Direct link to Dec. 15, 2011, meeting of Fayetteville's telecom-board meeting on You Tube.
Direct link to December 15, 2011, meeting of telecom board on Fayetteville AR Web site.
Schedules and other information about the Cox Cable City 216 station that covers public meetings and local government issues and events. Simulcasting and archived shows are now available on the city Web site. CITY 216 Government Channel 444-3434, 444-3436 THE CAT Cable Access Channel 218 CAT 444-3435 This site does not represent the official opinion of the administration or any official of city government. It was created to share information and public comment.
Wednesday, December 21, 2011
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
Government censorship of You Tube, blogs, facebook, My space, etc., etc., not a good idea
The SOPA Scoop: Anti-Piracy Bills Enrage Web Freedom Groups, Divide Congress
Wednesday 30 November 2011
by: Mike Ludwig, Truthout | Report
Misuse of copyrighted content is a fact of life on the Internet. Everyday, YouTube users upload homemade videos with copyrighted songs and peers share files that could have originated from a torrent site like Pirate Bay. Now, imagine that the US government granted itself sweeping legal authority to shut down alleged pirate sites and intervene when web sites host any kind of content that infringes a copyright. Imagine web users facing felony charges for streaming copyrighted content without permission.
Two bills aimed at fighting Internet piracy are currently making their way through Congress and would give the Justice Department such authority. The bill's proponents say the legislation could save the US economy billions of dollars and protect consumers from fraudulent products like fake prescription medicine.
A growing movement of opponents, including members of Congress from both parties, claim the bill is an Internet job killer that would open a Pandora's box of legal actions that could cripple online innovation and entrepreneurship while putting anyone connected to pirated content under threat of legal action.
The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) in the House and the Protect IP Act in the Senate have reopened the fierce debate over the government's role in regulating the Internet, and both bills could be up for a vote within months.
A movement to stop the bills has gone viral online. Web companies like Mozilla, Google, AOL and Facebook have come out against the legislation.
Both bills would allow the Justice Department to take down sites deemed to be "dedicated to infringing activities" and both the department and copyright owners would be allowed to sue alleged infringers. The bills also allow the Justice Department to demand that search engines, payment processors like PayPal, social media sites and service providers remove links and block access to targeted sites.
In addition, SOPA would make the unauthorized web streaming of copyrighted content a felony carrying a sentence of up to five years in prison, a measure that prompted the American Censorship coalition to claim "singing a pop song on Facebook could be a felony."
Broad language in both bills targets web pirates, but because many pirating sites operate outside the US and copyrighted content is mixed in with user generated media, a wide range of third-party search engines and sites would be forced into the legal process.
Under SOPA, private companies could ask the Justice Department to force search engines and providers to remove links to infringing sites and demand social networking sites police and censor users.
The authors of the bills claim that third-party sites could challenge court orders and would not have to police pirating beyond what is technically feasible, but opponents say big media and entertainment companies would be granted new legal tools to tie up smaller competitors in expensive legal battles and squash up-and-coming social media sites like Soundcloud and Tumblr.
"SOPA and [Protect IP] would place a major burden on all sorts of sites that accept user generated content, but it's heaviest for innovators and smaller organizations that don't have large legal teams," said Parker Higgins, an activist with the Electronic Frontier Foundation. "Under SOPA or [Protect IP], these sites may never be able to get off the ground."
Censoring user-generated media could drive consumers toward more conventional sources, and it turns out the entertainment industry is a big supporter of the legislation. Comcast, Viacom, NBC Universal and industry groups like the Recording Industry Association of America have all joined the US Chamber in Commerce in supporting SOPA. Together, these groups have contributed more than $3.9 million to top members of Congress.
Sen. Patrick Leahy's (D-Vermont) introduced the Protect IP Act, and the television, movie and music industries are his second-biggest campaign donor group, donating a total of $371,806 since 2007, according to OpenSecrets.org. The entertainment industry is top SOPA sponsor Lamar Smith's (R-Texas) biggest donor with a total of $59,300 in contributions since 2011.
But some lawmakers are wary of regulating the Internet in tough economic times, and bipartisan opposition to both bills is building in Congress, with leaders like House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-California) and Sen. Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) coming out against the legislation in recent weeks. (Pelosi took a side via Twitter.)
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Oregon) recently told members of the House Judiciary Committee that their legislation is a threat to the Internet as Americans know it.
"In other words, the wrong approach to combating infringement could fundamentally change the Internet as we know it, moving us towards a world where transactions are less secure, ideas are less accessible and starting a website wouldn't be an option for anyone who couldn't afford a lawyer," Wyden said.
SOPA is expected to receive markups on December 15 in the House Judiciary Committee and the Senate could vote on Protect IP by the end of the year or in early 2012.
This work by Truthout is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 United States License.
Tuesday, November 29, 2011
Tuesday, November 15, 2011
Wednesday, October 26, 2011
Saturday, October 22, 2011
Richard Drake, former chairman of Telecom Board, comments on recent changes in board function
Hotmail Active View
Fayetteville AR Telecommunications Board Subcommittee October 17 2011
Go to YouTubePlay video
Fayetteville Telecommunications Board -Subcommittee for Review of Telecommunications Ordinance -- October 17, 2011
00:13:58
Added on 10/20/11
Somewhere along the line, revisionist history came into play, and the TB came to believe that its role was merely "advisory," rather than a body which sets policy and oversees the channels. It is very sad that a number of TB members over the years have allowed themselves to believe this.
They COULD look at heir own history, , or even talk to past members, and see what the TB has accomplished in the past.
There are two immediate problems with the board.
A) The city of Fayetteville maintains an archaic policy of replacing board members, which can take an abominable amount of time. As a result of which, TB members often drop off, and the city may not fill the empty seats for far too long a period of time. This really needs to be fixed.
B) As with all boards - city or nonprofit - too many members over the years have merely been resume padders, using the experience on the board to add to their resume.
THe TB is a very important board, especially with the changes happening in the world around around us.
It DOES need to get back to basics, and the board needs to be aware of just why it was created in the first place.
If the TB is interested, there ARE written reports in the city archives from the board every year on what the board has accomplished every year. At least, there are SUPPOSED to be. I can always pass along the one that I wrote.
Richard S. Drake
---- Jim Bemis wrote:
>
>
> Fellow producers:
>
> This is the URL to the Oct 17 Telecom Board Subcommittee for ordinance
> review meeting. The Ordinance will be reviewed at today's Board meeting
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gUzyIVYesc
>
>
> Jim
Fayetteville AR Telecommunications Board Subcommittee October 17 2011
Go to YouTubePlay video
Fayetteville Telecommunications Board -Subcommittee for Review of Telecommunications Ordinance -- October 17, 2011
00:13:58
Added on 10/20/11
Somewhere along the line, revisionist history came into play, and the TB came to believe that its role was merely "advisory," rather than a body which sets policy and oversees the channels. It is very sad that a number of TB members over the years have allowed themselves to believe this.
They COULD look at heir own history, , or even talk to past members, and see what the TB has accomplished in the past.
There are two immediate problems with the board.
A) The city of Fayetteville maintains an archaic policy of replacing board members, which can take an abominable amount of time. As a result of which, TB members often drop off, and the city may not fill the empty seats for far too long a period of time. This really needs to be fixed.
B) As with all boards - city or nonprofit - too many members over the years have merely been resume padders, using the experience on the board to add to their resume.
THe TB is a very important board, especially with the changes happening in the world around around us.
It DOES need to get back to basics, and the board needs to be aware of just why it was created in the first place.
If the TB is interested, there ARE written reports in the city archives from the board every year on what the board has accomplished every year. At least, there are SUPPOSED to be. I can always pass along the one that I wrote.
Richard S. Drake
---- Jim Bemis
>
>
> Fellow producers:
>
> This is the URL to the Oct 17 Telecom Board Subcommittee for ordinance
> review meeting. The Ordinance will be reviewed at today's Board meeting
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gUzyIVYesc
>
>
> Jim
Thursday, October 20, 2011
Tuesday, October 11, 2011
Contact information for members of Fayetteville's telecommunication board as of October 11, 2011
City of Fayetteville Telecommunications Board
e-mail | Name | Address | Phone | Terms |
Aubrey Shepherd | 1101 S. Duncan Ave., Fayetteville, AR 72701 | (479) 444-6072 | 01/01/2008 thru 06/30/2013 | |
blake@niblocklawfirm.com | Blake Pennington | 927 N. Hall Ave., Fayetteville, AR 72701 | (479) 430-1221 | 07/01/2010 thru 06/30/2014 |
Michael Ehrig | 2007 W. Custer Lane Fayetteville, AR 72701 | (479) 521-4420 | 07/1/2011 thru 06/30/2015 | |
Stephen Smith | 340 N. Rollston Ave. Fayetteville, AR 72701 | (479) 409-7842 | 07/01/2011 thru 06/30/2015 | |
Michael Spencer | 2456 N. Southwick Dr., Fayetteville, AR 72704 | (202) 713-5480 | 01/01/2011 thru 06/30/2013 | |
| Mitchell Spearman | 615 W. Lafayette St., Apt. 105, Fayetteville, AR 72701 | (479) 287-4433 | 01/01/2011 thru 06/30/2013 |
Wednesday, October 5, 2011
Wednesday, September 28, 2011
Fayetteville Government Channel subcommittee meeting Friday: Everyone invited.
City Clerk
Time: 12:00 PM
Location: Room 111
Tuesday, September 27, 2011
Willam 'Mitchell' Spearman joins Telecommunication Board
Meeting Times
Regular meetings are held the third Thursday of each month at 5:30 p.m. in Room 219 of the City Administration Building.City of Fayetteville Appointees
Position | Name | Address | Phone | Terms |
---|---|---|---|---|
Aubrey Shepherd | 1101 S. Duncan Ave., Fayetteville, AR 72701 | (479) 444-6072 | 01/01/2008 thru 06/30/2013 | |
Blake Pennington | 927 N. Hall Ave., Fayetteville, AR 72701 | (479) 430-1221 | 07/01/2010 thru 06/30/2014 | |
Michael Ehrig | 2007 W. Custer Lane, Fayetteville, AR 72701 | (479) 521-4420 | 07/01/2011 thru 06/30/2015 | |
Michael Spencer | 2456 N. Southwick Dr., Fayetteville, AR 72704 | (202) 713-5480 | 01/01/2011 thru 06/30/2013 | |
Stephen Smith | 340 N. Rollston, Fayetteville, AR 72701 | (479) 409-7842 | 07/01/2011 thru 06/30/2015 | |
William "Mitchell" Spearman | The Monterey, 615 W. Lafayette St. Apt. 105, Fayetteville, AR 72701 | (479) 287-4433 | 10/01/2011 thru 06/30/2014 |
Tuesday, September 20, 2011
Thursday, September 15, 2011
Telecom Board down to five members of the standard 7. Hope two are appoiinted by Fayetteville City Council on Tuesday. However, there was only one opening when the interviews were held and thus it can't happen
Telecommunications Board
The Telecommunications Board, formerly known as the Cable Board, was created by City Ordinance No. 3549 on May 21, 1991. On February 1, 2000, the Cable Board was renamed Telecommunications Board by Ordinance No. 4219. On July 15, 2003, Ordinance No. 4504 was created to redefine the composition, officers, staffing, procedures, and the duties of the Board. The purpose of the Telecommunications Board is to advise the City Council on telecommunication issues and to coordinate and oversee telecommunications franchise systems and use of the public rights of way designated for public access, educational, and governmental (PEG) use in the City of Fayetteville as part of the City’s telecommunication infrastructure.
