I actually think lawns are valuable, we just need to realize that they aren't "free", especially in places where water is increasingly scarce (like most of the

I actually think lawns are valuable, we just need to realize that they aren't "free", especially in places where water is increasingly scarce (like most of the heavily populated parts of California). Lawns are pretty great places to put a blanket down and have a picnic, run around and play frisbee, badminton, or soccer, and so forth. They're just thirsty, expensive, and have other environmental issues. I remember reading an interview with a water-friendly landscape architect (sorry no cite) who was asked a question about lawns, and the question was kind of phrased in a "of course you must hate lawns" kind of way. His response was, no not really, lawns have a place, we just have to realize they're costly and shouldn't be used casually. For instance, lining a long driveway or a freeway median with a lawn that has to be constantly watered but is never walked on is probably a bad use of water and the other externalities that lawns produce (pesticides and so forth). Many of the current uses of lawns aren't a good use - but even the water-friendly landscape architect feel that there are some situations where a lawn is a justifiable use of water. We just have to stop pretending that water is "free".