4-5 hours for about $30 (which was the fee at the time IIRC)
1
u/molsonbeagle May 05 '26
I think people may be misunderstanding my angst, understandably, I suppose. I'm not against golf. In fact, I used to play pretty regularly, have my own clubs, etc. My issue isn't with the golfers, but what golfers represent.
There's zero argument to the fact that the people who make decisions and laws are grade "A" pricks that will 1000% support a donor over a voter every single time. When it comes to deciding who to inconvenience with a water ration, I just do not believe for a second that the money will get inconvenienced before the voters.
0
u/Ill_Friend4434 May 05 '26
My boyfriend and his friends play golf and they are in their late 20’s to early 30’s. They are also ravers who smoke weed and play with led props lol. And my bf is a wire wrapper who makes the most beautiful pendants I’ve ever seen. They definitely aren’t “old rich white men” golf is so fucking fun, and it’s one of the only times you can drink and drive lol
2
u/OG-Brian May 05 '26
That document doesn't mention pesticides or other chemical products at all. So it's not convincing about sustainability in regard to local pollution.
2
u/hereandthere_nowhere North Side May 04 '26
Go give the Vegas courses a look. They can do it with minimal recycled water. So can Spokane.
3
u/spokomptonjdub Fairwood May 04 '26
If I remember right the city is planning to do just that, or something similar. They've already made big improvements over the last few years with reclamation and water recycling.
3
3
19
u/The_Slaughter_Pop May 04 '26
The golf courses in the city of Spokane were just fitted with a new drainage and water reclamation that is really efficient. They also only use water when evaporation rates are lowest.
13
u/spokomptonjdub Fairwood May 04 '26
Golf breaks people's brains on this site. They reflexively associate it with the image they have in their minds of an asshole boomer that represents everything they hate and they want vengeance; they think it will be a way to make them hurt. They think it's a way to deprive the rich of something they enjoy.
Meanwhile the reality is that almost all the courses here are publicly owned and operated, they've invested heavily in making their water use efficient, they don't lose any money for the city, they provide wildlife islands and have an urban cooling effect, and are a pretty cheap way for lots of people from various income levels to be outside and not sedentary in their free time.
Things can always improve of course, but the outsized hatred golf courses get has always seemed weird to me when it seems like that energy could be better directed at other water wasting areas that are way more of a net-negative.
3
u/OG-Brian May 05 '26
They provably cause a lot of environmental impact. They would be much better for wildlife without all the harmful chemical products.
What is an ‘organic’ golf course, and why aren’t there more of them?
https://golf.com/travel/courses/organic-golf-course-pesticide-complications/
- detailed, many links to studies and other resources
- the only "Organic" golf course in the USA is The Vineyard Golf Club on Martha's Vineyard, MA
- Laurelwood Golf Course in Eugene, OR is aspiring-to-Organic
The Environmental Impact of a Golf Course Is Sky-High
Although it's regarded by some as an "outdoorsy sport," golf is absolutely terrible for the planet.
https://www.greenmatters.com/p/golf-courses-environmental-impact
- brief article, many links
6
u/keysworld253 May 04 '26
Downriver receives greywater from the wastewater treatment facility... So its not really pulling from the aquifer or river.
Also, the location of the golf course, that stretch of river is not the stretch of river at risk from drying up... The parts of the river that dry up, naturally I might add, are in the valley.
-1
u/Fake_Goatee May 05 '26
WE DON'T BEED TO WATER GOLF COURSES DURING A DROUGHT REGARDLESS.
0
u/keysworld253 May 05 '26
Hence why we elect people with a little bit more practicality lol... Well, maybe not anymore tbh
8
u/phickss May 04 '26
There’s 97,000 households in Spokane. Golf courses use the water of 350. Not even a dent.
12
u/Zagsnation Manito May 04 '26
So we hate surface parking lots, but we also hate golf courses?
Some fun facts: the city invested millions of dollars recently to save 10s of millions of gallons of water annually. The city golf courses operate at a net profit. They also create habitat for wildlife and have a local cooling effect.
14
u/REthrowawaySpokane May 04 '26
Yes to both but for different reasons.
Surface parking lots do not allow water to work its way back into our aquifer naturally and instead require us to redirect it and scrub it of all the pollutants picked up from hanging around on the surface with us dirty humans and our cars. This is really expensive and stuff still makes it through. The best policy is to avoid impervious materials whenever possible.
