Town Square

Post a New Topic

EBMUD implements new watering restrictions

Original post made on Aug 13, 2014

The San Ramon Valley's primary water provider told its customers Tuesday afternoon to comply with new statewide mandatory watering restrictions, but said it would not issue tickets or fines to users who ignore the recently adopted rules.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Tuesday, August 12, 2014, 5:45 PM

Comments (49)

Posted by Ms. bunny
a resident of San Ramon
on Aug 13, 2014 at 7:24 am

GOOD. I'm appalled at the number of people who STILL have huge lawns and are either not getting the message here in the East Bay or seem to think they have money to "burn" using up far more than their allotted share of water in general. San Ramon? Better than most. But a couple other communities to the north, as I do some business there? Really need a real REALITY check, that's for sure! What can they be thinking??????!!!!!!!

Posted by Aline Soules
a resident of Danville
on Aug 13, 2014 at 8:34 am

One challenge to the 10% water reduction is that it is much harder to achieve a 10% reduction if you have been conserving all along. I have always restricted toilet flushing, yard watering, etc. and I've always collected water in a bucket if I turn on the tap and need to wait for hot water, using that bucket of water for other purposes. We need to look at those who are still profligate with water use, whether residential or commercial. I see many watering systems watering concrete and it drives me crazy.

Posted by J Williams B
a resident of Danville
on Aug 13, 2014 at 8:53 am

We should be careful in our judgement of others. I have grown up in this community and lived through the drought in the 70s where we had a very lush green lawn because of the simple fact that my dad dug a well. People would drive by and be rude. Instead of getting insulted we just shared with the neighbors too. Let's find a way to help others around us instead of gripe!

Posted by Peter
a resident of Danville
on Aug 13, 2014 at 9:10 am

Want to see wasted water? Walk or drive through Magee Ranch prior to noon almost any day and you will see running water in the gutters on almost every street. Most of the lawns are watered every day. My bet is that EBMUD will not do anything about this.

Posted by Mr. Green Grass
a resident of Danville
on Aug 13, 2014 at 9:15 am

Paint your lawn green. Check this product out.

Web Link

Posted by Herman Glates
a resident of Danville
on Aug 13, 2014 at 10:42 am

Residential water rationing won’t save jack squat.

The general population of California uses only 10% of California’s water.
80-85% of California’s water is used in agriculture. Millions of acre feet of water is being wasted on water-intensive crops like cotton and alfalfa. Why? Because many farmers don’t have to pay market rates for their water. They have water allotment rights that are senior to everyone else and they take their full allotment and use it.

They can bite me.

Also, earlier this year, the Obama administration wasted 23 billion gallons of water. Yes, 23 billion! Obama (via the Bureau of Reclamation) ordered the draining of Folsom and other reservoirs on the American and Stanislaus rivers to nudge baby salmon toward the Pacific Ocean (to which they swim anyway) and to lower river water temperatures by a few degrees. There is no scientific evidence this was necessary.

I will continue watering my lawn. And I ain’t using no low-flow showerhead. And I’m flushing my toilet when I take a duke.

You want to save water? Then start charging farmers the market rate for their water use. And leave me alone.

Posted by Rodney V
a resident of Danville
on Aug 13, 2014 at 11:17 am

Don't worry, the rationing wont work really and all those still using ANY water (which is everyone) will be getting raped by EBMUD for the charges going forward...anyone get a water bill recently?!? WOW!!!!

Posted by dot
a resident of Danville
on Aug 13, 2014 at 11:46 am

I've cut back my 10%, let my front lawn die, and still my water bill was twice as much as it was the previous bill. What more do they want us to do ??

Posted by Debora
a resident of San Ramon
on Aug 13, 2014 at 1:55 pm

Just another way they do to rape us of our finances here in the San Ramon Valley. Shame on you EBMUD. You have us by the balls just like all the other Utility Companies. We are all too busy working our butts off to live here so we cannot even take a moment to read our bills let alone do anything about it. I am so sick of the outrageous costs here. I have lived here for 32 years and have seen so many changes and they have basically killed those of us who have seen it happen. We are being pushed out by high costs of everything. Personally I want to get the heck out of dodge while I still can and bag the funds and never come back!! Sorry but there really is nothing to offer here once your kids are grown and gone. We do not even have a downtown in San Ramon.

