Robert Gehrke’s column on July 10 (“Not in my front yard”) downplays legitimate environmental issues with artificial turf. It also demonstrates the trap of simplistic thinking about complex urban socio-ecological systems.
Yes, residential water conservation is important and lawns are often a culprit due to over watering. But the lion’s share of water use statewide is for commercial agriculture. Our mountain valley ecosystems have been highly modified over the past 150 years, and one of the biggest problems is the extent of impervious surfaces — roads, parking lots and roofs. These prevent ground water infiltration and cause excessive stormwater runoff to the impaired Jordan River and Great Salt Lake.
There are good landscaping solutions for shady areas, including low-water, shade-tolerant turfgrasses. Proper organic landscaping protects the soil, allows water infiltration, provides habitat for insects and birds and reduces the urban heat island effect, among other benefits. It isn’t the city’s problem if the homeowners had poor designers, spent a lot of money or didn’t properly maintain their previous plantings.
The claim that their yard is the prettiest on their street is laughable, and sad. Oddly, the homeowners in question didn’t want to remove their tree, but the lack of watering will likely weaken or kill it.
Artificial turf is a fossil-fuel-derived plastic product with serious life-cycle issues from manufacture to disposal. Salt Lake City is correct in banning it.
Jen Colby, Salt Lake City
Donate to the newsroom now. The Salt Lake Tribune, Inc. is a 501(c)(3) public charity and contributions are tax deductible