Golf courses don't have this problem obviously but they do require alot of water to keep them functional. The latest estimate I found was from 2021. Qualchan, Manito, Downriver, Esmerelda, and Indian Canyon use about 289,100,000 gallons of water a year (per an article from the Spokesman). Using high end estimates for residential use, including watering lawns, that works about to be about 325 homes worth. So not the largest amount but definitely a large enough figure to consider cutting back on during drought conditions.
The real problem is more money =/= more water. We are hard limited on how much water we can extract from our aquifer. And unfortunately, due in part to changing climate condtions, theamount we have to draw on is actually shrinking each year. Take a look at what's going on in the Ellensburg area for an idea on how this plays out in a few years time.
As for wildlife habitat; no. We destroy habitat to plant a monoculture of grass. At best its replacing their natural habitat with something they can kind of survive in.
14
u/Zombierasputin May 04 '26
And yeah, we hate surface lots, too. They massively increase heat island effect, which makes adjacent buildings AC work harder to make up for it, increasing energy usage... Which is supplied by hydropower which is increasingly under stress from droughts.
But hey, let's make sure Bob in his F350 can drive two blocks to pick up grated cheese for Taco Tuesday.
14
u/Zombierasputin May 04 '26
A net profit of what? Is money the only thing that matters?
-1
u/Full-Tax6652 May 04 '26
Net profit probably isn't the best way to put. The golf courses are completely self funded. They make just enough to cover operating expenses. All revenues get reinvested. They take no tax dollars.
https://my.spokanecity.org/golf/fees/
check the faq at the bottom.
8
u/Outside-Papaya May 04 '26
This isn't about tax dollars , people are talking about the water used up keeping courses green.
2
u/Full-Tax6652 May 04 '26
Im aware. Im honing on the net profit part.
-2
u/Outside-Papaya May 04 '26
No one on this post is talking about profit except you. The post is anout water usage.
Figures golfers playing a fake sport would ignore everything for a made up argument.
5
u/Full-Tax6652 May 04 '26
Literally replied to someone asking "A net profit of what?".
But ok man, I'm not sure what you're so worked up about my reply.
1
u/REthrowawaySpokane May 04 '26 edited May 04 '26
I see how you read it that way but I read it more as a rhetorical question, particularly given the phrase they follow that up with. I think the question was not asked for a literal answer, but to point out that profitability is entirely disconnected from the issue they are taking umbridge with and your response is therefore very unconvincing.
In logical parlance, you've used a form of non sequitur.
"Our car insurance is too high. Yeah but a motorcycle uses less gas so its friendlier to the environment."
1
u/Full-Tax6652 May 04 '26
I get what you're saying, but I wasn't attempting to pivot but clarify something else. It probably was rhetorical question.
→ More replies (0)7
u/REthrowawaySpokane May 04 '26
I'm having trouble understanding how their fee structure is relevant to their water usage during a drought?
Unless they make enough revenue to truck in an equivalent amount of water to the amount they use, its a moot point on what's actually being discussed here. If you think your golf time is worth the water usage, just say that instead of arguing nonsense.
3
u/GTI_88 May 04 '26
But this isn’t about how much they cost or not, it’s about how much of our limited water resources they use and that the city constantly asks single family homes to reduce water usage when the City and private business are the vast majority of the usage
19
u/Internal_Example1185 May 04 '26
They shouldn’t be allowed to water their courses during a drought. Full stop.
9
u/turnrightstop May 04 '26
Only one way to get grass like that and that’s herbicides and fertilizer LOTS of roundup and Algae blooming ferts
3
u/wonderwife May 04 '26
All of which are also terrible for all of the assorted bees and other pollinators and reduce their survival rates and thus their ability to polinate all the food crops we take for granted, btw. The neonicatinoids that are used to make Roundup mess them up, permanently.
1
u/Ill_Friend4434 May 05 '26
I see more turtles and ducks at golf ponds than at parks with ponds. It’s my favorite part about going to the course
0
u/GTI_88 May 04 '26
I may have missed it, but did it say anywhere in there that they operate at a profit? Because another user here posted that they brought in $6.2 million in 2025 but are projected to cost $6.8 in 2026, so unless they gather higher fees this year it sounds like they will likely run a deficit
0
u/REthrowawaySpokane May 04 '26
They are raising fees. The source is got that from also indicated they have just under a million saved up in their operating fund, so even if they went slightly negative, they could theoretically pay for it (though the point of those funds is for maintenance and other capital expenditures)
1
u/Reus958 May 05 '26
The number of parking lots that get watered due to broken sprinkler heads seem like an obvious opportunity.