Contact
Lindsley Smith, (479) 575-8330Terms
Staggered four-year terms.
Membership
The Board shall be composed of seven members as follows:
- Seven members from the public-at-large with experience in any one of the following areas:
Telecommunications infrastructure management, public policy development regarding communication and telecommunications issues, television, or other appropriate expertise. Members shall be registered voters and residents of the City of Fayetteville, and shall have resided therein for at least six months prior to their appointment.
Appointment
Vacancies on the Board are filled by appointment from the governing body of the City.
Public Notification
A weekly meetings list is prepared by the City Clerk’s office which is distributed to the press and posted on the City’s web site: www.accessfayetteville.org
Meeting Times
Regular meetings are held the third Thursday of each month at 5:30 p.m. in Room 219 of the City Administration Building.City of Fayetteville Appointees
Position | Name | Address | Phone | Terms |
---|---|---|---|---|
Aubrey Shepherd | 1101 S. Duncan Ave., Fayetteville, AR 72701 | (479) 444-6072 | 01/01/2008 thru 06/30/2013 | |
Blake Pennington | 927 N. Hall Ave., Fayetteville, AR 72701 | (479) 430-1221 | 07/01/2010 thru 06/30/2014 | |
Michael Ehrig | 2007 W. Custer Lane, Fayetteville, AR 72701 | (479) 521-4420 | 07/01/2011 thru 06/30/2015 | |
Michael Spencer | 2456 N. Southwick Dr., Fayetteville, AR 72704 | (202) 713-5480 | 01/01/2011 thru 06/30/2013 | |
Stephen Smith | 340 N. Rollston, Fayetteville, AR 72701 | (479) 409-7842 | 07/01/2011 thru 06/30/2015 |
Tuesday, August 23, 2011
Email exchange involving government channel, public-access channel, education channel and the Fayetteville Telecom Board and city staff and city council
Mr. Bemis,
I have attached a copy of the form to which you refer. The original intent was for it to be used by Staff in helping people document their complaints. It has not been vetted by the Telecommunications Board, and probably should be before it is released to the public for use. You are, however, welcome to use it if you wish.
Regarding your request of me to reference "the portion of the Telecom Board Ordinance that provides the City such authority" I will present these facts for your consideration:
1. The Telecommunications Board ordinance was passed by the City Council. By doing so it did not delegate authority to the Telecommunications Board to create policy for, establish procedures for, or operate any of the access channels. The Board is tasked with ensuring contract compliance if the City enters into a contract with an outside entity (such as Fayetteville Public Schools) to operate one of the access channels. This has been well-discussed and supported by opinions of the City Attorney's office.
2. The access channels are afforded the City of Fayetteville on both Cox Communications' cable system and AT&T's Uverse system through agreements with the City. Nothing in those agreements delegates authority over the operation of any of the access channels to any entity other than the City.
3. The City contracts with an outside entity to provide training, support, programming and outreach services for the Public Access channel. That relationship and the duties and authorities of that outside entity are defined in that contract. Nowhere in that contract does it state that the Public Access operator has the authority to determine operating policies or procedures for the Public Access channel. The City does not relinquish any of its authority or responsibility for the operation of the Public Access channel to the contracted Public Access operator or any other entity.
If you have any other questions I may assist you with, please don't hesitate to contact me.
Regards,
Fritz Gisler, Manager
The Fayetteville Government Channel
The Fayetteville Government Channel
The City of Fayetteville Television Center
101 W. Rock Street
Fayetteville, AR 72701
Voice: 479-444-3434
Fax: 479-444-3437
Mr Gisler --]
Thank you for your note below, which I will consider in submitting my complaints. However, again I must disagree with your interpretation of the City's authority to write Public Access Channel policy. I believe that we have differing views and definitions of the terms "policy" and "procedure" to be written by the Board and City staff, which have been included in my earlier complaints. I would appreciate your reference to the portion of the Telecom Board Ordinance that provides the City such authority.
I am attaching a scanned copy of a "Formal Request " form that was included with earlier versions of the new Administrative Rule for Complaints and Feedback. Please advise if this is the latest version that I should use for my submitting my revised concerns to the Board.
I will plan to pick up the DVD copy on Wednesday, about noon.
Thanks for your consideration,
Jim Bemis.
--- On Mon, 8/22/11, Frederick Gisler
From: Frederick Gisler
Subject: Re: Recent versions of the Telecommunications Board Administrative Rules
To: "Jim Bemis"
Cc: "Anne Shelley", "Aubrey Shepherd" , "Blake Pennington" , "Don Marr" , "Joel Walsh" , "Lindsley Smith" , "Michael Spencer" , "Mike Ehrig" , "Russ Davis" , "Stephen Smith"
Date: Monday, August 22, 2011, 9:36 AM

>>> Jim Bemis 8/21/2011 3:48 PM >>>
Mr. Gisler and Telecommunications Board:
As a response to the Board's request, I am preparing more succinct versions of my earlier requests and complaints that were submitted to the Telecommunications Board in 2010. Thus I plan to submit revised versions to be placed on the Board's Agenda for the September meeting. I understand that these revisions will be considered as a "trial or test" of the City staff's suggested version (July 2011) of the "complaint and feedback" process, which has been accepted by the Board for inclusion in the Board"s Administrative Rules. I am assuming that the Board will consider my revised versions as an agenda item for the September meeting.
In my preparations to follow the newly accepted rules,I find that I have only a 2009 version of the Board's Administrative Rules. (See attached). I do not know if this is the current version now being used, thus would like to confirm that it is the most recent.
Thus I am asking that your office please advise me as to where earlier or more recent electronic versions of their Rules might be obtained? I understand that the Board has not had such guidelines in the past. Similarly, I would like to obtain electronic copies of current and previous PEG-channel policies for comments and appeals that are now being used by all three Channels. And, if there are any complaint/feedback policies or procedures used by the City's other electronic media, please advise as to where they may be obtained.
In addition, I would like to obtain a DVD copy of the August Board meeting, as I do not find the video on AccessFayetteville or scheduled on the current weekly FGC schedule. If possible, I would like to obtain a copy on Wednesday, August 24. I will contact you by phone to see if I can pick up the DVD on that date.
Thank you for your consideration
Jim Bemis
Thank you for your note below, which I will consider in submitting my complaints. However, again I must disagree with your interpretation of the City's authority to write Public Access Channel policy. I believe that we have differing views and definitions of the terms "policy" and "procedure" to be written by the Board and City staff, which have been included in my earlier complaints. I would appreciate your reference to the portion of the Telecom Board Ordinance that provides the City such authority.
I am attaching a scanned copy of a "Formal Request " form that was included with earlier versions of the new Administrative Rule for Complaints and Feedback. Please advise if this is the latest version that I should use for my submitting my revised concerns to the Board.
I will plan to pick up the DVD copy on Wednesday, about noon.
Thanks for your consideration,
Jim Bemis.
--- On Mon, 8/22/11, Frederick Gisler
,
Jim Bemis.
--- On Mon, 8/22/11, Frederick Gisler wrote:
--- On Mon, 8/22/11, Frederick Gisler
From: Frederick Gisler
Subject: Re: Recent versions of the Telecommunications Board Administrative Rules
To: "Jim Bemis"
Cc: "Anne Shelley"
Date: Monday, August 22, 2011, 9:36 AM
Hello Mr. Bemis:
Attached is the latest revision of the Telecommunications Board's Administrative Rules, which include the new complaint/feedback procedure. Also attached are the operating policies for Fayetteville Public Access Television, which describe the procedure to be followed to submit complaints regarding programming or operations of that service. Please keep in mind that these policies are not determined by the Public Access operator, but are merely implemented by them. While the contracted provider of Public Access services is a valuable consultant regarding these policies and procedures, the operation of the Public Access channel is the responsibility of the City. The operating policies are determined by the City Administration.
Also attached is a copy of the Fayetteville Government Channel Operating Policies, which describe the procedure to be followed to request a review regarding the denial by the Channel Manager of a program request. All other complaints regarding the operation of the Government Channel are handled as are complaints regarding any other City Division, specifically they may be presented to the Division Head, Department Head, the Chief of Staff or the Mayor.
In addition is attached the agreement the City has with Fayetteville Public Schools to operate the Education Channel. Any complaints regarding the Education Channel would appropriately be first communicated to Fayetteville Public Schools Administration, and subsequently to City Staff if necessary.
Since the Telecommunications Board is charged with facilitating the resolution of disputes regarding the operations of the access channels, we present the information of all complaints, resolved or not, to them each month at their meetings. Many times the complaints have already been satisfactorily resolved and require no further action by the Board.
For your complaints to be placed on the agenda for the September meeting of the Telecommunications Board, you will need to present them to me in writing no later than August 31, which is 15 days before the meeting of the Board. Please state each complaint separately in the most direct and specific language as possible. You should strive to avoid several complaints in one statement, but rather each complaint should be focused on one specific subject. This will greatly assist me in any investigation or research I may need to do. If you provide me with such complaints by August 31 they will be placed on the Board's meeting agenda for September as individual items of new business. If you do not submit them by August 31, you can request that a member of the Board place them on the agenda when they consider the agenda at the beginning of the meeting. Please note, however, that the complaint then will not be actually considered at that meeting, but will be placed on the next meeting's agenda for consideration.
As for any complaint procedures that may have been in place prior to the procedures documented in the items I have sent , I do not have any knowledge. You may be able to obtain documentation of previous complaint procedures followed by the Public Access operator prior to January 1, 2011 by contacting the current operator, Your Media, at 479-444-3433. Please remember, however, any procedures that were followed prior to the date of adoption of the items I have sent you would be of historical interest only, and are no longer valid.
Regarding any complaint/feedback procedures or polices for any of the City's other electronic media, I advise you to contact Lindsley Smith, Director of Communication.
I will have a DVD copy of the meeting made for you. We telecast the meetings of the Telecommunications Board on The Fayetteville Government Channel every Friday at 4:00p and 4:00a. The most current schedule of the Channel can be viewed by going to http://www.accessfayetteville.org/government/city_tv/index.cfm and clicking on the "Current Program Schedule" link. You will notice the Board meeting is on the schedule on Friday, August 19. It will be telecast again on Friday, August 26 at 4:00p and 4:00a. It also should be available on our Video on Demand (VOD) service later today. We usually have it available the day after the meeting but we experienced a technical glitch and were not able to upload it Friday. I apologize for any inconvenience that may have caused.
If you have any other questions I may assist you with, please don't hesitate to contact me.