Posted by Dawn Leavitt Hitchah
a resident of Blackhawk
on Aug 13, 2014 at 4:46 pm

Have you heard about the proverbial door, Debora? Watch out behind you!

Posted by Conservator
a resident of Danville
on Aug 13, 2014 at 6:09 pm

Spcwt (aka H.G.),

While your point regarding agricultural subsidies bears merit, in my opinion, surely one who so viscerally resents the payment of taxes would acknowledge what cash crops such as cotton (commoditized as textiles) and alfalfa (commoditized into livestock support amongst other uses) bring to the state in terms of revenue. The more of those 'products' that gets produced in this state, the more clients you likely have to represent, ergo - the more school yard parking lots that can be named in your philanthropic honor.

Also, I believe your water use numbers are tired. Ref, Fig. 4 / pg. 7 (Web Link In general, AG takes about 60% of the total utilization, urban use is up to about 20%, conveyance losses (moving water from the hills through the deserts) account for about 10% and so forth. Interestingly, from the same report, urban use is dominated by residential use by nearly 70% proportion whereby about half of what goes to a home is used inside (32% of the total) and the rest to the 'lawn' (37% of the total utilization).

At the end of the day, we have water issues in this state.

BTW, does it really humor your soul to throw in the bathroom quip? We all appreciate what having a Derek and the Dominos kind of moment does for the human psyche. However, a bar-certified attorney, Internet anonymity regardless, should really use better form. Heck, even Clapton still made good music under the nom de plume.

Posted by Herman Glates
a resident of Danville
on Aug 14, 2014 at 8:01 am

My numbers are NOT tired. Did you read your own Web link? Look at the penultimate paragraph on page 1. It says, “agriculture and related manufacturing account for nearly four-fifths of all business and residential water use.”

I try never to do math in public. But the last time I checked, four-fifths = 80%.

As for my bathroom humor, all I’m saying is, a mercy flush is justified in all circumstances, drought or no drought.

Posted by Peter Kluget
a resident of Danville
on Aug 14, 2014 at 9:28 am

Ah, Herman! Arrogance, ignorance, self-absorption and belligerence! Such a delightfully toxic combo --- and you nailed it!

You're both wrong about the water percentages from the report - The horizontal lines show volume, the light vertical lines show agriculture's percent share -- about 75%. As to your rant about fish, it's always important to find a baseless assertion made by someone with an agenda and repeat it as established fact than to accept the opinions of scientists who are actually studying the matter, don't you think? I mean, if that's your approach to global warming, why not apply it to fish as well?

Oh, and you got Obama in there, too! Bonus points for that.

Posted by spcwt
a resident of Danville
on Aug 14, 2014 at 11:04 am

The good news is global warming is supposed to increase the amount of rain in California.

If we manage our water better, charging everyone a market price, including farmers, there would be no need to price gouge people like Debora.

That doesn’t fit the liberal paradigm, of course, who view exorbitant water rates as one of many tools designed to increase the cost of suburban living, thus nudging ever more people into high-density stack-and-pack housing.

Posted by Peter Kluget
a resident of Danville
on Aug 14, 2014 at 12:04 pm

Nailed it again, scpwt! It's a liberal conspiracy. Water prices and usage priorities have nothing to do with a complex history of water wars and the resistance to change by politicians (many GOP) in agriculturally-oriented districts - it's all about punishing you and your suburban dreamland.

But you get points deducted for not blaming the UN and Agenda 21. C'mon, man - get with it!

Posted by Herman Glates
a resident of Danville
on Aug 14, 2014 at 1:10 pm

Damg, I’m so used to calling myself spcwt, I flubbed up. The name’s Glates.

Liberals call the shots now Kluget. You know that. GOP is irrelevant in California. Democrats can change the rules anytime they want.

And isn’t it true that you liberals want people like Debbie living in dumpy condos and such? Admit it.

If they did, think of the reduced greenhouse gas emissions. You would be stoked.

Posted by Conservator
a resident of Danville
on Aug 14, 2014 at 2:02 pm

Spcwt (H.G.),

You are a shrewd counselor. I can only imagine how terrible you make it for those you take depositions from.

That stated, I did review the link I provided. I stand corrected. Total 2005 estimated consumption, based on CA Dept of Water Resources numbers, stood at just below 80MM acre-feet of H2O with agriculture taking around a 75% share.

