Surf contest put teens at risk
A shocking and alarming scene at 8 a.m., on Saturday, Dec. 8: a surfing competition held north of Crystal Pier in Pacific Beach, no surfers in the ocean except for some teens being put at a health risk for surfing before the 72-hour health and safety clearance, and their leaders not even considering the heavy rain in Pacific Beach last night.
The leader in the organization overseeing the surfing event said they had to cancel last week, and their leaders and parents agreed to go for it today, thinking the bad water runoff was gone, and yes, they were aware of the hazards of surfing before the 72-hour clearance.
One Pacific Beach lifeguard said they do not recommend surfing before the 72 hours due to health risks. Six local surfers watching from the hill said they would not go in the water today until the 72-hour clearance was lifted, and they could not believe why an organization would put teens at a health risk.
What message is this leadership and parents sending to the teens and all who are involved in this situation? That playing sports is more important than health issues, even for teens, and that it is not important to obey leadership, such as lifeguards, in this situation.
Nancelle Lauffer, Pacific Beach

Revolting Grandmas rock water changes
The Oct. 4 article on page 1 of the Village News, “Water issues come to a boil” by Sebastian Ruiz, was excellent. The Revolting Grandmas have been concerned about San Diego’s water issues for years. We offer the following comments garnered from our many years of involvement and research:
A common-sense approach to water reclamation: In the opinion of Revolting Grandmas, it might be more productive, prudent and “water wise” if the city of San Diego’s elected officials, the incorporated cities within San Diego County, the county Board of Supervisors, community planning groups and the myriad water districts and/or agencies in San Diego County would band together in an effort to overturn the federal judge’s decision with regard to saving the tiny delta smelt, which, in effect, would cut off Southern California’s water supply from the north and let the citizenry of Southern California dehydrate.
The public at large spoke loud, clear and overwhelmingly in 1999 that water re-purification (toilet-to-tap) was not acceptable for drinking water. Moreover, in the Grandmas’ opinion, less than 25 percent of the water used in cities needs to be of drinking water quality. Reclamation for purposes such as urban irrigation, vehicle washing, toilet flushing, air conditioning, construction, industry, fire protection and environmental enhancement substitutes for fresh water traditionally used for such purposes.
Many such systems are now operating successfully in California and elsewhere in the United States. Most systems have to be retrofitted, which is more costly than installing reclaimed water lines in new areas as they are being developed and/or redeveloped.
In Irvine, all new areas are obliged to be served with both potable (for drinking) and non-potable (reclaimed water) water distribution systems, and high-rise buildings are required to provide reclaimed water for toilet flushing and air conditioning.
Furthermore, the treatment is conventional and considerably lower in cost than making reclaimed water acceptable for drinking.
San Jose and Santa Clara had to reduce wastewater discharges into San Francisco Bay. They installed a large reclaimed water distribution system and signed up customers who wanted to be drought proof. Water reclamation is a viable option. However, the reclaimed water need not be a part of our drinking water supply.
Mary Quartiano, Revolting Grandmas, Ocean Beach
Muriel Watson, Revolting Grandmas, Bonita