Thank you,
Fritz Gisler, Manager
The Fayetteville Government Channel
The Fayetteville Government Channel
The City of Fayetteville Television Center
101 W. Rock Street
Fayetteville, AR 72701
Voice: 479-444-3434
Fax: 479-444-3437
TDD: 479-521-1316
>>> Jim Bemis
Mr. Gisler and Telecommunications Board:
As a response to the Board's request, I am preparing more succinct versions of my earlier requests and complaints that were submitted to the Telecommunications Board in 2010. Thus I plan to submit revised versions to be placed on the Board's Agenda for the September meeting. I understand that these revisions will be considered as a "trial or test" of the City staff's suggested version (July 2011) of the "complaint and feedback" process, which has been accepted by the Board for inclusion in the Board"s Administrative Rules. I am assuming that the Board will consider my revised versions as an agenda item for the September meeting.
In my preparations to follow the newly accepted rules,I find that I have only a 2009 version of the Board's Administrative Rules. (See attached). I do not know if this is the current version now being used, thus would like to confirm that it is the most recent.
Thus I am asking that your office please advise me as to where earlier or more recent electronic versions of their Rules might be obtained? I understand that the Board has not had such guidelines in the past. Similarly, I would like to obtain electronic copies of current and previous PEG-channel policies for comments and appeals that are now being used by all three Channels. And, if there are any complaint/feedback policies or procedures used by the City's other electronic media, please advise as to where they may be obtained.
In addition, I would like to obtain a DVD copy of the August Board meeting, as I do not find the video on AccessFayetteville or scheduled on the current weekly FGC schedule. If possible, I would like to obtain a copy on Wednesday, August 24. I will contact you by phone to see if I can pick up the DVD on that date.
Thank you for your consideration
Jim Bemis
Saturday, August 20, 2011
Traditional landscapes suck Energy, Water and Money, says Neil Diboll at The Native Plants in the Landscape Conference
Please click on individual images to ENLARGE. Click on enlargement for closer view.
University of Vermont Extension
Summer News Article
FUEL-EFFICIENT LAWNS AND LANDSCAPES
Dr. Leonard Perry, Extension Professor
University of Vermont
With the price of gasoline and natural gas on the rise, most are looking for ways to cut their costs and save energy. If you have a lawn or garden, you may not realize just how much fossil fuels you are using. By knowing where these are used, you can look for ways to reduce consumption. This will reduce your costs, and help the environment.
In a recent PPPro online newsletter Paul Tukey, editor of People, Places and Plants magazine, provides some sobering facts and helpful suggestions. Each year, a family with a one-third acre lawn will on average:
*consume five gallons of gas for mowing and trimming;
*apply the equivalent of seven gallons for fertilizing;
*burn up to five gallons for watering; and
*consume an additional gallon for cleanup.
That’s 18 gallons of fuel per household. With 120 million U.S. households, that’s the equivalent of almost 2.2 billion gallons of fuel used just for lawn care each year. This does not count other landscaping activities. So just how do we use so much?
Yale University has estimated that the United States uses more than 600 million gallons of gas to mow and trim lawns each year — about two gallons of gas for every man, woman and child, or five gallons per household. Mowers also consume engine oil in their crankcases, and two-stroke mowers consume oil in their fuel.
In addition to fuel consumption, mowers and outdoor power equipment contribute heavily to air pollution. Operating a typical (4 HP) gasoline-powered lawnmower for one hour produces as much smog-forming hydrocarbons as driving an average car between 100 and 200 miles under average conditions. Gasoline-powered string trimmers are actually more polluting than many lawn mowers. One estimate (mindfully.org) states that “the 20,000,000 small engines sold in the U.S. each year contribute about one tenth of the total U.S. mobile source hydrocarbon emissions, and are the largest single contributor to these non-road emissions.” These include power blowers, rakes, and brooms.
Creating synthetic nitrogen for fertilizers requires the heating of natural gas to combine atmospheric nitrogen and hydrogen into ammonia. The amount of natural gas required to make approximately 200 bags of lawn fertilizer would heat your home for a year. Each 40-pound bag contains the fossil-fuel equivalent of approximately 2.5 gallons of gasoline. Transporting these bags of fertilizer from the factory and to your home requires additional fuel.
According to a California study, in many areas — especially in the West, where water must be moved great distances from reservoirs — the amount of fuel needed to pump the water is at least equal to the fuel used in mowing.
So what can you do? Here are ten tips to have a “fuel-efficient” landscape.
*Use an electric or non-powered push mower. An electric mower maintaining one-third of an acre for a season consumes only $3 of electricity on average. Electric mowers are 75 percent quieter than gas mowers. Push mowers, of course, consume no fuel and make little noise.
*Similarly, use traditional hand rakes and brooms instead of power ones and blowers to save fuel, and at the same time reduce air and noise pollution. If you employ a landscape maintenance firm, encourage their use of these too. Minimize the need for string trimmers. Mulch along walks and around structures such as lamp posts to avoid having to trim weeds in these areas.
*If you have an old mower, consider replacing it. Newer small engines run much cleaner. EPA emission standards for such engines, to be in effect by 2007, are expected to reduce ground-level ozone emissions by 70 percent or 350,000 tons each year.
*Reduce the area mowed through use of groundcovers. This is especially true in areas with water shortages. Allow parts of large areas to grow, only mowing once or twice a season, creating a natural meadow. You can still mow areas near drives and homes to maintain the more formal manicured effects in such highly visible and high traffic areas.
*Save rainwater and gray water. Gray water is that water from home use, except from toilets, and can make up from 50 to 80 percent of home waste water. It comes from sinks, showers, and laundry and can be used for irrigating landscapes and lawns.
*Water deeply once per week on average, rather than frequently. Drip irrigation and mulches also conserve water. Using less water saves on energy use, whether you’re buying water that has to be pumped, or are paying an electric bill to pump your own.
*Use natural, organic fertilizers not derived from fossil fuels.
*Recycle grass clippings, mow higher and mix 5 percent clover into your lawn seed. All these help recycle nutrients back into the soil. Mulching-type mowers allow you to leave grass clippings on the lawn. If you don’t have such a mower, and remove the clippings, add them to compost or use them to mulch gardens.
*Compost all yard wastes, except for diseased plants and plant parts. They can go into compost piles, saving gasoline hauling such to landfills and recycle centers. If your landscape generates many twigs and other brush, consider buying or renting a home-size brush chipper.
*Finally, consider landscaping to reduce up to 25 percent of home energy consumption. Foundation plantings can lessen heat loss from buildings. Evergreen windbreaks can reduce heating costs in winter in windy areas. Deciduous shade trees can reduce energy needs for cooling in summer. According to the Department of Energy, only three properly placed trees may
Return to Perry's Perennial Pages, Articles
]
« Welcome to The Native Plants in the Landscape Conference
The Future of Gardening by Neil Diboll
The Future of Gardening: Why Going Native is the Answer
Presented at the 20th Millersville Native Plant Conference
Millersville, PA
June 4, 2010
by Neil Diboll
Prairie Nursery, Inc.
P.O. Box 306
Westfield, WI 53964
www.prairienursery.com
800-476-9453 (800-GRO-WILD)
Traditional landscapes suck. They suck Energy, Water, and Money. These three “Future Factors” will determine to a large degree the shape and structure of our landscapes in the coming years.
The old whipping boy, the lawn, indeed deserves a good whipping. It is emblematic of an expensive, unsustainable, energy and chemical hungry landscape that supports few forms of life and consumes valuable resources that could be better invested elsewhere.
Size of the American Lawn
There are over 50 million acres of lawn in the United States, twice the size of the state of Pennsylvania.
The total American corn crop for 2009 was 86 million acres.
The total American soybean crop for 2009 was 77 million acres.
The total American wheat crop for 2009 was 65 million acres.
Lawn is the fourth largest crop grown in America today.
Water Use by the American Lawn
Thirty percent of the water consumed on the East Coast of the US goes to watering lawns. Sixty percent of the water used on the West Coast is dedicated to maintaining green lawns, in a region that is facing looming water shortages.
A 1000 square foot lawn requires an average of 10,000 gallons of water per year to maintain in good condition.
One acre of irrigated lawn requires nearly half a million gallons (435,000) of water every year!
Chemical Fertilizers and Pesticides Applied to the American Lawn
The average lawn receives 10 times as much chemical fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides as the typical farm field, according to a Yale University graduate study.
Over 80 millions pounds of chemical pesticides are applied to American lawns each year according to the USEPA.
More than 70 million tons of chemical fertilizers are applied to American lawns per year.
The USEPA estimates that 40 to 60 percent of the Nitrogen fertilizer applied to lawns ends up in our surface water and groundwater.
Forty four percent of the Nitrogen and 28 percent of the Phosphorus applied in the Mississippi River watershed ends up in the Gulf of Mexico, greatly exacerbating the anoxic “dead zone” that preceded the BP oil spill of 2010.
Solid Waste Created by Lawns
The EPA also estimates that grass clippings and yard debris account for 20 to 40 percent of the landfill space consumed in America.
Energy Consumption by Lawns
The amount of energy required to mow and maintain manicured lawns is surprisingly large, and is used in every phase of lawn care:
Mowing: Gasoline or diesel fuel to is required to power riding mowers and most push type rotary mowers. Electricity that powers electric lawn mowers is produced primarily by fossil fuels such as coal and natural gas, and by nuclear power plants.
Pesticides: Most herbicides and insecticides are derived from or combined with petroleum-based compounds. Of the 80 million pounds of pesticides applied to lawns in American every year, most are synthesized from oil.
Fertilizers: Fertilizers are applied to lawns in staggering quantities. The energy required to mine and transport the 70 million tons of chemical fertilizers that are dumped on lawns every year is significant. Most Nitrogen fertilizers are produced using the Haber Process, in which Nitrogen in the air is converted into a solid or liquid form that can be readily handled and applied. The Haber Process is extremely energy intensive, and vast quantities of natural gas are consumed to produce nitrogen fertilizer for lawns.
Irrigation: Even watering the lawn consumes energy. Electricity is used to purify water at treatment plants, and to pump water to homes and businesses. The underground plastic pipes that are used in lawn irrigations systems are produced from petrochemicals derived from crude oil.
Carbon Footprint of Lawns
As an energy-dependent landscape, the carbon annual footprint consumption of lawns is high compared to prairies and other natural landscapes that require only occasional mowing, no fertilizers, no irrigation, and few if any pesticides. Prairies release carbon into the atmosphere when burned, and when dead organic matter such as leaves and stems decompose through microbial action. However, these releases are offset by new plant growth which absorbs carbon dioxide from the air and incorporates it into new leave, roots, and stems.
The incredibly rich prairie soils of the American Midwest are a result of the accumulation of organic matter in the soil over hundreds and thousands of years. Unlike most forest ecosystems, in which organic matter is sequestered in the upper 12- 18 inches of soil, prairie soils typically exhibit high organic matter content from three to six feet in depth. They also have significantly higher total organic matter content than forest soils. This would indicate that over time, prairies are one of the most efficient plant communities at removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and providing long term carbon sequestration in the soil.
Economic Costs of Lawn
Americans spend over $25 billion per year on lawn care (USEPA).
