Reasons Not to Have a Lawn?

[webmaster]

Saw a [url=https://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/books/2008/07/21/080721crbo_books_kolbert/?printable=true]New Yorker article about lawns[/url] that was illuminating. It discusses the history of lawns, how lawns became a socially required and then legally required. Then it details all the horrible chemicals used to keep a lawn in an artificial state of greenness, including a product called Sevin that has been banned in Toronto.

A very good read, and it made me wonder whether we should have a lawn forum at all, or maybe re-title it the Anti-Lawn Forum.

Please take a moment to read the article though.

[Kisal]

I have had a yard that was all vegetables and herbs. We even put in bay laurel (the kind used for seasoning soups and stews) as a hedge. I had one small area as a bulb garden, primarily tulips and crocus, and in a shady area under a tree, we put in pachysandra. Other than that, everything we grew was edible. It was very nice. A number of my current neighbors have converted their lawns in similar ways.

OTOH, the two things that attracted me to the house I currently own were the huge windows and the very large backyard. It's large enough to be subdivided, should I choose to do so. My reason for wanting a lawn, though, is because I wanted to have dogs -- and I especially like the giant breeds. I want them to be able to run and romp and play, without me getting all distressed if they smash some plant flat to the ground or dig a bunch of holes. A lawn is the simplest and sturdiest ground cover for my purposes.

I don't worry about my lawn being greener than anyone else's, and if I notice a lot of weeds, I dig them by hand. I don't do much of anything with the lawn, beyond keeping the dog waste cleared away and watering it once a week. This year it looks like it could use a light touch of fertilizer in some areas, but it will be the first time I've fertilized it in 22 years. I never use pesticides on my lawn, only on the plants I grow in containers. Even then, I only use Safer's Soap, and only when it's absolutely essential.


So, I like my lawn!

[Charlie MV]

I like my lawn. I tend it organically. I love my lawn mower. I can't let the kids play in the vegetables or flowers. I water it every 2 weeks for an hour unless it rains except in drought. During drought, it goes dormant and comes right back after it rains. It thrives on compost, harmony fertilizer and azimite. It feels good under my bare feet . I also use a rye cover crop in the garden. I plan on installing a well and then I'll water during drought because the water will go right back where it came from. I would be anti the anti lawn forum.

[dinker]

Thanks that was a good read. It highlight's some very good point's
Here in ks we have alot of grass land pasture's for cattle hayfields we bail for hay But yes I agree it should be a choise Yes I agree people have gone over board spraying. dumping anything and everything on their yard
with out thinking about risk (example) this has happened several times Iwas in the garden supply a mother picks up a cosintrated yard insect spray and hand's it to a small child to carry .point being we have gotten to confortable with the stuff But I could see them think when I said oh my gosh your child has a bottle of poison

[dinker]

I forgot I mow all but the very back part of my yard It helps keep the snake's ,skunk's.bug's away.no I don't water the grass.yes I water my garden and flowers water is very high here with out watering it run's as much as the electric and gas

[cklandscapingorlando]

There are very good reasons to go both ways.There is NOTHING that keeps the chemicals out of our water better then turf.It slows down run off and stabalizes the soil.It also absorbs most of the N/P that WE put down.It's easy to say my grass needs to much chemical but we put the junk down.If your turf is grown organicly you build up the soils natural ability to defend it's self.These may be a bit extreem but I tell my clients like this.A person with aids can die from a common cold because their immune system is week.The only thing keeping them going is drugs.Where as a healthy person might get sick but still be able to go to work.Plants are the same way.That being said, there is nothing in your landscape out side of bog blants that use more water to stay green.Drought tollerant in terms of turf only neans it lives past 30 days with out water.It does not mean it stays green.This is why I'm relandscaping my whole property.To use less water not chemicals.Chemicals can be solved for the most part through variety selection and culture.Also IPM(Integrated Pest Managment)states that you should identify the pest,treat only the problem areas,and use the least toxic chemical for said best first.

