Healthy soil and sustainable growing

["Tradingpost" <tradingpost@gilanet.com>]

The American Lawn Just Isn't Cutting It
http://www.landstewardshipproject.org/lsl/lspv15n2.html#cover
All those miles of manicured grass are the result of an unsustainable turf 
battle taking place in millions of individual yards.
By Brian DeVore

The lawn, that green, green grass of home, that succulent, sun-hungry 
extension of the living room, is more than an innocuous piece of pampered 
real estate. It's at the center of one of the key sustainable land use issues 
in this country today.

How can a patch of Kentucky bluegrass here and there be of such importance? 
For one thing, it's not a patch here and there anymore. In the past 100 
years, the turf-based lawn has crept across this country to the point where 
we've got 44,000 square miles of land (75 percent of that in home lawns) with 
a green crew cut ÷ roughly the size of Pennsylvania. And that land demands a 
lot of water and chemicals to maintain its green complexion.

Granted, land in crops and concrete contributes more pollution to our waters 
and displaces more natural ecosystems. But consider this: The Lawn Institute 
estimates there are at least 54 million homeowners in this country sweating 
over their yards on any given weekend. In comparison, there are fewer than 2 
million farmers.

So if the importance of a land use issue is judged on the merits of how many 
people can have a personal impact on it daily, then the American lawn is high 
on the list. And it's becoming increasingly clear that a lot of individual 
actions are adding up to one large unsustainable way of using land. Consumers 
can influence how food is produced through their buying habits and support of 
various sustainable agriculture policies. In the same vein, lawn owners could 
have a positive impact on their own micro-environment every time they step 
into the tool shed.

But that's easier said than done. It's gotten to the point where maintaining 
an apron of perfect, monocultural green around one's home has become a 
prerequisite for "good citizen" status in this country ÷ right up there with 
voting and volunteering at church. Something so interwoven with our cultural 
fabric is proving difficult to extract from our daily lives, even as the 
environmental problems associated with the lawn become more evident. 
Neighbors may not know or care if you're eating pork or vegetables produced 
by a sustainable family farm. But chances are they will know, and definitely 
care, if you are taking an alternative path in the care of your yard. Just 
ask anyone who has spurned the mowing, spraying, seeding and digging that 
goes with the all-American ÷ it is an American phenomenon ÷ lawn.

"I was astonished at how lawns bring out the worst in people," recalls Walter 
Stewart of his battle to get neighbors to accept that his Potomac, Md., yard 
should be more than a monoculture of bluegrass. "You can go into a church and 
yell obscenities and expect to get negative reactions, but you don't expect 
such reactions to your yard."

He was slapped with a stiff fine for allowing the vegetation on a few acres 
to grow above 12 inches in 1986. Stewart fought the fine for almost a year, 
enlisting the help of ecological experts to defend the value of his yard. 
County officials finally withdrew their charges and changed the ordinance, 
but not before neighborly relations in the Washington, D.C., suburb hit a new 
low. One local resident quoted in the local paper compared the Stewart yard 
to bad hygiene: "It's like they don't wash."
Sod's roots

The reason for this passion is that turf grass truly has roots in the history 
and culture of this country, and in the population's evolution from rural to 
urban and suburban. Creating yards that look like the tops of billiard tables 
was inspired by the closely cropped fields of English manors in the 18th and 
19th centuries. These several hundred acre "lawns," which were kept short 
with the use of sheep and plenty of hired help, were the ultimate symbol that 
their owner had arrived: He was so wealthy, he didn't need to use his land to 
produce food. The invention of the lawn mower in 1830 made it possible for 
even the most modest home to have a piece of English countryside on a few 
hundred square feet.

Early this century, the U.S. Department of Agriculture teamed up with the 
golfing industry to promote a monocultural turf grass system based on such 
species as bluegrass, a plant native to the more humid parts of Europe and 
Asia. By the time World War II rolled around, lawns had become a part of the 
American dream. By 1960, we were adding half a million lawns to the landscape 
a year. Power equipment and agri-chemicals allowed homeowners with even the 
smallest yard to do some "farming" on their own suburban savanna.
Yard farmers

The total land area covered by lawns is about a third of the area planted to 
corn this year, and half of what we have in soybeans and wheat. But in terms 
of the intense use of inputs, lawn owners put any modern farmer to shame. By 
1984, Americans were applying more chemical fertilizers to lawns than India 
applied to all its food crops, according to the Environmental Protection 
Agency (EPA). A 1989 National Academy of Sciences study reported the 
astonishing news that homeowners were using up to 10 times more chemicals per 
acre than farmers.

EPA officials believe that education and general environmental awareness has 
narrowed that gap in recent years. But in an average year, American lawn 
lovers still apply between 70 and 75 million pounds of chemicals that kill 
weeds, insects and fungi. Today the typical lawn owner annually applies on a 
per-acre basis 2.38 pounds of pesticides, 4.28 pounds of herbicides and 1.69 
pounds of fungicides, according to the EPA. In comparison, corn farmers on 
average apply less than a pound of herbicides or insecticides per acre.