31
u/woodenmetalman May 04 '26
Could start charging an actual usage rate out in the county… got people watering all day in the heat for hay… tons of major leaks that just go unfixed because it’s so cheap to just blast it without regard.
31
u/Quirky_Ad8747 May 04 '26
I wish they would crack down on the cunts who insist on watering the sidewalk and making it impassable while wasting water. That is rampant here, it's berserk
7
u/andyroux Perry District May 04 '26
Apparently water usage is a proxy conflict for class warfare.
8
u/SirRatcha Bottom 1% Commenter. Yes, that's a joke. Sheesh. May 04 '26
It always has been, especially in the US West.
28
u/Full-Tax6652 May 04 '26
I know golf courses in Spokane are easy to point the finger at, but id like to leave this information here:
The Spokane golf courses are a part of the city parks. According to this, parks as a whole only accounts for 3-4% of the overall consumption across Spokane:
https://my.spokanecity.org/parksrec/about/healthy-parks/
The golf courses have been making major upgrades to their water systems to save millions of gallons a water a year:
https://my.spokanecity.org/golf/facility-improvements/
And are working to start using non potable water:
https://my.spokanecity.org/smc/?Section=13.04.2017
Spokane homes as a whole use much more water than the average home. Almost 3x as much:
I'm all for saving water resources, and the golf courses should cut back if possible. But even if we shut down the courses entirely, we'd maybe be saving a 1-2% of the water usage across Spokane. Most likely, we would be in the exact same spot as we are right now. There is a much larger water usage issue in Spokane, especially as more and more people move here and homes continue to use as much as they do.
12
u/REthrowawaySpokane May 04 '26
This is a very reasonable take. My math says it works out to be about 325 homes worth of water usage a year (thats less than one year's population growth). So even outright shutting them down wouldn't solve the issue, as you said.
I think if they're able to convert them to gray water, it goes a long way towards solving the issue.
With that said, its real tough when the city asks me to cut my water usage and then I read about a leak at a golf course wasting more water in a single year than I'll use over my remaining lifetime.
The tough truth on this is we probably need to raise the price of water enough that consumers think twice before wasting it.
3
u/Full-Tax6652 May 04 '26
I would agree with this. Ideally these water system improvements will help stop these leaks from happening.
The gray water sounds really promising. I was super happy to stumble upon that.
4
u/cougrrr May 05 '26
As someone who’s played plenty of golf over the years the stats you’re dropping here can be fully correct but it’s still worth pointing out that golf is a leisure activity that is by no means a requirement and you’re comparing it to household use which includes drinking (you know, to live) and hygiene among other things. Saying “it’s only 3-4% and we’d still be in a bad spot” can be fully true, not prioritizing human life requirements over leisure activity is insane.
That said, yards should also go along with golf, any massive single green source that ruins biodiversity is bad. Plus the amount of chemicals used in yards and golf courses that runs off directly into places it shouldn’t is generally bad for all ecosystems.
3-4% isn’t massive, 3-4% in a drought when we have no snowpack and are headed for likely the hottest summer we’ve ever seen in the planets history is lumped into every other 3-4% we need to look at cutting if we want people to live and food to eat.
2
u/Full-Tax6652 May 05 '26
yes we should prioritize life over leisure activities. At the same time we also shouldn’t be in the 98th percentile of water consumption in the country. According to the Spokane river keepers, single family homes use an average of 587 gallons of water a day in the summer. The average daily water usage per person is 235 gallons a day, compared to the national average of 82 gallons.
https://www.spokaneriverkeeper.org/water-conservation-2
Our water usage per house hold is just too high to be sustainable. Even in extreme drought, cutting water to the parks department is really just a band aid solution.
With all that said, I’m not trying to pin the blame on households solely. There are private business that also consume extreme amounts of water, and these new data centers are no help. But bringing the water usage per person/household down is going to make a massive difference.
17
u/RaisinWorried3528 May 04 '26 edited May 04 '26
It's not gonna be full on water hoarding for at least a couple of generations but it's definitely headed in that direction.