[TheLorax]

Oh my, several though provoking and powerful statements-

There is NOTHING that keeps the chemicals out of our water better then turf.

That being said, there is nothing in your landscape out side of bog blants that use more water to stay green

Also IPM(Integrated Pest Managment)states that you should identify the pest,treat only the problem areas,and use the least toxic chemical for said best first.

Would you please take a moment to help me understand each one of the above comments from your perspective?

[cklandscapingorlando]

1)Grass slows down the water as it flows across the ground as its roots help to hold the soil.It also uses up alot of excess nutrients before they leach in to or water shed into our ground water.This is why retention ponds are lined with grass.

2)The roots of turf are very shallow.This means the water table has to be high or they need water.Most trees and shrubs have much deeper root systems and there for can survive longer periods of drought.

3)IPM means that we don't just say we have bugs and go buy something that kills bugs.We need to know what kind of problem first.Then we need to use the least toxic chemicals first.If you use something that targets the problem versus a brodspectrum you don't kill the benificals in the process.If you can hand pick or fix it with dish soap then you should.We also need to realize that something caused the problem.Identify the cause and try to correct the underlying problem to help lesson the future use of pestacides

[TheLorax]

Shaking my head in disbelief.

Your reply has left me speechless, and that's quite hard to do to me.

Best wishes to you and to your clients.

[MaineDesigner]

"There is NOTHING that keeps the chemicals out of our water better then turf."

Setting aside for a moment the variables of existing moisture levels, soil structure and compaction I am not aware of any controlled studies that suggest that lawn turf is even remotely as effective as native riparian grasses/sedges/reeds and forbs in controlling runoff and pollution, nor do I know of any authorities that recommend planting turf grasses to the water's edge. In fact, many localities have zoning restrictions that specifically disallow this practice because of the demonstrated adverse effect on water quality. If you have access to contrary data I'd love to see it.

[cklandscapingorlando]

a healthy and vigorous turf with good plant density provides many benefits.Healthy grass is viewed as an aesthetic asset,and a growing body of evidence points to the positive health and environmental contributions made by lans and other turf areas.Turfgrass plays a significant role in reducing water runoff in urban and suburban environments that have significant areas of impervious surfaces such as parking lots,side walks,and driveways.Dense turf reduces the velocity of runoff and allowa greater infiltration into both the thatch and root zone,where microbes can begin breaking down the water contaminants.The turfgrass root zone is a unique soil system.A healthy root zone does the following
1)Improves soil structure and reduces soil compaction,allowing greater infitration of rain or irrigation water.
2)Improves soil processes that facilitate the biodegradation of various types of organic pollutants,air contaminants,and pesticides used in lawn care.
3)Encourages soil-building process through the decomposition of organic fewer weeds and insects and less disease
This is out of (Florida Green Industries Best Management Practices For Protection of Water Resources in florida)
In Florida all retention ponds are grassed.
It seems like you enjoy talking down to people

[MaineDesigner]

Your reference refers to lawns relative to impervious surfaces like asphalt or concrete. It does not support your contention that NOTHING (your emphasis) is better than turf.

You may regard it as talking down but my intent is to give people accurate information that is actually supported by the best scientific data that I'm aware of. If you find that insulting I'm sorry but I would be doing a disservice to anyone who visits The Helpful Gardener if I simply ignored incorrect or misleading information. As I stated earlier if you can direct me to data that supports your statement I'd be more than happy to review it.

[TheLorax]

This site provides us with private messages to ask questions of a personal nature. Perhaps it would be best to use the PM feature in the future.

Turf is anything but aesthetically appealing to me.

I'm afraid either one of two things has occurred, you are either misinterpreting the Florida Green Industries Best Management Practices For Protection of Water Resources in Florida or they really did make those representations at some point in time in which case I'm afraid you've been sold a bill a goods. Please do your homework before you spread misinformation around as you have.