Americans spend over $2 billion per year on lawn and garden chemicals.
A 4000 square foot lawn (1/10 acre) produces an average of 1200 pounds of grass clippings per year. The City of Philadelphia Streets Department reported in 2005 that it costs $75 per year to dispose of this material.
Wildlife and Lawns
The US EPA estimates that between 60 and 70 millions birds are poisoned annually due to the application of lawn pesticides.
On lawns that receive regular applications of pesticides, 60 to 90 percent of the earthworms in the soil are killed.
Air and Noise Pollution
In summer months, 5 percent of air pollution is attributable to gas powered lawn and garden equipment (National Vehicle and Fuel Assessment Lab, Ann Arbor, MI)
Per hour of operation, a typical lawnmower emits 10-12 times as much hydrocarbons as an automobile.
Health and Safety
Of the most commonly used lawn pesticides, 13 are known to cause cancer, 14 can cause birth defects, 11 can interfere with reproduction, and 21 can cause damage to the nervous system. (US EPA)
111,000 Americans are sickened every year due to exposure to pesticides. (US EPA)
Over 230,000 people are treated in the Emergency Room every year for accident related to lawn equipment. (US EPA)
Time
The average homeowner spends 40 hours a year mowing his or her lawn – the equivalent of a week’s vacation!
HOW DID WE ARRIVE AT OUR LAWN-DOMINATED LANDSCAPE MODEL?
AN HISTORICAL OVERVIEW
The New World of North America once appeared to be a seemingly inexhaustible resource that held immense promise for the early colonists and settlers. True to their culture, the northern Europeans that swarmed into the vast hinterlands of America created a landscape in the image of their forebears: cut, grazed, plowed, and fenced into submission. The newly broken land yielded great bounty for a growing nation. As the country expanded, the towns and villages took on the names and character of our former homes across the Atlantic: Amsterdam, Birmingham, Gloucester, Berlin, Warsaw, and Rome, to name but a few.
Our goal as a nation and a culture was to tame the wilderness and make it safe for civilization. In so doing, we re-created the Old Country in the New World. As we brought the wilderness under our heel, we took little time to appreciate its unique character and beauty. Most settlers sought bounty, not beauty. In the rush to convert forests and meadows into farms and fields, the flowers mostly went unnoticed. Unplowed, unproductive wild land was a sign of sloth, savagery, and the devil’s work. Indeed, our mandate was to subdue the earth. And subdue it we did.
When our work was finally done, we sat back to take stock of our immense labors, and it appeared that it was good. Mostly. What we had not considered were the terrible losses associated with our great gain. We had gained ascendancy over our young country. In the process, we lost the character of a continent.
Yea, even unto our gardens, we banished the wildflowers and wild things to the far reaches of the countryside and to the corners of our consciousness. And nothing suffered the utter demise and near-total destruction such as that which was visited upon the American Prairie.
The American Prairie: the once-vast kingdom of flowers, grasses, bison and butterflies. This unbelievably rich, unique ecosystem blanketed millions of acres of America’s heartland. These were the flower gardens of North America. Hidden deep underground, among the intertwined roots of a universe of prairie plants, lay the black gold that was to become the currency of the prairie farmer. Here was the inheritance of a million sunny days, hoarded away in the bank account of the prairie soil.
Agricultural, the Industrial Revolution, and the Rise of the American Middle Class
The farmers that tapped into this prairie trust fund found the dividends to be prodigious. No fertilizers were needed to grow bumper crops. The immense yields increased agricultural productivity to levels previously unheard-of, revolutionizing the farmer’s relationship with the land. Now one family could produce food for dozens of others. The day of the subsistence farm was over. Human labor was set free to tend the factory instead of the field. The dawn of the American Industrial Revolution was reflected in the glow of the forge that John Deere used to construct the first sod-busting steel plow in 1836. With the industrial dawn came the sunset of the American Prairie.
The Eastern Tallgrass Prairie of Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Missouri, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Oklahoma, Kansas, and Nebraska was all but obliterated in the span of a few short decades at the close of the nineteenth century. That which was not plowed under was closed in with fences and grazed to the ground by millions of cattle. What were once wide open spaces became food factories and feedlots. Still, we knew not what we had done.
A full century later, we are just beginning to grasp the scope of the loss. The Eastern Tallgrass Prairie is now one of the rarest plant communities in the entire world. Rainforests are commonplace by comparison. Less than 1/10th of 1% of the Tallgrass Prairie remains today. The small refuges where it can be found occur only in small tattered fragments, ripped from the original cloth. Only those pieces that could not be drained, plowed, grazed, or otherwise turned to the service of mankind remain. There was simply no place for wildness in this new American landscape.
The conversion of the New World into the Old Country was complete. All that remained now was to tend the fields and the gardens of plants brought over from Europe, and to make sure that the lawns that replaced that prairie were kept mown and in order.
Order. The watchword of a Puritanical culture that sought to carve structure from the chaos of wilderness. Everything in control. Nothing out of place. Even our gardens reflect this directive. Designs are precise, with each plant in its pre-ordained place, ensconced in a thick bed of bark mulch. The vegetable world must supplicate itself to our omnipotence. Those plants that fail to stay in their assigned seats are branded as weeds, and banished from the garden. And if they should grow wild in nature, how could such peasant plants of common breeding be sufficiently refined to have a place in our gardens?
If the garden is truly the place where people and nature meet, it is almost always the gardener who determines the terms of the meeting. Will the gardeners of the earth choose to work with Nature to create beauty in the landscape? Or will we attempt to overpower her with an arsenal of chemicals, machines, and “maintenance programs?”
We are finally coming to realize that the practice of paying homage to a uniform, idealized landscape of seamlessly interconnected lawns is an illusion. This becomes eminently clear when one realizes that the centerpoint of this landscape is a nearly lifeless, two dimensional expanse of turf, to which we slavishly devote much of our increasingly rare and precious free time. We pour on the chemicals, mow the grass to within an inch of its life, and kill any and all bugs that have the temerity to share the landscape with us. Perhaps most annoying, this national pastime called Lawn Care is really quite expensive.
For many, their lawns are like an addiction. They will pay almost any price to satisfy the cravings. The price is paid in money, time, environmental degradation, and in some cases, one’s health. We have so completely divorced ourselves from Nature that the only connection to the natural world is by watering and mowing their green carpets!
It is indeed a costly divorce from Nature. Enforcement of our unnatural landscapes consumes billions of dollars every year. Lawns, ornamental plantings, and even perennial gardens require constant attention if the desired order is to be maintained. Without intervention by the human hand on a regular basis, these landscapes soon fall victim to the invading hordes of weeds, trees, brambles and vines. Left unguarded, the walls of the domestic garden are stormed by the Vandals and Visigoths of the Vegetable Kingdom. Without the indulgences of their human benefactors, the meeker and fairer plants of the garden are quickly pillaged and displaced by the roving thugs of the plant world.
History of the American Lawn
The modern lawn has it origin in the country estates of landed gentry in England in the 16th and 17th centuries. It was a status symbol of the wealthy, for the working classes typically possessed no land, and could ill afford a lawn eve if they did. With our Anglo-American heritage, we looked to the mother country for our social cues in the 18th century as the American middle class emerged during the industrial revolution. The newly wealthy purchased homes and estates and installed lawns as one of their symbols of having “made it.” Lawns quickly became one of the status symbols associated with the new middle and upper classes.
The great American landscape architect, Frederick Law Olmstead, referred to the lawn in the late 18th century as “The Great Democratizer” of a newly ascendant nation. Rather than installing fences and barriers between neighboring properties as was common in Europe, Americans had a seamless carpet of green grass unifying their properties, all sharing in the new ethos of a mutual affluence.
The lawn quickly became a socio-economic symbol, denoting order and devotion to a non-economic crop that only those with expendable income could afford. As the middle class in America grew after World War II, the occupants of newly-built suburbs embraced the lawn as one of their icons of success and comfortable living.
The lawn was now cemented into American culture. Woe be unto he who violated the unspoken contract of “keeping up appearances” and allowing one’s turf to “go native” and grow beyond the socially acceptable four inches in height. An un-mowed, unkempt lawn was a sign of slovenliness and anti-social tendencies. Social breakdown and chaos could not be far behind.
This is why the lawn is so ardently defended by so many. It is a symbol of an entire social class and lifestyle. It is far more than a near-lifeless green expanse that requires an inordinate amount of time, money and chemicals to maintain. It embodies the hopes and dreams of average Americans, and symbolizes the triumph or order over entropy. It is a shared middle class bond that transcends politics, religion, and ethnicity. In many communities you are judged by your lawn first, and your character as a human being second. And do not for one minute believe that the first does not influence the second.
Why do we Persist with Our Addiction to Lawns? What About Wildlife?
1) It’s simple and easy! We know how to do it: Fertilize it, spray it, and mow it!
2) You don’t really have to know anything about plants or gardening to grow and manage a lawn – just follow the directions provided by the purveyors of fertilizers, herbicides, fungicides, and insecticides provide you!
3) Lawn is a cheap fix. Although less costly to install than native landscapes, lawn has a high life cycle cost over a period of many years. Native landscapes typically have low long-term maintenance costs, with lower life cycle costs.
4) Lawns don’t attract bugs or wildlife (except for geese), so you know you and your family will be safe from snakes, vermin, and those annoying insects! So what if insects are the foundation of the food chain, and support a myriad of birds and other desirable creatures. We’ve been brainwashed that bugs are bad, so we have to make sure they don’t inhabit our outdoor living spaces.
5) NO BUGS, NO BIRDS!
6) Everybody says they love Nature, but nobody ever invites her over to their yard.
7) I knew my prairie was a success when I saw Meadow Jumping Mice (Zapus hudsonianus) and Hog Nosed Snakes (Heterodon platirhinos) in it. These creatures provided evidence that I now had a functioning ecosystem, not just a garden. If you like hawks and owls, you better be able to feed them: rodents and reptiles are some of their preferred foods.
WE ARE NOT A NATION OF GARDENERS:
WE ARE A NATION OF MOWERS!
WHY DO WE CARE WHAT WE PLANT IN OUR GARDENS
AND LANDSCAPES?
Many of us care deeply about the state of our planet and the loss of biodiversity that is occurring on a global scale. Although we all think globally, most of us can only act locally. Together, we can have an impact in our own gardens and landscapes, as well as those of our friends and neighbors. For those of us in the landscape design business, we can promote sustainable landscapes composed of native plants that require little or no fertilizers, pesticides, watering, or mowing (just burning!). This alone, when compounded over time as more people opt for sustainable landscapes, can have an impact.
The looming question for us today is the on-going loss of biodiversity. Restoring native ecosystems is one way we can help support not just native plants, but also invertebrates such as rare butterflies and moths, bees, wasps, and all manner of the generally unloved lower castes of bugs and creepy crawly things. Yet they are all important, and each has an important place in the web of life.
Homo sapiens, is presently presiding over what is believed to be the Sixth Great Extinction. Although we have yet to reach the catastrophic levels of past extinction events, we are well on our way and showing only a few signs of abatement in our drive to subdue and conquer the earth, as we serve our ever-expanding need for food, fuel, water, and living space.