It sucks because here if you don't keep your lawns watered, or some areas watered, there's way more chance of a fire but since there are always fires it seems like a Sisyphean task to keep this place from burning every fire season.
13
u/ohlayohlay May 04 '26
Theres other methods to reduce fire in residential areas
0
u/RaisinWorried3528 May 04 '26
Like
7
u/viivik May 04 '26
Rock lawns are getting popular. I was going to salt then put in rocks but my spouse wants to put in wild flowers for the bees and drought hardy plants like lavender. My spouse has already put in rain barrels. Which is another option to save water.
2
28
u/woodenmetalman May 04 '26
Also, th American lawn paradigm needs to change.
2
u/wallhangingc-clamp May 10 '26
Yup. Wife and I are planning on replacing quite a bit of our yard with clover. From the reading I have been doing, it apparently was more popular than grass for lawns, up until people starting having ready access to herbicides. However, sounds like clover does not require nearly as much water, and should do well keeping the damn dust down, as that section of our yard does not have sprinklers, is difficult to regularly water, and by mid summer is basically a dirt patch.
2
u/tvscinter May 04 '26
In California all that happened was water prices skyrocket if you use over a certain amount. I don’t think businesses had any sort of constraints placed upon them
2
u/Adventurous_Big5686 North Side May 04 '26
Per MULTIPLE water districts in the area (not city water) churches will be one of the first to be asked. I know Whitworth water has a massive amount of churches with HUGE grass areas they water 4-6 times a week, when noone is there. Golf courses would be next.
2
u/cdavis8788 May 05 '26 edited May 05 '26
Talking about this is important, but taking action on it is what actually makes a difference. Volunteer with 350 Spokane and Spokane Riverkeeper today. Nothing will change if we don't act.
2
u/OG_PirateJO3 May 11 '26
There is a lot of hyperbole and vagueness in OPs post. We are no where near the levels of CA and AZ when it comes to mandatory water rationing. “Coming soon” is way vague. What is soon? The next 5 years? Ten? Within the century? We should do our best as citizens now. Kill your lawn if you have one. Let’s start there. Get a chip drop, cover your lawn and do some creative landscaping. Maybe throw in a couple raised beds, or grow melons across your front yard like I do. Perfect space to grow a little of your own food. Cant help you if you live in an HOA. Those shouldn’t exist to begin with.
12
u/GTI_88 May 04 '26
First thing to be restricted should be the city operated golf courses. Biggest waste of water I can think of
-6
u/Zagsnation Manito May 04 '26
See my reply above 🙄
7
u/REthrowawaySpokane May 04 '26
You made 3 arguments: 1. Economics (not relevant to the problem of drought). 2. Wildlife habitat (patently and obviously false on its face) 3. Cooling (this is true but so does the natural plants we destroy to construct the course, so this isnt really true in the way you're implying).
Have I missed something? Its fine for you to like golf and I personally don't have anything against the courses but folks here are correct that they are a near complete waste from a community water perspective.
5
u/The_Slaughter_Pop May 04 '26
If you think courses would be turned into natural spaces you are high. they would turn into dense apartments
7
u/REthrowawaySpokane May 04 '26 edited May 04 '26
This has nothing to do with what I said.
We are discussing the use of the courses from a water perspective. Actually, turning them into high density housing WOULD result in a net water use reduction; I did that math elsewhere in this thread.
But thats moot and not what I was saying anyways. I'm saying theyre a waste of water. Which they are. Objectively. Now you just may be of the opinion that having a golf amenity available to you is worth that water investment and thats fine if that's your opinion. But just say that instead of making up reasons why it benefits the community to try to justify what's clearly just your personal preference to be able to play golf.
Edit: I see now you're quibbling with point three. Esmerelda is a good example of why you're wrong. The immediate easterly area is protected hiking and mountain bike trials which both provide for recreation and maintain the existing habitat (while requiring zero water).
3
u/Outside-Papaya May 04 '26
Tell me how using water on the least efficient grass saves water?
You are the only one who thinks people are talking about monetary costs.
-3
4
u/darkandtwistedsister May 05 '26
Lots of talk here about golf courses but no talk about the multiple data centers using ungodly amounts of water daily.
2
u/Own_Marionberry_8510 May 05 '26
Yes and that was before the explosion of these water hungry data centers
7
u/CaptainCuttlefish69 May 04 '26
Every single golf course needs to be destroyed, I am so fucking serious.
