U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Green Living
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-24-2012, 04:39 PM
 
Location: Interior AK
4,729 posts, read 8,610,611 times
Reputation: 3358

Advertisements

The only place grass is sustainable is in native prairie and grasslands. Manicured turfed lawns are a waste of multiple valuable resources. The only cultivated grasses I can get onboard with is pasture for livestock and for fast erosion control; however I do think sod is preferable to acres of asphalt in yards and on roofs.

Grasses are one of the most common pioneer species in ecological succession after a disturbance. Ecologically, they are not meant to be maintained indefinitely and are not the dominate climax species except in grassland biomes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-24-2012, 05:17 PM
 
Location: SW Missouri
15,847 posts, read 30,258,723 times
Reputation: 22342
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoffdano View Post
No subsidies!

Make these changes because you want to and can afford them. The government should not intervene to distort the reasons people do things.
Since when do we pay for people to do what is right? If the people do something because they want to do it, then it will succeed. If you "PAY" someone to do what is right, they will not follow through once the initial incentive is gone. Then the city will have to figure out how to maintain the green spaces, which will end up costing even more money.

20yrsinBranson
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-24-2012, 05:47 PM
 
Location: ๏̯͡๏﴿ Gwinnett-That's a Civil Matter-County
2,117 posts, read 5,297,736 times
Reputation: 3517
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissingAll4Seasons View Post
The only place grass is sustainable is in native prairie and grasslands. Manicured turfed lawns are a waste of multiple valuable resources. The only cultivated grasses I can get onboard with is pasture for livestock and for fast erosion control; however I do think sod is preferable to acres of asphalt in yards and on roofs.

And even when it comes to roofs, such as for earth sheltered buildings, there are native alternatives. Sedums, herbs, etc.

Aside from the waste of resources that lawns demand, nearly ALL turfgrasses used in this country (US) are on invasive species lists for having escaped cultivation and displacing native vegetation.

One major example being Bermudagrass which is like a tattoo on the planet. It's immortal. Once it's there, it's there forever. There's no killing it. Although the sod types are (supposedly) sterile hybrids, the common types are out there spreading by wind, water and wildlife.

Tall fescue and Kentucky bluegrass... also invasive species.

Not just a problem with turfgrasses. Pasture grasses (like bahiagrass) and golfcourse grasses (like creeping bentgrass) can spread by seed and are extremely invasive and very hard to get rid of.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-24-2012, 06:28 PM
 
Location: Interior AK
4,729 posts, read 8,610,611 times
Reputation: 3358
Any time you try to force a natural system to behave unnaturally you have expend a lot of resources to maintain it and end up dealing with several unintended consequences. For example, SoCal is fire-modified savannah-chapparel... mega-resources are spent fighting the fires every year and irrigating crops/orchards/groves. The climate might be good for growing, but the ecology isn't, and that costs us plenty.

Ecologically, most of NY is forest-woodland biome, so the most "sustainable" green landscaping for the city, businesses and homeowners would be trees and shrubs because the land is always going to be trying to revert. From that aspect, I don't think it would entirely unreasonable for entities who insist on maintaining unproductive, non-compliant landscaping to be penalized... forget the carrot, use the stick.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2012, 08:56 AM
 
2,401 posts, read 3,944,297 times
Reputation: 2175
Vote for tax break too...
But NOoooooo more "handouts"!!!

Live by example, die by example.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-29-2012, 01:19 AM
 
Location: North Texas
23,968 posts, read 32,669,154 times
Reputation: 27468
I wouldn't object to a subsidy for people to xeriscape their yards here in drought-stricken Texas. Eventually I'd like to see fairly steep punishments for people dumb/selfish enough to use very thirsty plants in their landscaping...it's ridiculous.

Personally I think our next major global conflict is going to be over water.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Green Living
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:00 AM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. | Please obey Forum Rules | Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top