But does it really matter what we do as individuals? A society is composed of all its individuals, and their actions determine the face of that society. Most of us are working to restore the integrity of native ecosystems because we believe it is the “right” and good thing to do, and that we are “doing it for the planet.” But does it really matter? Does the planet really respect our actions? Or is it all irrelevant?
The Earth has been subjected to massive extinctions in the past, some fairly recent in geological history. The planet has always recovered, with the development of new species and a wealth of new life forms. Nature does indeed abhor a vacuum, and she apparently fills it rapidly. All of the work I am doing on my property to control invasive species and restore native plants will someday be negated by the next advance of the glacier, as unlikely as that may seem at this point in geological and meteorolical history. Of course, my landscape will probably be invaded by garlic muster, buckthorn, honeysuckle and other non-native thugs soon after my demise, unless some equally deranged and determined individual picks up where I leave off.
SO WHY RESTORE THE PLANET? DOES IT REALLY MATTER?
If one takes a long-term geological perspective, it doesn’t really matter what we do. Even if we nuke the joint, something will survive and a whole new set of life forms will evolve. Maybe the next sentient beings will be smarter than us, and actually take care of the planet.
We Restore the Earth Because It Is Good for Us!
We need a quality of life that includes clean air, clean water, trees, flowers, ferns, birds, and all the wonderful life forms with which we share the planet. We aren’t just preserving habitat and restoring native plant communities out of the goodness of our hearts – Our very economic and psychic survival depend upon it!
We have yet to fully value the economics of a healthy environment. But as the planet is further degraded, the value of high quality living spaces only increases.
THE BOTTOM LINE: Ultimately, our future landscapes will be in large part determined more by economics than ecology. This is an unfortunate consequence of the human condition. As a quality living space becomes more valuable, more value will be placed upon it. We will protect it more diligently. It will sell for a higher price. People will begin to view the natural environment more as an asset, rather than as a resource to be exploited.
All of this will most likely be precipitated by shortages of water, rather than a shortage of oil or other energy source. You can live without oil, but you cannot live without water. As the price of water increases, the incentive to conserve it will increase. We will need landscapes that do not require huge inputs of water and chemicals to sustain them. We will need to overcome our cultural taboos of “messy” natural landscapes and move beyond viewing lawns as status symbols and a rite of passage into the middle and upper classes.
Someday pride of place will belong to those with the least lawn, lowest water bill, and no chemicals in their garages. Society will value those who work to preserve our environment, rather than those who can make the most money by despoiling it. I personally cannot wait much longer for that day to come.
AT A GLANCE:
TODAY: LAWN, an ecological and economic disaster
TOMORROW: SUSTAINA LE ECOSYSTEMS, composed of native plant
communities that require little or no fertilizers, pesticides, or irrigation, o
TODAY: MONOCULTURES of mowed lawns
TOMORROW: DIVERSE ECOSYSTEMS that support a wide variety of life
TODAY: FEAR and mistrust of the natural world and its attendant organisms (bugs,
mice, snakes, etc)
TOMORROW: RE-INTEGRATION of people into nature and an understanding that
everything is connected and interdependent
WE MUST ENTER INTO A JOINT VENTURE WITH NATURE TO PRESERVE OUR PLANET AND THE SYSTEMS UPON WHICH ALL LIFE DEPENDS.
ONLY THEN WILL WE LIVE IN HARMONY WITH OUR FELLOW CREATURES ON THIS PLANET.
OUR QUALITY LIFE AND LONG-TERM SURVIVAL DEPENDS UPON THE SURVIVAL OF THE SYSTEMS AND ORGANISMS THAT SUPPORT US.
Presented at the 20th Millersville Native Plant Conference
Millersville, PA
June 4, 2010
by Neil Diboll
Prairie Nursery, Inc.
P.O. Box 306
Westfield, WI 53964
www.prairienursery.com
800-476-9453 (800-GRO-WILD)
Traditional landscapes suck. They suck Energy, Water, and Money. These three “Future Factors” will determine to a large degree the shape and structure of our landscapes in the coming years.
The old whipping boy, the lawn, indeed deserves a good whipping. It is emblematic of an expensive, unsustainable, energy and chemical hungry landscape that supports few forms of life and consumes valuable resources that could be better invested elsewhere.
Size of the American Lawn
There are over 50 million acres of lawn in the United States, twice the size of the state of Pennsylvania.
The total American corn crop for 2009 was 86 million acres.
The total American soybean crop for 2009 was 77 million acres.
The total American wheat crop for 2009 was 65 million acres.
Lawn is the fourth largest crop grown in America today.
Water Use by the American Lawn
Thirty percent of the water consumed on the East Coast of the US goes to watering lawns. Sixty percent of the water used on the West Coast is dedicated to maintaining green lawns, in a region that is facing looming water shortages.
A 1000 square foot lawn requires an average of 10,000 gallons of water per year to maintain in good condition.
One acre of irrigated lawn requires nearly half a million gallons (435,000) of water every year!
Chemical Fertilizers and Pesticides Applied to the American Lawn
The average lawn receives 10 times as much chemical fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides as the typical farm field, according to a Yale University graduate study.
Over 80 millions pounds of chemical pesticides are applied to American lawns each year according to the USEPA.
More than 70 million tons of chemical fertilizers are applied to American lawns per year.
The USEPA estimates that 40 to 60 percent of the Nitrogen fertilizer applied to lawns ends up in our surface water and groundwater.
Forty four percent of the Nitrogen and 28 percent of the Phosphorus applied in the Mississippi River watershed ends up in the Gulf of Mexico, greatly exacerbating the anoxic “dead zone” that preceded the BP oil spill of 2010.
Solid Waste Created by Lawns
The EPA also estimates that grass clippings and yard debris account for 20 to 40 percent of the landfill space consumed in America.
Energy Consumption by Lawns
The amount of energy required to mow and maintain manicured lawns is surprisingly large, and is used in every phase of lawn care:
Mowing: Gasoline or diesel fuel to is required to power riding mowers and most push type rotary mowers. Electricity that powers electric lawn mowers is produced primarily by fossil fuels such as coal and natural gas, and by nuclear power plants.
Pesticides: Most herbicides and insecticides are derived from or combined with petroleum-based compounds. Of the 80 million pounds of pesticides applied to lawns in American every year, most are synthesized from oil.
Fertilizers: Fertilizers are applied to lawns in staggering quantities. The energy required to mine and transport the 70 million tons of chemical fertilizers that are dumped on lawns every year is significant. Most Nitrogen fertilizers are produced using the Haber Process, in which Nitrogen in the air is converted into a solid or liquid form that can be readily handled and applied. The Haber Process is extremely energy intensive, and vast quantities of natural gas are consumed to produce nitrogen fertilizer for lawns.
Irrigation: Even watering the lawn consumes energy. Electricity is used to purify water at treatment plants, and to pump water to homes and businesses. The underground plastic pipes that are used in lawn irrigations systems are produced from petrochemicals derived from crude oil.
Carbon Footprint of Lawns
As an energy-dependent landscape, the carbon annual footprint consumption of lawns is high compared to prairies and other natural landscapes that require only occasional mowing, no fertilizers, no irrigation, and few if any pesticides. Prairies release carbon into the atmosphere when burned, and when dead organic matter such as leaves and stems decompose through microbial action. However, these releases are offset by new plant growth which absorbs carbon dioxide from the air and incorporates it into new leave, roots, and stems.
The incredibly rich prairie soils of the American Midwest are a result of the accumulation of organic matter in the soil over hundreds and thousands of years. Unlike most forest ecosystems, in which organic matter is sequestered in the upper 12- 18 inches of soil, prairie soils typically exhibit high organic matter content from three to six feet in depth. They also have significantly higher total organic matter content than forest soils. This would indicate that over time, prairies are one of the most efficient plant communities at removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and providing long term carbon sequestration in the soil.
Economic Costs of Lawn
Americans spend over $25 billion per year on lawn care (USEPA).
Americans spend over $2 billion per year on lawn and garden chemicals.
A 4000 square foot lawn (1/10 acre) produces an average of 1200 pounds of grass clippings per year. The City of Philadelphia Streets Department reported in 2005 that it costs $75 per year to dispose of this material.
Wildlife and Lawns
The US EPA estimates that between 60 and 70 millions birds are poisoned annually due to the application of lawn pesticides.
On lawns that receive regular applications of pesticides, 60 to 90 percent of the earthworms in the soil are killed.
Air and Noise Pollution
In summer months, 5 percent of air pollution is attributable to gas powered lawn and garden equipment (National Vehicle and Fuel Assessment Lab, Ann Arbor, MI)
Per hour of operation, a typical lawnmower emits 10-12 times as much hydrocarbons as an automobile.
Health and Safety
Of the most commonly used lawn pesticides, 13 are known to cause cancer, 14 can cause birth defects, 11 can interfere with reproduction, and 21 can cause damage to the nervous system. (US EPA)
111,000 Americans are sickened every year due to exposure to pesticides. (US EPA)
Over 230,000 people are treated in the Emergency Room every year for accident related to lawn equipment. (US EPA)
Time
The average homeowner spends 40 hours a year mowing his or her lawn – the equivalent of a week’s vacation!
HOW DID WE ARRIVE AT OUR LAWN-DOMINATED LANDSCAPE MODEL?
AN HISTORICAL OVERVIEW
The New World of North America once appeared to be a seemingly inexhaustible resource that held immense promise for the early colonists and settlers. True to their culture, the northern Europeans that swarmed into the vast hinterlands of America created a landscape in the image of their forebears: cut, grazed, plowed, and fenced into submission. The newly broken land yielded great bounty for a growing nation. As the country expanded, the towns and villages took on the names and character of our former homes across the Atlantic: Amsterdam, Birmingham, Gloucester, Berlin, Warsaw, and Rome, to name but a few.
Our goal as a nation and a culture was to tame the wilderness and make it safe for civilization. In so doing, we re-created the Old Country in the New World. As we brought the wilderness under our heel, we took little time to appreciate its unique character and beauty. Most settlers sought bounty, not beauty. In the rush to convert forests and meadows into farms and fields, the flowers mostly went unnoticed. Unplowed, unproductive wild land was a sign of sloth, savagery, and the devil’s work. Indeed, our mandate was to subdue the earth. And subdue it we did.
When our work was finally done, we sat back to take stock of our immense labors, and it appeared that it was good. Mostly. What we had not considered were the terrible losses associated with our great gain. We had gained ascendancy over our young country. In the process, we lost the character of a continent.
Yea, even unto our gardens, we banished the wildflowers and wild things to the far reaches of the countryside and to the corners of our consciousness. And nothing suffered the utter demise and near-total destruction such as that which was visited upon the American Prairie.
The American Prairie: the once-vast kingdom of flowers, grasses, bison and butterflies. This unbelievably rich, unique ecosystem blanketed millions of acres of America’s heartland. These were the flower gardens of North America. Hidden deep underground, among the intertwined roots of a universe of prairie plants, lay the black gold that was to become the currency of the prairie farmer. Here was the inheritance of a million sunny days, hoarded away in the bank account of the prairie soil.