Regardless, you were asked for controlled studies. Please cite your sources and do include citations to this "growing body of evidence" you claim allegedly points to the "positive health and environmental contributions made by lans and other turf areas". Sort of silly to expect anyone to rely upon representations made by the Florida Green Industries or some growing body of evidence you claim to be out there if you aren't going to start rattling off valid scientific research. In lieu of some form of reputable research data; and mind you I'm not even all that interested in any type of rigorous scientific standard but literally any reputable research data would suffice after this many years of turf being around, I am not able to swallow anything you have contributed to this thread.

More turf is not the solution, turf is a resource hog. it's part of the problem and irrefutable evidence exists backing up my statement. Can't comment on your statement about bog plants growing in our landscapes. I have a wetlands on my property as well as several artificial bogs and an artificial fen and I can assure you actual "bog" species won't be found outside their natural environment unless one has gone to great lengths to meet their cultural requirements. You totally lost me with those comments. Your comments regarding IPM are so incredibly misguided I wouldn't even begin to know where to start addressing them.

Are you familiar with this new rule?
https://charlotte.ifas.ufl.edu/horticulture/fertilizer/Urban_turf_fact_sheet.pdf
I am having difficulty believing your Florida Green Industries Best Management Practices would be disseminating the type of information you shared previously.

[cynthia_h]

Not quite believing that a professional manual would indeed say that turfgrass(es) provide(s) the best possible filtration mechanism for chemicals, I went to the Internet and performed a search on "Florida Green Industries Best Management Practices for Protection of Water Resources in Florida."

You can read the 68-page manual at https://www.dep.state.fl.us/central/Home/MeetingsTraining/FLGreen/FLGreenIndustries.htm

but I just preferred searching the .pdf for the word "filtration." The manual was published in 2002 by a coalition of three industries and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. Its publication date may account for some of its statements about the "aesthetic asset" of a lawn (cf. the New York Times article at the top of this thread--which article I did indeed read) and other points.

Here is the first mention of "filtration" in the document, and I think it's what cklandscapingorlando referred to:

>>“Importance of Maintaining Healthy Landscapes and Turfâ€

[TheLorax]

Thank you cynthia_h!

Even though it is dated 2002, this helps clarify-

Well-planned, healthy landscapes designed with Florida-friendly landscape practice usually include trees, ornamentals, and a lawn of turfgrass or other ground cover. Native and well-adapted, noninvasive ornamentals contribute beauty and balance to a property, provide shade and wildlife habitat, and help to control erosion by diminishing the force of rainfall. Both the lawn and other landscape plantings reduce noise and glare, and modify temperatures.

It would appear the Florida Green Industries Best Management Practices for Protection of Water Resources in Florida was misinterpreted because turf most certainly doesn't provide the best possible filtration mechanism for chemicals.

I would agree that turf can reduce noise, reduce glare, and modify temperatures however I wouldn't agree that it is the best choice for the "job".

I was typing when MaineDesigner was posting and didn't catch that the other poster's reference was to impervious surfaces such as asphalt and concrete. Even I would take toxic chemical dependent water slurping turf over an impervious surface.

The Ring of Responsibility you mentioned would be one of the reasons behind why the planting of turf grass to the water's edge is being strongly discouraged and zoning restrictions disallowing the practice are popping up all over the country.

[applestar]

The New Yorker article was great! I usually don't mass-mail articles, but I couldn't resist sending this one to all my friends... AND NEIGHBORS! The subsequest discussion was informative too.

I already have a "weedy" lawn, and have converted a substantial amount of my back yard this year, but I want to do more -- and target the front yard (my hubby's territory ) over the next year.

[smokensqueal]

I'm not going to jump in to the major discussion thats going on but I think one of the issues here is that we are looking at two different areas and two different enviroments. People in the dessert need differnt plants and controls then people in the swamps. Just keep that in mind.