Kentucky bluegrass and similar carpet-like fine grasses do well in a climate 
found in, say, the Pacific Northwest. But the entire U.S. is not Seattle. As 
a result, up to 60 percent of the urban water on the West Coast goes toward 
giving lawn grasses a regular soaking. Even more amazing is the estimate that 
up to 30 percent of urban water on the more humid East Coast goes toward 
lawns. The community of Novato, Calif., became so concerned about the use of 
water for lawn care that in the early 1990s it paid homeowners up to $310 to 
rip out their turf grass and replace it with a xeriscape landscape of 
drought-tolerant plants. City officials estimated that each converted 
property represented a potential water savings of 120 gallons per day in 
peak-use months.
Singing turf's praises

Groups like the Professional Lawn Care Association of America and the 
National Lawn Institute say such heavy use of inputs is critical to creating 
the kind of thick turf that makes for a healthy lawn. That healthy lawn, in 
turn, creates the kind of ground cover that keeps our soil intact and our 
water clear, say trade associations who are ever conscious of what good 
public relations environmental rhetoric produces. The Professional Lawn Care 
Association goes so far as to claim that "well-managed turf has the greatest 
capacity for absorbing and holding water than any other ground cover."

That's stretching the truth by quite a bit, say environmental experts, but 
there's no doubt grass holds our soil in place. "I think a good lawn is good 
ground cover. It's certainly preferred over concrete," says Roger Bannerman, 
a Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources environmental specialist who has 
studied water runoff in the city of Madison.

And like any green plant, turf grass can control dust and pollen and absorb 
and convert pollutants like carbon dioxide and sulfur dioxide into oxygen.

"Environmental benefits of a well-cared for lawn and landscape aren't as well 
recognized but are very important," says Ann McClure, executive vice 
president of the Professional Lawn Care Association. "Turf is an unsung 
environmental hero."
No hero-worship

But people like Lorrie Otto aren't ready to bow down at the altar of the 
almighty turf grass. In fact, the "natural yard" pioneer finds the American 
lawn to be anything but a hero.

"It's just evil," says the feisty resident of a Milwaukee, Wis., suburb. 
"When you add up all the reasons why we shouldn't have a lawn, it's just 
inexcusable to have one."

Otto has had strong opinions about lawns ever since the early 1960s, when she 
started turning her own one-acre yard over to prairie plants and trees. She's 
written and taught courses on natural landscaping and in 1977 helped found an 
organization dedicated to the promotion of yard alternatives.

The average American may not be as prepared to use the word "evil" and "lawn" 
in the same sentence. But the growing list of environmental costs involved in 
creating a sea of unblemished green is increasingly difficult to ignore.

"Where the problems come is people expect a perfect lawn of pure grass. The 
chemical companies are responsible for convincing people the perfect lawn 
looks like a putting green," says Bannerman. "Mother Nature will not give you 
a lawn that looks like a putting green. What I've learned from the 
agronomists is you can't have a perfect lawn without some chemicals."

Despite the water holding capacity of turf grass, the chemicals and 
fertilizers dumped on lawns are showing up in our lakes and streams. In the 
Great Lakes Basin, 13 of the 18 most commonly used lawn pesticides have been 
found in water. A 1993-1994 study of urban runoff in the Denver, Colo., area 
found 22 different pesticides present in a local watershed (30 pesticides 
were found in water in an agricultural area during the same study period). 
Not surprisingly, the Colorado researchers found the highest concentrations 
of pesticides during the summer, but they also concluded that because there 
were consistent levels detected year-round, the compounds persist in the 
aquifer's sediment. Agronomists have also expressed concern that because lawn 
pesticides are applied several times a year, the potential for runoff may be 
greater than from crop fields, which may receive one or two applications 
during a growing season.

Studies have also documented runoff of nitrates and other fertilizers when 
lawns are over-watered, a fairly common event in homes that panic at any sign 
of brown grass. And it's becoming increasingly clear that homeowners are 
applying nutrients such as phosphorus based on little evidence that the lawn 
actually needs it. Whereas cost considerations often play a big part in 
reducing chemical and fertilizer applications on several hundred acres of 
crop land, lawn owners aren't as pressured to scrimp. In fact, they're more 
likely to finish off a jug of weed killer, rather than deal with the hassle 
of storing it safely. A close examination of today's lawn care practices 
reveals an agronomic system akin to crop production 20 years ago, when 
farmers indiscriminately applied inputs, ignoring soil tests and other 
indicators of what crops really needed.

John Barten, the water quality manager for the Hennepin County, Minn., park 
system, has seen this firsthand. In 1994, he conducted a sampling of 181 
lawns in four suburban communities of the Twin Cities. More than 95 percent 
of the lawns tested had phosphorus levels that were at "high" or "very high" 
levels (more than 50 pounds per acre). And of those lawns with "very high" 
levels of phosphorus, 75 percent of the owners were applying the fertilizer 
two or more times a year. Last year, Wisconsin Department of Natural 
Resources researchers found high levels of phosphorus in urban runoff using 
rainfall simulation in the city of Madison. They also found that the younger 
the lawn, the poorer the infiltration rate. This is because the typical model 
for establishing a lawn in a new housing development is to bulldoze the 
topsoil, and then drop sod on top.