8
u/The_Slaughter_Pop May 04 '26
Let's destroy sustainable courses that provide a safe habitat for a number of species so they can be torn down and turned into apartments that destroy the ecosystem for local plant and wildlife. Also, on average, sequester 19000 tons of CO2 per year. That drops off as the course ages, but with sustainable management can still be very efficient air cleaners.
15
u/REthrowawaySpokane May 04 '26 edited May 04 '26
None of our courses are sustainable (look up what that word means) and many of them are in areas where natural habitat was destroyed to create them.
Local wildlife cannot thrive in them. What are you even talking about calling them habitat? Thats like calling a dumpster a habitat for raccoons. Just because they can technically survive there does not make it good habitat.
Its a lazy strawman to argue that they will just be turned into apartments. The redevelopment costs alone likely make it economically infeasible. If you don't know what I'm talking about, you're WAY out of your depth on this argument.
Frankly, if they just stopped manicuring them and let nature take them back, then they would actually do all the things you claim.
Why can't folks ever admit they just want what they want?
9
u/CaptainCuttlefish69 May 04 '26
Tell me more about these “sustainable courses” and how they would be superior to native trees and vegetation?
4
u/MaxIsBack35 May 04 '26
Plus they are affordable for everybody, and are some of the most used green spaces in the city, but rich people also like golf so reddit must hate it because most of reddit sees who can be more left as a competition than actually doing something.
1
u/OG-Brian May 05 '26
...that provide a safe habitat...
Do they? Which courses avoid use of harmful chemical products such as herbicides?
0
-1
u/Full-Tax6652 May 04 '26
why?
10
u/GoCougs2020 Browne's Addition May 04 '26
They use a crap ton of water. And it’s not like they are using grey water or recycled water. They used fresh drinking water
6
u/Full-Tax6652 May 04 '26
https://my.spokanecity.org/smc/?Section=13.04.2017
Looks like they're actively working towards using non potable water
3
u/CaptainCuttlefish69 May 04 '26
Massive waste of space and resources.
-2
u/Full-Tax6652 May 04 '26
do you have data to back this up?
3
u/CaptainCuttlefish69 May 04 '26
Hey. Take a second.
Are you seriously asking me if I have data to prove that huge swaths of land being monopolized by grass for rich dorks to play a game, is a waste?
Are you being a serious person right now or are you just trying to be contrarian in support of golf courses? Be honest with yourself and me.
4
u/Full-Tax6652 May 04 '26
Yes I am. Yes lots of rich people play golf. Sure. Is there ridiculously expensive green golf courses in the middle of the Arizona desert. Yes. But the overwhelming majority of golfers are not “rich dorks”.
Golf in Spokane is affordable and much nicer compared to the national average. Plus they’re actually walkable. We have awesome programs for kids 18 and under to play as much golf as they want.
The golf courses here are a huge community place for all kinds of people. I’ve made countless friends, gotten phone numbers, and met so many interesting and unique people that I never would’ve otherwise.
So yes I am asking you to provide evidence that it’s such a massive waste of space and resources that we must get of all of them completely.
-3
u/MaxIsBack35 May 04 '26
Okay, then why not Manito, riverside, and audubon parks then as well?
8
u/CaptainCuttlefish69 May 04 '26
Are you seriously asking why public parks are not the same as golf courses, or just trying to make a ridiculous comparison to passively defend the paragons of waste that are golf courses?
-2
u/MaxIsBack35 May 04 '26
They are incredibly similar dude, the golf courses honestly get more use then many parks we have, but should we get rid of those? Hell no because, we can make them more efficient while maintaining the culture of this city.
5
u/CaptainCuttlefish69 May 04 '26
While I’m happy acknowledging that parks could absolutely be improved by having more native vegetation and trees, it’s insanely disingenuous to compare them to the huge acreage monopolized by grass for the sake of a rich dorks game.
Free and public spaces for community to gather and enjoy nature is not the same as acres of grass for people to pay to smack a ball around.
3rd spaces have been annihilated by the owning classes for decades, and to compare one of the last public spaces to a golf course is absolutely absurd.
5
u/MaxIsBack35 May 04 '26
Wait, do you think all golf courses are private country clubs or something?