As far as the lawn thing I love my lawn. We just built two years ago and we ended up redoing out back yard last year. We did use fertelizers but because my brother in-law is a landscaper he had left over organic fertelizers which we used. This year I plan on plugging and reseeding then covering with compost. to ward of any crabgrass that continues to come up. At this time I do NOT water my lawn. If it grows I cut it, if it turns brown o well it's brown. On occation the kids will play in the sprinkler which helps in times of needing water. In the future I would like to connect a sprinkler system to my aeration system and re-use that water that we already used once. It's going in my ground any way why not use it to green up the place.

But my lawn has grown smaller. With the landscaping projects we will be adding some sort of eddible landscaping around our house. This is only in places that it's hard to mow. BUT I will alway have an area for my kids to go out and play ball. I would much rather spend time grooming my lawn then my kids sitting in the house playing video games because I have no place for them to play outside.

[TheLorax]

That poster is not in the desert and aside from that, issues aren't as cut and dry as he would have readers believe. Something we all need to keep in mind.

Regarding different "plants and controls" for people gardening in deserts as opposed to people gardening in swamps... not so simple. Swamps are an entirely different ecosystem than a bog or an acidic fen. Swamps are as vastly different from desert ecosystems as they are from bog ecosystems. You see- bogs, although water laden at some times of the year, are nutrient deprived and acidic unlike swamps which are very rich in nutrients with a considerably higher pH of water that is maintained at a more consistent level throughout the year. The plants that co-evolved in the harsh bog environment have extremely complex survival adaptations. Take for example the Drosera rotundifolia (Common Sundew). That particular species adapted to the nutrient deprived environment of a bog by developing mucilaginous glands that cover its leaves. These glands produce nectar that lures in prey, adhesive compounds that trap the prey when it lands, and digestive enzymes that reduce the prey to nutrients the Drosera is then able to use to replace those that it doesn't have access to in its natural habitat. For all practical purposes, the roots exist almost exclusively to anchor the plant and to uptake water. Try to grow this plant in a swamp ecosystem and it's toast because of the excessive nutrients just as it would toast if somebody attempted to grow it in a desert ecosystem. All bog plants have adaptive strategies to ensure their survival. Needless to say, few people can successfully grow them unless they have an actual bog on their land or unless they have painstaking recreating an environment that can meat the cultural requirements of a bog plant. These plants won't be growing in any turf I know of with or without supplemental waterings and to suggest otherwise by using them as an example is kinda unethical.

I think most of us have turf and I think most of us know it's a resource hog regardless of where we garden. The grasses used for "turf" are generally not indigenous species regardless of whether we're gardening in the middle of the desert or a great prairie. In other words, the grasses chosen for turf aren't exactly environmentally responsible choices. Me, I've got kids too and also have a need for an area where they can play. I found a considerably more responsible choice for where I garden. Better explanation here-
https://www.highcountrygardens.com/library/view/article/319/
That particular native grass is indigenous to where we live. After the first year it is established, it needs no water. It needs no fertilizer as it is well adapted to my county and was here long before we wiped it out to plant "turf". Added bonus is that it doesn't grow higher than around 6"-8" so it only needs to be mowed once in June and then you let it go or don't mow it at all for that soft gentle wispy natural look so many now crave.

If we begin to consider a native grass or native ground cover well adapted to where we garden, then there will be no need for water or fertilizers and children will have something much healthier to roll around in and play on. If a short native grass is chosen such as Buffalo Grass... we can pocket the savings of not having to buy a lawnmower. Matter of fact, we can pocket the money we won't be spending for replacement of and/or maintenance to the lawnmower or gas to feed it every week... and no more emissions to pollute the air our children and grandchildren breathe. Think for a moment of all the golf course gorgeous lawns out there from coast to coast- lawns that have chemicals dumped on them, that are watered to stay picture perfect green, then mowed on a weekly basis throughout the growing season and tell me the byproducts of these lawns aren't entering our atmosphere while leaching into our soils and water supply? One home with turf isn't an issue. It becomes an issue when it's multiplied by a one hundred million housing units all relying upon turf for curb appeal. Imagine the water wasted by turf lovers. Now for a moment imagine what we're going to learn about the cumulative effects of the chemicals we've been relying upon to keep our turf looking barefoot green 20 years from now... 50 years from now?

