Lawn care tip of the week.

[LwnmwnMan2]

The more chemicals you use the more it pollutes OUR lakes, rivers and streames. One more ground water.

If done improperly, yes.

If done properly, at the correct times, with correct application procedures, the risk is minimal at best.

It's no different than the same water that's in those lakes, rivers and streams can be a killer as well.

I'm not trying to be arrogant by any means. I'm here to help people realize how to do these things the right way, not the "well, if 3 oz works, then 3 gallons should work better" attitude.

There are things like Creeping Charlie and Dandelions are only going to be controlled with chemicals, unless you want to get on your hands and knees, daily.

Higher mowing practices help tremendously. You'll see people that will mow their yard at 1", because "it's just weeds anyways". That actually increases your weed exposure.

You can go the route of Quetico's "no-mow fescue" but truth be told, IMO, 80% of people on here aren't going to go that route. Do a search and see what those lawns look like.

Anyways, like I said. I'm not here to promote an agenda. I'm here to help people that are already established with a certain landscape to maintain it properly, in as efficient of a manner so they can enjoy the outdoors, since most likely, that's what's drawn us all to this site to begin with.

[Charley]

What do you mean (the same water that's in those lakes)? I agree with some of the things about times,amonts and to short. But the amout of nutrients in the lakes today has never been as high as it is now. You make your living in this industry. You might be a little one sided do you think.

[LwnmwnMan2]

Correct, I do make a living in the green industry.

However, I do not PROMOTE the use of chemicals, but if people are going to use them, I would like to help them out to minimize the use of them.

I'm not like a large national chain that will be advertising very soon on the radio and tv, whether we have snow on the ground or not.

I do minimal applications on the properties that I service, using the lowest rates, yet making sure I'm effective the first time.

I and others on this board are licensed by the state, and have to take classes to keep those licenses.

What I meant by "the water in those lakes" is that water, at abnormal levels and misuse can kill, just like chemicals and fertilizers at abnormal levels and misuse can pollute.

There are constantly changing properties to the chemicals that are being used to treat the properties today. Notice how there is a ban on Phosphorus in fertilizers (except for some specialty fertilizers such as starter fertilizers and plant fertilizers)?

I'd rather educate the public on proper use, than see pollution as well.

[Quetico]

I spent 2 years in the wonderful world of public education related to green landscaping. I do miss it.

[Charley]

Golf coruses I belive can still use it. To much nitrogen is also not good for the lakes. As far as the license will that is just a form of a tax. You can do what ever you want out on a job. I'm not saying you will or do. Some will.

[croixflats]

In order to become a licensed applicator it takes much more than a few classes and some fees to have one issued.

I do see what you are saying. I'm not a big fan of these companies that go out and sell contracts to fertilize areas that don't need it just to generate income.

But before licensing was required you had companies just throwing this down without regards to what is was doing to the environment.

[LwnmwnMan2]

Golf coruses I belive can still use it. To much nitrogen is also not good for the lakes. As far as the license will that is just a form of a tax. You can do what ever you want out on a job. I'm not saying you will or do. Some will.

If you'd like, you can go to the Minnesota Department of Agriculture's HSOforum and look at the fines that companies are handed.

The majority are farming related, either crop or turf, whether it's application or manufacture.

I personally use a 10-0-20 with 10% iron for a fertilizer. There are specific applications which require a different formulation, but even my pre-emergent fertilizer is a 13-0-5. If you go to Home Depot / Wal-Mart and buy a national brand that starts with "S", you're looking at a something along 32-0-10.

Again, a product that will give you a green color, top growth, but really isn't doing a whole lot for your root structure of the turf.

As my company also mows the lawns that we fertilize, I don't want abundant top growth. The low Nitrogen is enough to keep the grass growing, with the 10% iron helping keeping a dark green color (normal irrigation is needed as well).

I'm not going to use a 40-0-0 urea, which some of the companies will use, as this promotes a large top growth, so the home owner thinks "wow, I really got my money's worth, I had to mow 3 times this week".

The 20 on my fertilizer (potassium / potash) will promote root growth, which will help your grass become thicker, which will in turn naturally keep weed seeds from getting to the soil, which will naturally keep weeds from forming in your yard.