Agricultural, the Industrial Revolution, and the Rise of the American Middle Class
The farmers that tapped into this prairie trust fund found the dividends to be prodigious. No fertilizers were needed to grow bumper crops. The immense yields increased agricultural productivity to levels previously unheard-of, revolutionizing the farmer’s relationship with the land. Now one family could produce food for dozens of others. The day of the subsistence farm was over. Human labor was set free to tend the factory instead of the field. The dawn of the American Industrial Revolution was reflected in the glow of the forge that John Deere used to construct the first sod-busting steel plow in 1836. With the industrial dawn came the sunset of the American Prairie.
The Eastern Tallgrass Prairie of Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Missouri, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Oklahoma, Kansas, and Nebraska was all but obliterated in the span of a few short decades at the close of the nineteenth century. That which was not plowed under was closed in with fences and grazed to the ground by millions of cattle. What were once wide open spaces became food factories and feedlots. Still, we knew not what we had done.
A full century later, we are just beginning to grasp the scope of the loss. The Eastern Tallgrass Prairie is now one of the rarest plant communities in the entire world. Rainforests are commonplace by comparison. Less than 1/10th of 1% of the Tallgrass Prairie remains today. The small refuges where it can be found occur only in small tattered fragments, ripped from the original cloth. Only those pieces that could not be drained, plowed, grazed, or otherwise turned to the service of mankind remain. There was simply no place for wildness in this new American landscape.
The conversion of the New World into the Old Country was complete. All that remained now was to tend the fields and the gardens of plants brought over from Europe, and to make sure that the lawns that replaced that prairie were kept mown and in order.
Order. The watchword of a Puritanical culture that sought to carve structure from the chaos of wilderness. Everything in control. Nothing out of place. Even our gardens reflect this directive. Designs are precise, with each plant in its pre-ordained place, ensconced in a thick bed of bark mulch. The vegetable world must supplicate itself to our omnipotence. Those plants that fail to stay in their assigned seats are branded as weeds, and banished from the garden. And if they should grow wild in nature, how could such peasant plants of common breeding be sufficiently refined to have a place in our gardens?
If the garden is truly the place where people and nature meet, it is almost always the gardener who determines the terms of the meeting. Will the gardeners of the earth choose to work with Nature to create beauty in the landscape? Or will we attempt to overpower her with an arsenal of chemicals, machines, and “maintenance programs?”
We are finally coming to realize that the practice of paying homage to a uniform, idealized landscape of seamlessly interconnected lawns is an illusion. This becomes eminently clear when one realizes that the centerpoint of this landscape is a nearly lifeless, two dimensional expanse of turf, to which we slavishly devote much of our increasingly rare and precious free time. We pour on the chemicals, mow the grass to within an inch of its life, and kill any and all bugs that have the temerity to share the landscape with us. Perhaps most annoying, this national pastime called Lawn Care is really quite expensive.
For many, their lawns are like an addiction. They will pay almost any price to satisfy the cravings. The price is paid in money, time, environmental degradation, and in some cases, one’s health. We have so completely divorced ourselves from Nature that the only connection to the natural world is by watering and mowing their green carpets!
It is indeed a costly divorce from Nature. Enforcement of our unnatural landscapes consumes billions of dollars every year. Lawns, ornamental plantings, and even perennial gardens require constant attention if the desired order is to be maintained. Without intervention by the human hand on a regular basis, these landscapes soon fall victim to the invading hordes of weeds, trees, brambles and vines. Left unguarded, the walls of the domestic garden are stormed by the Vandals and Visigoths of the Vegetable Kingdom. Without the indulgences of their human benefactors, the meeker and fairer plants of the garden are quickly pillaged and displaced by the roving thugs of the plant world.
History of the American Lawn
The modern lawn has it origin in the country estates of landed gentry in England in the 16th and 17th centuries. It was a status symbol of the wealthy, for the working classes typically possessed no land, and could ill afford a lawn eve if they did. With our Anglo-American heritage, we looked to the mother country for our social cues in the 18th century as the American middle class emerged during the industrial revolution. The newly wealthy purchased homes and estates and installed lawns as one of their symbols of having “made it.” Lawns quickly became one of the status symbols associated with the new middle and upper classes.
The great American landscape architect, Frederick Law Olmstead, referred to the lawn in the late 18th century as “The Great Democratizer” of a newly ascendant nation. Rather than installing fences and barriers between neighboring properties as was common in Europe, Americans had a seamless carpet of green grass unifying their properties, all sharing in the new ethos of a mutual affluence.
The lawn quickly became a socio-economic symbol, denoting order and devotion to a non-economic crop that only those with expendable income could afford. As the middle class in America grew after World War II, the occupants of newly-built suburbs embraced the lawn as one of their icons of success and comfortable living.
The lawn was now cemented into American culture. Woe be unto he who violated the unspoken contract of “keeping up appearances” and allowing one’s turf to “go native” and grow beyond the socially acceptable four inches in height. An un-mowed, unkempt lawn was a sign of slovenliness and anti-social tendencies. Social breakdown and chaos could not be far behind.
This is why the lawn is so ardently defended by so many. It is a symbol of an entire social class and lifestyle. It is far more than a near-lifeless green expanse that requires an inordinate amount of time, money and chemicals to maintain. It embodies the hopes and dreams of average Americans, and symbolizes the triumph or order over entropy. It is a shared middle class bond that transcends politics, religion, and ethnicity. In many communities you are judged by your lawn first, and your character as a human being second. And do not for one minute believe that the first does not influence the second.
Why do we Persist with Our Addiction to Lawns? What About Wildlife?
1) It’s simple and easy! We know how to do it: Fertilize it, spray it, and mow it!
2) You don’t really have to know anything about plants or gardening to grow and manage a lawn – just follow the directions provided by the purveyors of fertilizers, herbicides, fungicides, and insecticides provide you!
3) Lawn is a cheap fix. Although less costly to install than native landscapes, lawn has a high life cycle cost over a period of many years. Native landscapes typically have low long-term maintenance costs, with lower life cycle costs.
4) Lawns don’t attract bugs or wildlife (except for geese), so you know you and your family will be safe from snakes, vermin, and those annoying insects! So what if insects are the foundation of the food chain, and support a myriad of birds and other desirable creatures. We’ve been brainwashed that bugs are bad, so we have to make sure they don’t inhabit our outdoor living spaces.
5) NO BUGS, NO BIRDS!
6) Everybody says they love Nature, but nobody ever invites her over to their yard.
7) I knew my prairie was a success when I saw Meadow Jumping Mice (Zapus hudsonianus) and Hog Nosed Snakes (Heterodon platirhinos) in it. These creatures provided evidence that I now had a functioning ecosystem, not just a garden. If you like hawks and owls, you better be able to feed them: rodents and reptiles are some of their preferred foods.
WE ARE NOT A NATION OF GARDENERS:
WE ARE A NATION OF MOWERS!
WHY DO WE CARE WHAT WE PLANT IN OUR GARDENS
AND LANDSCAPES?
Many of us care deeply about the state of our planet and the loss of biodiversity that is occurring on a global scale. Although we all think globally, most of us can only act locally. Together, we can have an impact in our own gardens and landscapes, as well as those of our friends and neighbors. For those of us in the landscape design business, we can promote sustainable landscapes composed of native plants that require little or no fertilizers, pesticides, watering, or mowing (just burning!). This alone, when compounded over time as more people opt for sustainable landscapes, can have an impact.
The looming question for us today is the on-going loss of biodiversity. Restoring native ecosystems is one way we can help support not just native plants, but also invertebrates such as rare butterflies and moths, bees, wasps, and all manner of the generally unloved lower castes of bugs and creepy crawly things. Yet they are all important, and each has an important place in the web of life.
Homo sapiens, is presently presiding over what is believed to be the Sixth Great Extinction. Although we have yet to reach the catastrophic levels of past extinction events, we are well on our way and showing only a few signs of abatement in our drive to subdue and conquer the earth, as we serve our ever-expanding need for food, fuel, water, and living space.
But does it really matter what we do as individuals? A society is composed of all its individuals, and their actions determine the face of that society. Most of us are working to restore the integrity of native ecosystems because we believe it is the “right” and good thing to do, and that we are “doing it for the planet.” But does it really matter? Does the planet really respect our actions? Or is it all irrelevant?
The Earth has been subjected to massive extinctions in the past, some fairly recent in geological history. The planet has always recovered, with the development of new species and a wealth of new life forms. Nature does indeed abhor a vacuum, and she apparently fills it rapidly. All of the work I am doing on my property to control invasive species and restore native plants will someday be negated by the next advance of the glacier, as unlikely as that may seem at this point in geological and meteorolical history. Of course, my landscape will probably be invaded by garlic muster, buckthorn, honeysuckle and other non-native thugs soon after my demise, unless some equally deranged and determined individual picks up where I leave off.
SO WHY RESTORE THE PLANET? DOES IT REALLY MATTER?
If one takes a long-term geological perspective, it doesn’t really matter what we do. Even if we nuke the joint, something will survive and a whole new set of life forms will evolve. Maybe the next sentient beings will be smarter than us, and actually take care of the planet.
We Restore the Earth Because It Is Good for Us!
We need a quality of life that includes clean air, clean water, trees, flowers, ferns, birds, and all the wonderful life forms with which we share the planet. We aren’t just preserving habitat and restoring native plant communities out of the goodness of our hearts – Our very economic and psychic survival depend upon it!
We have yet to fully value the economics of a healthy environment. But as the planet is further degraded, the value of high quality living spaces only increases.
THE BOTTOM LINE: Ultimately, our future landscapes will be in large part determined more by economics than ecology. This is an unfortunate consequence of the human condition. As a quality living space becomes more valuable, more value will be placed upon it. We will protect it more diligently. It will sell for a higher price. People will begin to view the natural environment more as an asset, rather than as a resource to be exploited.
All of this will most likely be precipitated by shortages of water, rather than a shortage of oil or other energy source. You can live without oil, but you cannot live without water. As the price of water increases, the incentive to conserve it will increase. We will need landscapes that do not require huge inputs of water and chemicals to sustain them. We will need to overcome our cultural taboos of “messy” natural landscapes and move beyond viewing lawns as status symbols and a rite of passage into the middle and upper classes.
Someday pride of place will belong to those with the least lawn, lowest water bill, and no chemicals in their garages. Society will value those who work to preserve our environment, rather than those who can make the most money by despoiling it. I personally cannot wait much longer for that day to come.
AT A GLANCE:
TODAY: LAWN, an ecological and economic disaster
TOMORROW: SUSTAINA LE ECOSYSTEMS, composed of native plant
communities that require little or no fertilizers, pesticides, or irrigation, o
TODAY: MONOCULTURES of mowed lawns
TOMORROW: DIVERSE ECOSYSTEMS that support a wide variety of life
TODAY: FEAR and mistrust of the natural world and its attendant organisms (bugs,
mice, snakes, etc)
TOMORROW: RE-INTEGRATION of people into nature and an understanding that
everything is connected and interdependent
WE MUST ENTER INTO A JOINT VENTURE WITH NATURE TO PRESERVE OUR PLANET AND THE SYSTEMS UPON WHICH ALL LIFE DEPENDS.
