Especially ironic when suburbanites rave about how houses are infinitely better than apartments because they’re “closer to nature.” You want to be closer to nature? Let natural processes work and have a lawn of whatever grows in your area naturally (even an “invasive” species is better than lawn grasses, unironically, and lawn grasses are almost always also non-native species, just ones that can’t actually survive in the environment.) Don’t water, don’t mow, don’t fertilize, just let nature do its thing. It will also attract more pollinators, birds, wildlife in general and instead of a lawn, soon you’ll have a natural meadow in your yard. That’s nature, a lawn that needs excessive water, chemical fertilizers, and poison just to maintain isn’t.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    291 year ago

    Not mowing in some places means letting it turn into an overgrown, unusable mess. I’m all for more natural and beneficial lawns, but just letting tall grasses and things grow until it’s hard to walk in and looks abandoned isn’t an option in a lot of cases. There might need to be to be a bit more artificial selection involved.

    • Semi-Hemi-Demigod
      link
      fedilink
      51 year ago

      I don’t weed or fertilize, and mow at the longest setting and only when there’s at least a couple inches to cut off. There’s at least a dozen different species of plants in my yard, depending on how much shade and water that spot gets: Clover, violets, dandelions, and several different kinds of grass and flowering plants.

      It stays nice and green all year long, and I get compliments on it from my neighbors who have TruGreen showing up every month. You don’t have to leave it overgrown to have something much healthier than a monoculture lawn.

    • @Eheran
      link
      English
      11 year ago

      There is no need to do this with 100 % of the area.