Perhaps you are truly convinced that those of us who either do, or did, toil and sweat in something like a boardroom or a corner office are teflon coated to the affects of increasing the cost of growing 'things' out in the central valley. I personally believe that if we went to full market pricing on the west coast's most valuable element for everything, I think you would drive everyone into a 1000 sq ft flat, stacked 7 to 8 high. Maybe I'm just myopic.

I also realized that my reference to Derek and the Dominos was quite dated. Got me thinking. Who was that country & western Oklahoman who tried out rock-n-roll to sow a few oats…??? Chris Gaines = Herman Glates???

Posted by Angelina Diva
a resident of Danville
on Aug 14, 2014 at 3:17 pm

One solution to our water or drought issues and rationing would be for us to bring in hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants (and more +more legal immigrants too) to California. Let's educate them for free too! Free school lunches, err I mean 'gratis'

C'mon, who's down for even more water rationing in the future!?

"Oakland Schools Prepare for Surge of Central American Students"
Web Link

Posted by Majid
a resident of San Ramon
on Aug 14, 2014 at 5:39 pm

With Angelina Diva starts the moron brigade blaming the drought on immigration.

Posted by Philip Henika
a resident of San Ramon
on Aug 15, 2014 at 9:20 am

Energy and water conservation ought to become part of the American lifestyle whether there is a drought or not; whether there is climate change or not i.e. waste not; want not. Sure I am as guilty as the rest because I am now looking at choices that I have should have made years ago such as drought-resistance plant landscapes; solar panels; Earthbox hydroponics; hybrid cars; collecting rainwater etc. Americans are a spoiled lot if they conclude that conservation means sacrifice and leaves it at that or whines about it. People are inventive; resourceful and yes, I am starting to find out what others are doing in terms of the talk-the-talk and the walk-the-walk of energy and water conservation and I thank the participants of this blog. However, I would rather hear more practical solutions from bloggers than useless complaints.

Posted by Philip Henika
a resident of San Ramon
on Aug 15, 2014 at 10:15 am

Searched: What can California agriculture do to conserve water? (1) repair damaged irrigation systems, (2) replace irrigation system with a drip system, (3) lower the trajectory level of the operating guns on irrigation system on windy days e.g. this conservation measure was a suggestion re: foundation spray on windy days in Las Vegas - see Showtime's Years of Living Dangerously (4) plant shelterbelts in your pastures to protect your livestock from the sun i.e. livestock will not require as much water to stay hydrated (5) sweep the floors and alleys of a barn thoroughly before washing them down with water and (6) capture drainage water and re-use it in your irrigation system.

Posted by Angelina Diva
a resident of Danville
on Aug 16, 2014 at 5:08 pm

Majid, I stand corrected - an increase in population has nothing to do with H20 consumption. I had somehow thought maybe millions more people over a few decades could be related to rationing of H20. In other words, maybe there's more to it than drought? But I guess not! My bad.

Posted by Peter Kluget
a resident of Danville
on Aug 17, 2014 at 8:27 am

Angelina, obsessively blaming immigrants (legal or otherwise, as you note) for all of the bad things in the world has been a hallmark of irrational nativism for hundreds of years. Knee-jerk assertion that everything would be just hunky-dory if all those strange new people (Irish, Chinese, Latino - doesn't really matter who they are at any particular point in time) would just "go home" is nothing new.

Blaming a drought on immigrants is, however, a new low.

Posted by Philip Henika
a resident of San Ramon
on Aug 17, 2014 at 8:09 pm

Angelina Diva et al - I recommend Showtime's Years of Living Dangerously. Drought has been considered a contributing factor to the recent revolutions in Syria and Egypt. Yemen could be the first nation to completely run out of fresh water. It is obvious that drought leads to conflict but the question is - will conflict be resolved with resourcefulness or with violence. Climate change is considered by many experts as the major security threat to all nations so nations can either cooperate or they can fight.