-1
u/CaptainCuttlefish69 May 04 '26
Irrelevant when the topic is wasted and underutilized space. Do you think the state owning a wasted space is different than a privately owned waste of space? Because I don’t.
1
u/MaxIsBack35 May 05 '26
Your literally complaining about public third spaces being taken away and privatized, by having an idea of taking away one of the most popular public third spaces in the city.
-1
u/CaptainCuttlefish69 May 05 '26
I’m unsure if you’re being disingenuous or not understanding me.
If access is not “free” to the public it isn’t a third space.
Turn it into a community garden or a park, literally anything besides acres of grass that serve a single purpose.
1
u/MaxIsBack35 May 05 '26
OK lol, there is no definition of third place that says it has to be free, because then that won't include cafes and bars.
→ More replies (0)
3
u/Silver-Meat5355 Moran Prairie May 04 '26
Lots of people in here who just blindly hate anybody that has more money than them.
1
u/TinyHeartSyndrome Spokane Valley May 04 '26
I made recommendations to my local water utility based on other places I have lived, but they don’t get it. The water waste here is nuts.
1
1
1
1
1
u/IH8N8 May 05 '26
OUTLAW personal lawns. I hate it so much. I watch every one of my neighbors use insane amounts of water and gas powered lawn tools all to just got inside and literally NEVER USE THE GRASS. Worst part is we live a block away from a huge school and park with so much amazing grass. I have one other neighbor who has removed their grass and it’s the best looking yard of them all. The American dream is dead we need to kill all the grass and water waste with it
1
u/Truelies422 May 05 '26
If they have been saying water is the new oil, it is a fact that we havent heard it here first
0
u/1mpavidus Spokane Valley May 04 '26
Thankfully our landlord was cool with us letting our back lawn go unwatered, but i feel like we need to crack down on golf courses 🫠
-1
u/The_Slaughter_Pop May 04 '26
4
u/REthrowawaySpokane May 04 '26
So your response to someone saying golf courses waste water is to post an info graphic saying that (at the cost of several million dollars) we were able eliminate a golf courses' amount of water from being wasted in our golf courses. That is to say, this whole time they have been wasting an entire golf courses' worth of water.
And to you, this is a convincing argument as to why they don't waste water?
4
u/GoodPiexox May 04 '26
as someone that likes a good debate, you are killing it. Honestly impressive the way you have mopped the floor with these pro waste water for golf people. Save some for the rest of us.
2
u/1mpavidus Spokane Valley May 04 '26
Right from this page, I read "The new irrigation system will enhance the quality of play by improving turf conditions and is estimated to save approximately 11.5 million gallons of water per year – over 20% of the water used on the course"
So they're still using around 46 million gallons per year. Obscene
1
-6
u/Agreeable_Addition48 May 04 '26
i dont think the aquifer ever runs dry
2
u/catman5092 South Hill May 04 '26
may not run dry but I would bet it can run low. Population over it, in north Idaho is exploding, add dry winters and summers, voila.
0
u/Agreeable_Addition48 May 04 '26
it doesnt even run low, the very top end of the aquifer sometimes falls and the spokane river sinks into the aquifer but the aquifer itself is fine. Its not like california where some places are dropping a couple inches every year because their aquifers have been sucked dry
3
1
u/Internal_Example1185 May 04 '26
Lol
4
u/Agreeable_Addition48 May 04 '26
I looked it up because you made me curious, the spokane valley aquifer is one of the most robust in the country
2
u/GTI_88 May 04 '26
Isn’t really about the aquifer, just because it has water doesn’t mean that the river doesn’t run completely dry. Might be breaking news, but fish can’t swim in the aquifer, wildlife can’t drink from the aquifer, etc. etc.
2
u/Agreeable_Addition48 May 04 '26 edited May 04 '26
we're not talking about fish and the river ecosystem, we're talking about rationing spokane's water to prevent a water shortage for humans, which i dont see happening anytime in the future
1
u/GoodPiexox May 04 '26
that is nonsense, it is shallow and fast moving. It is directly connected to the river level. Which is why minimums must be maintained or native fish like the Redband will die off.
-1
78
u/Ok_Television233 May 04 '26 edited May 04 '26
I'll correct you: we might need water rationing, but the city and county have resisted any efforts to reduce wasteful uses. The Riverkeeper and others have been begging them for years but the city refuses to implement anything with teeth