ONLY THEN WILL WE LIVE IN HARMONY WITH OUR FELLOW CREATURES ON THIS PLANET.
OUR QUALITY LIFE AND LONG-TERM SURVIVAL DEPENDS UPON THE SURVIVAL OF THE SYSTEMS AND ORGANISMS THAT SUPPORT US.
This entry was posted on Tuesday, April 26th, 2011 at 3:39 pm and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
University of Vermont Extension
Department of Plant and Soil Science


Dr. Leonard Perry, Extension Professor
University of Vermont
With the price of gasoline and natural gas on the rise, most are looking for ways to cut their costs and save energy. If you have a lawn or garden, you may not realize just how much fossil fuels you are using. By knowing where these are used, you can look for ways to reduce consumption. This will reduce your costs, and help the environment.
In a recent PPPro online newsletter Paul Tukey, editor of People, Places and Plants magazine, provides some sobering facts and helpful suggestions. Each year, a family with a one-third acre lawn will on average:
*consume five gallons of gas for mowing and trimming;
*apply the equivalent of seven gallons for fertilizing;
*burn up to five gallons for watering; and
*consume an additional gallon for cleanup.
That’s 18 gallons of fuel per household. With 120 million U.S. households, that’s the equivalent of almost 2.2 billion gallons of fuel used just for lawn care each year. This does not count other landscaping activities. So just how do we use so much?
Yale University has estimated that the United States uses more than 600 million gallons of gas to mow and trim lawns each year — about two gallons of gas for every man, woman and child, or five gallons per household. Mowers also consume engine oil in their crankcases, and two-stroke mowers consume oil in their fuel.
In addition to fuel consumption, mowers and outdoor power equipment contribute heavily to air pollution. Operating a typical (4 HP) gasoline-powered lawnmower for one hour produces as much smog-forming hydrocarbons as driving an average car between 100 and 200 miles under average conditions. Gasoline-powered string trimmers are actually more polluting than many lawn mowers. One estimate (mindfully.org) states that “the 20,000,000 small engines sold in the U.S. each year contribute about one tenth of the total U.S. mobile source hydrocarbon emissions, and are the largest single contributor to these non-road emissions.” These include power blowers, rakes, and brooms.
Creating synthetic nitrogen for fertilizers requires the heating of natural gas to combine atmospheric nitrogen and hydrogen into ammonia. The amount of natural gas required to make approximately 200 bags of lawn fertilizer would heat your home for a year. Each 40-pound bag contains the fossil-fuel equivalent of approximately 2.5 gallons of gasoline. Transporting these bags of fertilizer from the factory and to your home requires additional fuel.
According to a California study, in many areas — especially in the West, where water must be moved great distances from reservoirs — the amount of fuel needed to pump the water is at least equal to the fuel used in mowing.
So what can you do? Here are ten tips to have a “fuel-efficient” landscape.
*Use an electric or non-powered push mower. An electric mower maintaining one-third of an acre for a season consumes only $3 of electricity on average. Electric mowers are 75 percent quieter than gas mowers. Push mowers, of course, consume no fuel and make little noise.
*Similarly, use traditional hand rakes and brooms instead of power ones and blowers to save fuel, and at the same time reduce air and noise pollution. If you employ a landscape maintenance firm, encourage their use of these too. Minimize the need for string trimmers. Mulch along walks and around structures such as lamp posts to avoid having to trim weeds in these areas.
*If you have an old mower, consider replacing it. Newer small engines run much cleaner. EPA emission standards for such engines, to be in effect by 2007, are expected to reduce ground-level ozone emissions by 70 percent or 350,000 tons each year.
*Reduce the area mowed through use of groundcovers. This is especially true in areas with water shortages. Allow parts of large areas to grow, only mowing once or twice a season, creating a natural meadow. You can still mow areas near drives and homes to maintain the more formal manicured effects in such highly visible and high traffic areas.
*Save rainwater and gray water. Gray water is that water from home use, except from toilets, and can make up from 50 to 80 percent of home waste water. It comes from sinks, showers, and laundry and can be used for irrigating landscapes and lawns.
*Water deeply once per week on average, rather than frequently. Drip irrigation and mulches also conserve water. Using less water saves on energy use, whether you’re buying water that has to be pumped, or are paying an electric bill to pump your own.
*Use natural, organic fertilizers not derived from fossil fuels.
*Recycle grass clippings, mow higher and mix 5 percent clover into your lawn seed. All these help recycle nutrients back into the soil. Mulching-type mowers allow you to leave grass clippings on the lawn. If you don’t have such a mower, and remove the clippings, add them to compost or use them to mulch gardens.
*Compost all yard wastes, except for diseased plants and plant parts. They can go into compost piles, saving gasoline hauling such to landfills and recycle centers. If your landscape generates many twigs and other brush, consider buying or renting a home-size brush chipper.
*Finally, consider landscaping to reduce up to 25 percent of home energy consumption. Foundation plantings can lessen heat loss from buildings. Evergreen windbreaks can reduce heating costs in winter in windy areas. Deciduous shade trees can reduce energy needs for cooling in summer. According to the Department of Energy, only three properly placed trees may
Return to Perry's Perennial Pages, Articles

]
![]() | Gardening | ||
![]() | |||
What to do with a Lawn | ![]() |
THE SITE home news monocult actions evolution RESOURCES sitemap books links search US contact us our aims logo/banner ![]() |
![]() but a garden has a whole world of wonders." history Lawns started out as grazing areas around the manors of the landed gentry. Having a nice lawn around the house was a sign of power as you owned sufficient land to raise sheep and cow. As the industrial revolution took hold and animals were less a sign of wealth, the lawn itself became the status symbol. You could indulge yourself in sparing land and time to recreational grounds. As people moved to the cities so did the grass, on ever smaller plots. First lawns were cut by hand and later with the mechanical lawnmower, (an automated, resource depleting, pointless cow.) The 20th Century saw an explosion of lawn making as commercial interests produced endless grass seed, fertiliser, pesticides, mowers, spreaders and irrigation equipment whilst developers discovered they could pass off cheap ‘gardens’ by spreading 3 inches of soil over hard subsoil and laying turf on top. Nowerdays, many lawns are rarely used and some are so covered with chemicals children have been permanently injured after walking barefoot on them.[1] |
the modern lawn - a waste of resources The modern pure grass lawn is artificial... you need effort and chemicals to maintain a monoculture.
The lawn is a green desert. Adoption of a monoculture for a garden drastically reduces the habitats available for wildlife. Birds, bees, butterflies and other animals all begin to disappear. Often leaving an unstable ecosystem where common ‘pest’ species seem to flourish. alternatives Aside from keeping animals or ripping up the turf to plant trees and bushes, build vegetable beds, a pond or a greenhouse there are many things you can do to keep the same purpose of a lawn whilst adding diversity and removing chemical and mechanical dependence. (Unless the area you have is subject to heavy traffic and abuse, where turf is probably the most suitable thing to use.) If you just want somewhere to sit, try making a bench a focal point of your garden. Lawns can be made more edible, medicinal, beautiful and nice smelling by adding low growing aromatic herbs and flowers. The plants below have been specially selected because they will tolerate at least infrequent mowings. For best results don’t cut as often or as short as a normal lawn and try to lay off for at least 3 weeks in the summer to let the taller plants flower and set seed. You could try sowing them into small gaps in the grass or better still plant them out. For low maintenance choose plants that will like your local conditions. |
![]() ![]() | lively lawns Apart from the obvious dandelions (Taraxacum officinale), daisy (Bellis perennis) and plantains (Plantago major, plantago media) which are all excellent in lawns, freely self seed, add variety and can also be eaten once you get past seeing them just as ‘weeds,’ try… White Clover, Trifolium repens: 10cm H, spreads, adds nitrogen to the soil, attracts bees and butterflies. You can eat the flowers and leaves, (bit fiddly though) Camomile, Chamaemelum nobile: 15cm H 30cm W, Plants for a future[9] recommend for smell but not for medicine, (no flowers), a cultivar called ‘Treneague’ which is low growing, spreads and will succeed if the grass is cut low and often, however you'll have to find a cutting, there are no seeds. Wild thyme, Thymus serpyllum: 10cm H 30cm W Forms spreading clumps, pink flowers attract bees in summer, drought tolerant, needs sun. High in antioxidants and an essential kitchen herb. Lemon thyme, Thymus x citiodorus: 10cm H 30cm W. Likes light well drained soil and full sun, can be planted by division. Coltsfoot, Tussilago farfara: 25cm H, spreads invasively. Tolerates shade, does well in all soils, flowers edible mar-apr, leaves appear afterwards, used for treatment of respiratory problems. Rough Hawkbit, Leontodon hispidus: 40cm H 30cm W. Similar to dandelion, prefers chalky soil, flowers all summer, attracts bees & butterflies, edible leaves most of the year. |
![]() | Salad burnet, Sanguisorba minor: 55cm H 30cm W. Prefers chalky soil and slightly longer grass, flowers May-Aug and provides edible young leaves all year round. Self Heal, Prunella vulgaris: 15cm H spreading to form clumps 30cm W. Prefers moist soil, tolerates low cutting and shade, flowers mid to late summer, attracts bees & butterflies, eaten in salads and an healing herb for cuts and wounds. Yarrow, Achillea millefolium: upto 60cm H spreads, hardy, drought resistant, good in poor soils, and a very useful medicinal herb. beautiful bulbs By lengthening the time between mowings you can also grow taller plants such as bulbs. Planted surreptitiously they are a nice surprise. All below are edible and most spread naturally. It is advisable to plant bulbs of similar flowering times together to make any lawn maintenance more straightforward. Field & Crow garlic, Allium oleraceum & A. vineale: 60cm H, 5cm W. Both almost invasive in grass if left to form bulbils in jul-aug, tolerant of mowing, leaves edible autumn to following summer. If cows eat them, their milk is tainted. Quamash, Camassia quamash: 50cm H 10cm W. Does well in short grass and under trees, flowers late spring, very edible bulbs when cooked. |