Posted by Angelina Diva
a resident of Danville
on Aug 18, 2014 at 5:24 pm

In fact I obsessively blame Liberals for most things, not immigrants, but that's neither here nor there. The issue at hand is mandatory H20 rationing due to drought, but another contributing factor would be population, which seems to be connected to immigration which in turn seems to lead to an increase in H2o consumption. More people tend to need more H20. I am not referring to the handful of illegals in front of your local Home Depot, but am referring to the projected millions incoming. Let's look at the BIG PICTURE. Does this make sense? Or are numbers off limits for fear of offending ya'll?

Posted by Long time resident
a resident of Danville
on Aug 18, 2014 at 6:25 pm

Interesting that EBMUD raised our rates 9.5% last July and another 9.5% this July. One of the reasons (excuses) was that our conservation efforts have reduced their revenue stream by selling less water. On the other side of the coin, they keep adding to their customer base through new housing developments. For every gallon I have saved, they have just turned around and sold it to someone else (a new customer).

We could have all the water we need if the state would allow franking and production of our vast natural gas resources. Natural gas could generate electricity and run desalinization plants at the same time. Instead, we are installing solar panels and wind turbines while we import electricity from neighboring states.

Of course, none of these are being worked on. The high speed train pet project is much more important!

Posted by Aubrey
a resident of Alamo
on Aug 19, 2014 at 9:11 am

As smeone born/raised here in the Bay Area, I have seen California, especially the Bay Area, go to heel in a handbasket. We haven't built new water storage since Jerry's father was Governor, but 90+ billion on highspeed rail is a higher priority.

Maybe it's just me, but that's beyond stupid...

Posted by Ms. bunny
a resident of San Ramon
on Aug 19, 2014 at 11:06 am

It's frightfully irresponsible to be "high and mighty" about using as much water as you care to because you feel EBMUD, farmers, etc. are corrupt and therefore you are justified NOT conserving; NOT being cautious, careful OR RESPONSIBLE.

I am truly appalled at what I hear here insofar as so-called justification for using as much water as some of you want.

Seriously. Some of you here? Really need a better moral compass when it comes to doing your part for the environment and conservation and take a hard look that this righteous attitude of condemnation of politics has driven a stake through your common sense and ability to be reasonable human beings when it comes to ALL our natural resources WE ALL NEED TO CONSERVE.

Posted by Herman Glates
a resident of Danville
on Aug 20, 2014 at 8:11 am

I don’t lack a “moral compass” just because I do an extra flush after taking a duke.

San Francisco smells like crap, literally, because it mandated that everyone use low-flow toilets and now there’s not enough toilet water in sewer pipes to wash it away.

California has plenty of water to meet its needs, if we’re smart. The solution to California’s water “crisis” is to start charging everyone a market rate for their water use, including farmers. We should also build more water storage.

It makes no sense to squeeze a few drops out of residential users, who use hardly any water in the first place.

You sound like a good little Liberal. You like taxes, right? Why don’t you and your Liberal friends in Sacramento impose an excise tax on farmers who grow water-intensive crops during drought years? That would make the farmers plant something else and save more than enough water to meet the needs of California. As a bonus, you could spend that tax money to build more water storage. Or you could waste it on a pointless welfare program. Your choice.

Now why don’t you run along, take your moralizing with you, and go wag your finger at someone else.

Posted by Ms. bunny
a resident of San Ramon
on Aug 20, 2014 at 9:06 am

IF you're referring to me? Wow Herman. You're one cynical little man with a "chip" the size of a boulder on his shoulder...Clearly, this is ALL about what you refuse to do. You must lead an interesting life.

Feel better soon dear.

Posted by Herman Glates
a resident of Danville
on Aug 20, 2014 at 9:35 am

This is NOT about what I refuse to do. It’s about what YOU refuse to do.

Doing a mercy flush doesn’t make you a bad person. It makes you considerate of others.

I do it because I care.

You should too. It will make everyone feel better.

Posted by Ms. bunny
a resident of San Ramon
on Aug 20, 2014 at 10:35 am

You really are a confused man.
You actually have the audacity to say you "care" here?
Cheeky guy!


Posted by Long Term Resident
a resident of Danville
on Aug 20, 2014 at 11:47 am

Just for the record, I have cut back and my water consumption is 25% less than last year at this time and my lawns are brown. As a 56 year resident of Danville, I do question how much my conservation is making a difference as urban sprawl continues and more customers/consumption is added to the EBMUD ysstem. I'm not saying I deserve to use more water and shouldn't conserve, I'm only questioning whether my conservation efforts are really making a difference. Also, it seems to me like all the local churchs have green lawns. Do they get a free pass as places of worship??