There are alternatives out there in the form of ground covers that can work for people who want at least a portion of their yard to have that manicured look much better than traditional turf. To ignore they exist claiming "turf" is this miracle silver bullet product by quoting other sources out of context is as MaineGardener suggested, "misleading". Sheesh, if traditional turf was such a "responsible" choice... there would be no need for "rules" such as the one I hyperlinked above and certainly no need for a "Ring of Responsibility".

Still not able to address the comments of IPM because as stated before, they were so incredibly misguided I really wouldn't know where to begin and I suspect others who are familiar with IPM are probably in the same position.

Kudos to anyone else out there like me and smokensqueal who is reducing their turf.

[Charlie MV]

Wow!

[TheLorax]

Yes, we have over 100 million housing units out there in just the US alone. Mind boggling when we start thinking of the cumulative tonnage of chemicals being used on them let alone the drain on our water supplies watering them or the emissions from equipment used to cut them to code. What I'd like to know is what the number of housing units is for all of North America and what percentage of those "units" actually have turf? When I'm down in the southwest, I see many homes that have absolutely no turf. When up north, it's not uncommon to see a gravel road leading up to a home in the woods completely devoid of turf. Around me, we're just beginning to see large corporations converting at least some of their turf to prairie. Not many, but a few. There's one large corporation not too far from me that is going for a full blown savanna restoration and they've created paths and placed picnic benches underneath the oaks for employees to take breaks and to have lunch. My guess is they've restored at least 3 acres so far and are going for the rest that their manufacturing plant sits on. They claim the costs of converting will be recaptured within 5 years as they will no longer have a need for a landscape staff or a budget to cover lawn care products and equipment. They'll also enjoy a substantial savings on their utility bills. They recently made a commitment to replace their existing asphalt parking lot with permeable pavers. Twice the cost of asphalt but these pavers have a lifespan that will blow asphalt out of the water. Great for businesses that are looking to contain maintenance costs of patching and resurfacing asphalt only to ultimately have to remove it and replace it in the long run. I've researched these products and have been watching two in the local area and my asphalt that is only 5 years old looks horrible by comparison. We've been very conscientious about filling the cracks and re-tarring it every year and it still looks ickie. The permeable pavers are going strong and have required no maintenance at all since they've been installed. Best guess is my asphalt is going to have to be resurfaced in another few years then replaced at year 15 and those permeable pavers that are now being used in commercial applications will still be going strong and looking good. I've learned that for my area, asphalt is not the most cost effective product to use for driveways from a time and materials standpoint with costs being darn near double that of the permeables over 30 years. I'm like most people though, and sort of followed the huddled masses and conformed never realizing there were sustainable options available out there to me for both my turf and my driveway that were actually more attractive as well as more cost effective and environmentally friendly in the long run. Plus, my husband wouldn't be out there mowing what we've got left every week and would have more time to spend waiting on me hand and foot while dropping grapes into my mouth if he was off that darn tractor!

Here are a few examples of a permeable paver-
https://www.paversearch.com/permeable-pavers-faqs.htm
https://www.lid-stormwater.net/permpavers_benefits.htm
https://www.concretenetwork.com/concrete/porous_concrete_pavers/

We'll have to see what's out there and available 10 years from now when we're ready to rip our driveway out but we'll go with something along these lines.

Our existing turf... it will be gone in its entirety within the next five years. Replaced by prairie and buffalo grasses around the footprint of the home. We've had some issues getting rid of it because of other projects but we do reduce it every year.

You know something, we put in our driveway before petroleum prices went through the ceiling. I wonder if the gap between the cost of installing an asphalt driveway v. a permeable paver driveway hasn't narrowed considerably?