![]() | Dog's Tooth Violet, Erythronium den-canis: 15cm H 10cm W. appears in spring for a few months each year. bulbs edible raw or cooked, also try E. revoltum 'pagoda' for a bigger, version. Tassel Hyacinth, Muscari botryoides: 40cm H clumps 20cm W. Easy to grow, does well in short grass, almost invasive, 3.5cm bulbs edible, but a little bitter. Or for beauty, there are many other bulbs, such as daffodils, bluebells, crocus etc that can be planted into the lawn. wonderful wildflowers Perhaps you could turn some of your lawn into a ‘wildflower meadow’. This will attract butterflies and insects as well as bringing nature a bit closer to home. Choose a sunny position on poor soil to get the most flowers. Mow only after the seeds have set (around August) and remove the clippings to keep fertility low. Sow a mix of wild flowers into bare earth, or if grass is already established, grow in pots and plant out in Autumn or Spring, this is more work but gets better results. Most of the above taller lawn plants will do well as these edible ones below... Meadowsweet, Filipendula ulmaria: 120cm H. Likes moist rich soil non acid soils, a useful medicinal and culinary herb. Sheep sorrel, Rumex acetosella: 30cm H. prefers suny and moist spot, sharp edible salad leaves all year round. Red clover, Trifolium pratense: 60cm H. attracts butterflies, moths and bees, put round apple trees for better fruit, edible leaves, fixes nitrogen. Alternatively you could purchase a conservation wildflower mix from a local supplier, you won't be able to eat them though. For some more lawn fun see the guerrilla gardening pages. Notes [a] Many pesticides have never been adequately tested for toxicity to humans or wildlife. According to the National Coalition Against the Misuse of Pesticides, 13 of the most commonly used lawn care pesticides can cause cancer, 14 can cause birth defects, 21 can damage the nervous system, 15 can injure the liver or kidney, and 30 are sensitizers or irritants. [3] The pesticide MCPA, used as an ingredient is some lawn pesticides, has been found to damage the blood brain barrier which protects against neurological illness.[4] Organophosphate pesticides have been shown to cause memory loss and short attention spans.[5] Other studies have linked long term pesticide use with prostate[6], brain and lung cancer.[7] It is estimated that each year in the US, 67 million birds are poisoned by legally used pesticides.[3] Pesticides are often misused especially by homeowners, increasing the risks. [b] Fertiliser is often over applied, causing runoff problems in nearby watercourses, as well as the obvious waste of fossil fuels in its manufacture and transport. [c] It is estimated that 44% of domestic water consumption in California is used for lawns[8] In many areas ground water tables are being depleted. [d] The manufacture of garden machinery uses energy, depletes resources and creates pollution as do the engine fumes or the power plants producing the electricity they run on. In the early 90’s it was estimated that 580,000,000 gallons of petrol were used to run lawnmowers in the US every year.[2] References [1] The Pesticide Scandal, Sayan, Kathyrne, Family Circle 2 April 1991. [2] Redesigning the American Lawn, F. Herbert Bormann, Diana Balmori, Gordon T. Geballe, Yale University Press, 1993 [3] Spring, 1997 edition of The Arlington Environment, Volume Four, Number Four [4] Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology, 65:23, 1982 [5] Annual Reviews in Public Health, 7:461, 1986 [6] Occupational Environmental Medicine, 56(1):14-21, 1999 [7] Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 71(1), July 1983 [8] Permaculture a designers manual, Bill Mollison, Tagari publications, 1988. [9] Plants for a future- edible and useful plants for a healthier world, Ken Fern, Permanent publications, 1997. |
![]() |
![]() | Gardening | ||
![]() | |||
What to do with a Lawn | ![]() |
THE SITE home news monocult actions evolution RESOURCES sitemap books links search US contact us our aims logo/banner ![]() |
![]() but a garden has a whole world of wonders." history Lawns started out as grazing areas around the manors of the landed gentry. Having a nice lawn around the house was a sign of power as you owned sufficient land to raise sheep and cow. As the industrial revolution took hold and animals were less a sign of wealth, the lawn itself became the status symbol. You could indulge yourself in sparing land and time to recreational grounds. As people moved to the cities so did the grass, on ever smaller plots. First lawns were cut by hand and later with the mechanical lawnmower, (an automated, resource depleting, pointless cow.) The 20th Century saw an explosion of lawn making as commercial interests produced endless grass seed, fertiliser, pesticides, mowers, spreaders and irrigation equipment whilst developers discovered they could pass off cheap ‘gardens’ by spreading 3 inches of soil over hard subsoil and laying turf on top. Nowerdays, many lawns are rarely used and some are so covered with chemicals children have been permanently injured after walking barefoot on them.[1] |
the modern lawn - a waste of resources The modern pure grass lawn is artificial... you need effort and chemicals to maintain a monoculture.
The lawn is a green desert. Adoption of a monoculture for a garden drastically reduces the habitats available for wildlife. Birds, bees, butterflies and other animals all begin to disappear. Often leaving an unstable ecosystem where common ‘pest’ species seem to flourish. alternatives Aside from keeping animals or ripping up the turf to plant trees and bushes, build vegetable beds, a pond or a greenhouse there are many things you can do to keep the same purpose of a lawn whilst adding diversity and removing chemical and mechanical dependence. (Unless the area you have is subject to heavy traffic and abuse, where turf is probably the most suitable thing to use.) If you just want somewhere to sit, try making a bench a focal point of your garden. Lawns can be made more edible, medicinal, beautiful and nice smelling by adding low growing aromatic herbs and flowers. The plants below have been specially selected because they will tolerate at least infrequent mowings. For best results don’t cut as often or as short as a normal lawn and try to lay off for at least 3 weeks in the summer to let the taller plants flower and set seed. You could try sowing them into small gaps in the grass or better still plant them out. For low maintenance choose plants that will like your local conditions. |
![]() ![]() | lively lawns Apart from the obvious dandelions (Taraxacum officinale), daisy (Bellis perennis) and plantains (Plantago major, plantago media) which are all excellent in lawns, freely self seed, add variety and can also be eaten once you get past seeing them just as ‘weeds,’ try… White Clover, Trifolium repens: 10cm H, spreads, adds nitrogen to the soil, attracts bees and butterflies. You can eat the flowers and leaves, (bit fiddly though) Camomile, Chamaemelum nobile: 15cm H 30cm W, Plants for a future[9] recommend for smell but not for medicine, (no flowers), a cultivar called ‘Treneague’ which is low growing, spreads and will succeed if the grass is cut low and often, however you'll have to find a cutting, there are no seeds. Wild thyme, Thymus serpyllum: 10cm H 30cm W Forms spreading clumps, pink flowers attract bees in summer, drought tolerant, needs sun. High in antioxidants and an essential kitchen herb. Lemon thyme, Thymus x citiodorus: 10cm H 30cm W. Likes light well drained soil and full sun, can be planted by division. Coltsfoot, Tussilago farfara: 25cm H, spreads invasively. Tolerates shade, does well in all soils, flowers edible mar-apr, leaves appear afterwards, used for treatment of respiratory problems. Rough Hawkbit, Leontodon hispidus: 40cm H 30cm W. Similar to dandelion, prefers chalky soil, flowers all summer, attracts bees & butterflies, edible leaves most of the year. |
![]() | Salad burnet, Sanguisorba minor: 55cm H 30cm W. Prefers chalky soil and slightly longer grass, flowers May-Aug and provides edible young leaves all year round. Self Heal, Prunella vulgaris: 15cm H spreading to form clumps 30cm W. Prefers moist soil, tolerates low cutting and shade, flowers mid to late summer, attracts bees & butterflies, eaten in salads and an healing herb for cuts and wounds. Yarrow, Achillea millefolium: upto 60cm H spreads, hardy, drought resistant, good in poor soils, and a very useful medicinal herb. beautiful bulbs By lengthening the time between mowings you can also grow taller plants such as bulbs. Planted surreptitiously they are a nice surprise. All below are edible and most spread naturally. It is advisable to plant bulbs of similar flowering times together to make any lawn maintenance more straightforward. Field & Crow garlic, Allium oleraceum & A. vineale: 60cm H, 5cm W. Both almost invasive in grass if left to form bulbils in jul-aug, tolerant of mowing, leaves edible autumn to following summer. If cows eat them, their milk is tainted. Quamash, Camassia quamash: 50cm H 10cm W. Does well in short grass and under trees, flowers late spring, very edible bulbs when cooked. |
![]() | Dog's Tooth Violet, Erythronium den-canis: 15cm H 10cm W. appears in spring for a few months each year. bulbs edible raw or cooked, also try E. revoltum 'pagoda' for a bigger, version. Tassel Hyacinth, Muscari botryoides: 40cm H clumps 20cm W. Easy to grow, does well in short grass, almost invasive, 3.5cm bulbs edible, but a little bitter. Or for beauty, there are many other bulbs, such as daffodils, bluebells, crocus etc that can be planted into the lawn. wonderful wildflowers Perhaps you could turn some of your lawn into a ‘wildflower meadow’. This will attract butterflies and insects as well as bringing nature a bit closer to home. Choose a sunny position on poor soil to get the most flowers. Mow only after the seeds have set (around August) and remove the clippings to keep fertility low. Sow a mix of wild flowers into bare earth, or if grass is already established, grow in pots and plant out in Autumn or Spring, this is more work but gets better results. Most of the above taller lawn plants will do well as these edible ones below... Meadowsweet, Filipendula ulmaria: 120cm H. Likes moist rich soil non acid soils, a useful medicinal and culinary herb. Sheep sorrel, Rumex acetosella: 30cm H. prefers suny and moist spot, sharp edible salad leaves all year round. Red clover, Trifolium pratense: 60cm H. attracts butterflies, moths and bees, put round apple trees for better fruit, edible leaves, fixes nitrogen. Alternatively you could purchase a conservation wildflower mix from a local supplier, you won't be able to eat them though. For some more lawn fun see the guerrilla gardening pages. Notes [a] Many pesticides have never been adequately tested for toxicity to humans or wildlife. According to the National Coalition Against the Misuse of Pesticides, 13 of the most commonly used lawn care pesticides can cause cancer, 14 can cause birth defects, 21 can damage the nervous system, 15 can injure the liver or kidney, and 30 are sensitizers or irritants. [3] The pesticide MCPA, used as an ingredient is some lawn pesticides, has been found to damage the blood brain barrier which protects against neurological illness.[4] Organophosphate pesticides have been shown to cause memory loss and short attention spans.[5] Other studies have linked long term pesticide use with prostate[6], brain and lung cancer.[7] It is estimated that each year in the US, 67 million birds are poisoned by legally used pesticides.[3] Pesticides are often misused especially by homeowners, increasing the risks. [b] Fertiliser is often over applied, causing runoff problems in nearby watercourses, as well as the obvious waste of fossil fuels in its manufacture and transport. [c] It is estimated that 44% of domestic water consumption in California is used for lawns[8] In many areas ground water tables are being depleted. [d] The manufacture of garden machinery uses energy, depletes resources and creates pollution as do the engine fumes or the power plants producing the electricity they run on. In the early 90’s it was estimated that 580,000,000 gallons of petrol were used to run lawnmowers in the US every year.[2] References [1] The Pesticide Scandal, Sayan, Kathyrne, Family Circle 2 April 1991. [2] Redesigning the American Lawn, F. Herbert Bormann, Diana Balmori, Gordon T. Geballe, Yale University Press, 1993 [3] Spring, 1997 edition of The Arlington Environment, Volume Four, Number Four [4] Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology, 65:23, 1982 [5] Annual Reviews in Public Health, 7:461, 1986 [6] Occupational Environmental Medicine, 56(1):14-21, 1999 [7] Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 71(1), July 1983 [8] Permaculture a designers manual, Bill Mollison, Tagari publications, 1988. [9] Plants for a future- edible and useful plants for a healthier world, Ken Fern, Permanent publications, 1997. |
![]() |