Posted by Ms. bunny
a resident of San Ramon
on Aug 20, 2014 at 12:27 pm

I believe LTR, that this speaks volumes about your care and concern for the problem at hand. While many of us are continuing to "question" what's really going on at both the local and state levels in regard to issues with diversion of water if not the agricultural consumption? As well as the current legislation we'll see on the ballot in November that will definitely encourage reserve/conserve methods? EACH of us really does have a responsibility to do our part, which is what, in part, is what trying to maintain a civilized society is all about. There are absolutely entities, and residents, as demonstrated here and in many a neighborhood, who are either nonchalant, less than concerned or who are "chest pounders" with the NIMBY attitude or just plain cynics on working towards worthy solutions to such problems. I don't think any church, school, golf course, retail business or upper echelon landowner or others, get a "free pass" whatsoever when it comes to each doing THEIR part to conserve energy, water or other natural resources.

Posted by Lorin Mauer
a resident of Danville
on Aug 20, 2014 at 2:46 pm

LTR: Call it immaculate photosynthesis? The local parks look pretty good, as well.

Posted by Water Waste
a resident of Danville
on Aug 20, 2014 at 3:05 pm

The town of Danville wastes more water then we do..

All of our parks get FLOODED with water at least once if not twice every night.

50% of all the sprinklers are over spraying on to concrete or dirt. I didn't know sidewalks need watering not to mention the drought were facing.

There is actually pools of water in the grass that cant be absorbed by the ground.

For example sycamore valley park the basketball courts at the elementary school have lanes eroded into the asphalt from where all the run off water drains from the field.

Posted by Duffy
a resident of Danville
on Aug 21, 2014 at 11:06 am

My goodness this article sure created firestorm. Let's face it peoples we live in a desert and water turns it into an oasis! Every decade or so we have a drought and we go through this drill. If next winter is a wet one we will have to find something else to go ballistic!

Posted by Philip Henika
a resident of San Ramon
on Aug 22, 2014 at 9:09 am

Folks - You need to move on from the liberal/conservative thing i.e. Republicans and Democrats alike still go under water when sea levels rise and hurricanes strike. In fact, hurricane Sandy inundated a largely Republican community in New York - see Showtime's Years of Living Dangerously. On the solution side, you don't have to be a Republican or Democrat to recycle or put solar panels on your roof. Come on folks. Get real! Educate yourselves!

Posted by San Ramon Observer
a resident of San Ramon
on Aug 25, 2014 at 12:21 pm

San Ramon Observer is a registered user.

Philip & Ms. Bunny,

As I have posted before in my blog I have 7000 gallons of water storage on my property, with about 3000 left to last until October. If either of you want to come over and see my setup here, email me at my address.

H.G. I thought "conservative" meant conserving, saving, self-reliant, independent, even perhaps old-fashioned. You can't get more old-fashioned and independent than to divorce yourself from utilities by having your own energy source (i.e. solar) and water. I'm waiting for the Bloom box Web Link to get down to the size of an oven so I can give PG&E the finger and nothing else.

I'll stick with EBMUD for drinking water, but for most other uses I will use my stored water. EBMUD and DSRSD are stepping up their recycling programs too. That's what should be used by ag. Cotton doesn't care if the water has been recycled, but people do.

AKA San Ramon Observer

Posted by Ms. bunny
a resident of San Ramon
on Aug 26, 2014 at 8:39 am

Roz - Not everyone is in your position and I believe we will always have to rely on the utility agencies we need in order to survive overall as cities/counties. That said? The grey water system is best implemented in a home to be built/under construction and can be most costly/unsightly if ADDED along the way of existence in a home, as I have looked into myself. But? All is not lost, I have cleared a substantial place in my garage for stored water and a composite toilet, basically for emergencies. I have taken every known measure to mitigate water usage, from rocking/native/drought tolerant L/S in both my front/rear yards, to water saving hardware in bathrooms and kitchens and new hose bib valves installed. I believe I've done what I can as a homeowner and my water bill proves heartily that it is working!

Posted by San Ramon Observer
a resident of San Ramon
on Aug 27, 2014 at 6:07 pm

San Ramon Observer is a registered user.