"Some of these places had 10 inches of topsoil and then they're down to one," 
says Bannerman.

He says it may take three or more years for microorganisms to work at the 
hardpan and break it down, increasing infiltration. But in the meantime, the 
owner of the new lawn, hoping to hurry the development of a thick green turf, 
will likely be pouring on just the kind of pesticides that deter the 
biological development needed for healthy soil.

Microbes and worms aren't the only unintended targets that get caught in the 
broad brush of chemical application. Even other beneficial plants can get 
hurt. Jim Walsh, general manager at St. Louis Park, Minn.-based Rainbow 
Treecare, says his company originally focused on trees. But they expanded 
into turf care because of the detrimental effects lawn chemicals were having 
on valuable woody plants.

"Most of these herbicides don't differentiate between broad-leafed trees and 
broad-leafed weeds, like dandelions," he says. "We've actually seen trees 
killed with [herbicides]. I see a tortured ecosystem."

The scientific literature is full of links between lawn chemicals and bird 
poisonings. But wildlife ecologists say the passion for turf grass poses an 
even greater threat to wildlife populations: a loss of habitat. Otto, the 
Milwaukee resident, says even attempts to make conventional lawns more 
welcome to wildlife are inferior to just converting the yard completely over 
to natural plantings.

"If you're a bird, where are you going to nest? You're not going to fly into 
a lawn with one lone shrub trimmed into a ball like some sort of sculpture."

All that mowing ÷ sometimes twice a week ÷ also takes its toll. The 
California Air Resources Board estimated a few years ago that in terms of air 
pollution produced, operating a mower with a two-cycle engine for an hour was 
equivalent to driving an auto 350 miles. Tighter federal emissions 
restrictions have been imposed on two-cycle engines since that estimate was 
made, but mowers are still a major source of air pollution.
Pass on grass

Concerns about the environment, as well as cost and time involved with a 
perfect lawn, are starting to turn the tide slowly. Extension educators 
report an increasing number of inquiries from people looking for natural 
alternatives in yards that range in size from a few hundred square feet to 
several acres. Turf grass promoters have read the environmental tea leaves 
and are promoting such practices as selective spraying and the use of mowers 
that mulch, returning natural nutrients to the lawn. The lawn care industry 
now recognizes the dangers of over-watering, and homeowners are being advised 
to irrigate in a way that develops healthy root systems in grass.

There is also an increasing interest in planting yards to native plants. The 
landscape and nursery industries have responded to that demand in recent 
years. Otto says when she started her natural yard, she had to grub up native 
plants from road ditches. Now she has several prairie nurseries in Wisconsin 
alone to choose from.

And there is a greater acknowledgment on the part of municipalities that 
there's a difference between an abandoned lot and a natural lawn. It's a 
different world from 30 years ago, when Otto's young son dragged her out of 
the basement one day to the horrific sight of a freshly mowed one-acre 
prairie. Local officials did it in the name of "weed control." She soon took 
those same officials on a walking tour of the mowed prairie, challenging them 
to find any weeds that violated the ordinance. They didn't, and payed her a 
cash settlement.

In Madison, officials concerned about the pollution of lakes there have been 
encouraging the planting of natural lawns since the 1970s. They've developed 
an ordinance and permitting system that includes a booklet to help people get 
a natural lawn established and avoid conflicts with neighbors and officials.

But the perfect American lawn isn't going to dry up and blow away anytime 
soon. In 1994, consumers spent $25.9 billion on do-it-yourself lawn and 
garden activities, according to a national Gallup poll. They spent an 
additional $13.4 billion on professional lawn and landscape activities that 
same year, which was an increase of $900 million from the previous year. With 
so much at stake, it's no wonder the industry saturates the airwaves and 
magazine pages with images of the perfectly coiffured lawn.

But perhaps the biggest barrier remaining is the social taboo associated with 
allowing a wayward plant here and there that doesn't fit the Better Homes and 
Gardens model. Even the most understanding municipal government cannot stand 
up to neighbors concerned that a natural yard will do everything from serve 
as a breeding ground for rats, disease and garbage, to spawn wildfires and 
hay fever outbreaks.

"Property values didn't plunge, children didn't disappear and red foxes 
didn't turn into timber wolves," Maryland's Walter Stewart says of his now 
meadow-like yard (one vandal tried to prove public opinion right by tossing a 
lighted flare into the grass; it sputtered out in the green growth).

In fact, Lorrie Otto maintains that people who plan, create ÷ with an 
emphasis on planning, not just stepping off the mower one day and letting the 
weeds take over ÷ and maintain a more natural lawn should be considered a 
valuable part of the community, not a disgrace. They should be applauded as 
stewards of the environment who are providing beauty and diversity, she says. 
When it comes to yards, people have their priorities backwards. They should 
recognize that with their reliance on artificial inputs and imported grasses, 
it's the monocultural turf-based lawns that are the exotic invaders in our 
communities, says Otto.

"We've kind of homogenized the whole planet. Instead, we should reflect the 
native things that grow in our country. People come to my yard and say, 'Oh, 
this is what Wisconsin looks like. ' "