Ms. Bunny,

You are absolutely correct that greywater recycling systems should be installed in all new homes. These should be added to the building code. There are rebates for installing low flow toilets, but if bathroom sink water is recycled to the toilets, there's no need for 1.29 gal. toilets which might not provide enough rinse water to clean the sewer laterals.


Posted by Herman Glates
a resident of Danville
on Aug 28, 2014 at 8:17 am

Look at the neat idea these do-gooder liberals thought up. They want to force people to buy greywater recycling systems. They probably wouldn’t cost too much and easy to maintain.

But why stop there? You could save even more water by forcing people to pee in the sink. Urine is sterile!!! People need to get over their phobias.

While we’re at it, let’s ban all flush toilets. You don’t need them, not even to take duke. Force people to use a composting toilet. People need only mix their excrement with sawdust, coconut coir or peat moss to support aerobic processing and to mitigate odor. No water needed!!!

Aren’t you glad liberals are here to have government run your life?

They do it because they care.

Hurray for liberals!!!

Posted by Conservator
a resident of Danville
on Aug 28, 2014 at 11:36 am


The commodes that you are disparaging have become slightly more sophisticated then the ones you have described.

Web Link

Web Link

Perhaps, hurray for billionaires that fund these innovations in mankind's most basic necessities?

BTW, urine is only sterile (aseptic) in situ. The dispensing 'systems' tend to be quite septic.

Posted by Herman Glates
a resident of Danville
on Aug 28, 2014 at 11:51 am

Thanks for posting that link!

Wow, a solar-powered toilet that generates hydrogen and electricity. Amazing!!

Who knew that was even possible??

To paraphrase John Lennon, “All we are saying, is give pee a chance!”

Posted by Ms. bunny
a resident of San Ramon
on Aug 29, 2014 at 7:16 am

Oh Herman, once again you're hysterical in your rant...Calm down dear. No one is insisting/pushing/demanding all partake of grey water systems (geez)
Working towards environmental/conservation solutions doesn't equate to being a Republican or Democrat (geez) It's about a person's philosophy in trying to mitigate existing issues and those that have gotten out of control - such as people like you who simply choose to "blow" their "horn" and "pound" their "chest" that no problem exists and we all live in "la la land" with no real water issues and you're busy flushing away at your discretion. Geez again! BTW? My compost unit is stored for earthquake usage if need be, not a matter of daily use for God sakes...Do you ever READ man??? Geez, AGAIN!!!

Posted by Herman Glates
a resident of Danville
on Aug 29, 2014 at 8:32 am

Why is your compost unit in storage? Why aren’t you using it all the time? Sounds like you're busy flushing away at YOUR discretion.

In fact, why don’t you carry your composter around with you when you’re out and about so if you have to pee, you don’t have to use a regular toilet. You could use your composter instead.

But you don’t. Do you.

Clearly, you’re not doing all you can do to save water.

Face it. You’re a water waster.

Posted by Ms. bunny
a resident of San Ramon
on Sep 1, 2014 at 8:10 am

As I said before, your off-the-mark raving gets you nowhere. Informs no one (sigh) You're just acting here like an hysterical old fool. My compost toilet, as stated? (but then, you're weak in reading, we all know that by now...) is for use in emergency situations such as a natural catastrophe, not a water shortage.

What have YOU done to conserve water? We already know: less than nothing BECAUSE? Fanatics rave, they are not proactive and feel they are above such simple tasks as reducing their "footprint" on the planet.

Herman Glates? I salute you as one of "those".

Posted by Ms. Green
a resident of Danville
on Sep 1, 2014 at 8:18 am

Check out all the very green lawns that extend for miles along Blackhawk Road. They may have plenty of money to pay but can't they help out by turning down the water usage like the rest of us??

Posted by Name hidden
a resident of Walnut Creek

on Jun 4, 2017 at 7:19 pm

Due to repeated violations of our Terms of Use, comments from this poster are automatically removed. Why?

Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.


Post a comment

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Stay informed.

Get the day's top headlines from sent to your inbox in the Express newsletter.

Burning just one "old style" light bulb can cost $150 or more per year
By Sherry Listgarten | 6 comments | 1,975 views

Reflecting on lives this Thanksgiving Day
By Tim Hunt | 0 comments | 1,047 views