[goblueM]

I say plant native prairie forbs/grasses... less maintenance, looks cool, and its better for the environment

[Quetico]

Native prairie needs no irrigation and fertilizers. You conserve water while avoiding the chemical pollution to our lakes, rivers and ground water supplies.

I know too many licensed chemical applicators that don't have a clue what they are doing. Also almost all of them mow the lawns they chemically treat. So if they put on more fertilizer, they have to mow more. Thus generating more money for them.

I'm not saying all lawn services are shady like that but some are. Some mow when the lawn clearly does not need it. They do this to make money rather than being honest about their work. If they don't mow they don't get paid in most cases.

[Charley]

Quetico-- I don't know about native prairie grasses,but the rest of what you say is so ture.

[fish with teeth]

Native prairie needs no irrigation and fertilizers. You conserve water while avoiding the chemical pollution to our lakes, rivers and ground water supplies.

I know too many licensed chemical applicators that don't have a clue what they are doing. Also almost all of them mow the lawns they chemically treat. So if they put on more fertilizer, they have to mow more. Thus generating more money for them.

I'm not saying all lawn services are shady like that but some are. Some mow when the lawn clearly does not need it. They do this to make money rather than being honest about their work. If they don't mow they don't get paid in most cases.

not saying this is true for all companies, but i used to work in the lawn industry for 4 years and we had contracts to mow 1 time a week no matter how much or little it grew. so if we had alot of "top growth" it only made more work because we would have to double or triple cut for the same price. we did commerical properties so it may be different for residential. in regards to "mowing when the lawn clearly does not need it" running the mowers over the lawn (although not actually cutting the grass) will leave the nice looking stripes in the lawn. which is part of the contract and keeps the customer happy. just my 2 cents from the industry.

[Quetico]

Mowing when not needed causes unnecessary damage. People need to realize mowing injuries the plant. Mowing is hard on your lawn. If the lawn is dried and you need a mower over it, it wounds stressed plants. Also those large mower cause compaction. The less mowing the better for the lawn.

[fish with teeth]

agreed mowing does cause damage to the plant, it cuts it in half. keeping the blades sharp will help reduce the damage because it will actually cut the grass instead of ripping it in half which is way worse. all of our properties had sprinkler systems so for the most part it wasn't dried up. i was refuring to areas of slow growth. but you cant just stop the stripe or go a random direction to go around the area that doesnt need to be cut. that is a good way to not get your contract renewed. the large mowers do compact but that is why they have fat rear tires to try to spread it out as best they can. but you also can't expect lawn companies to mow (townhouse complexes for instance, which is what i mowed) with a push mower. no mowing may be better but in some cities if you dont mow your grass the city will do it for you and then send you a bill. same as shoveling your sidewalks. again i do agree that mowing is not good for the grass but there is no way around it.

[LwnmwnMan2]

I disagree with the fish. I too have all contracts, I get paid the same whether I double or triple cut in the spring, or whether I skip a week or two in the summer.

I DON'T mow if the grass is between 3 and 4.5" tall and it's not going to get any irrigation (rain or installed system) within a reasonable time.

I'm on a property as the professional, and my customers hire my company to do what's best for their property.

Damaging the turf is not what's best for the property.

On the smaller properties, I use walk-behind or stand on mowers.

The larger ones we use a 60", a 72" or we have a 60 hp Kubota with a 15' tri-deck mower to mow the school and city properties we maintain.

As for people arguing that large mowers compact, sod farms use about the largest mower you can use, and most people would agree that sod, when new and when taken care of, looks about as good as grass can get (besides Quetico and goblueM with their natives and fescues).

It's more about properly maintaining a property than just getting on a mower and going. Ask any one of the guys that have worked for me over the years.

[LwnmwnMan2]

Native prairie needs no irrigation and fertilizers. You conserve water while avoiding the chemical pollution to our lakes, rivers and ground water supplies.

I know too many licensed chemical applicators that don't have a clue what they are doing. Also almost all of them mow the lawns they chemically treat. So if they put on more fertilizer, they have to mow more. Thus generating more money for them.

I'm not saying all lawn services are shady like that but some are. Some mow when the lawn clearly does not need it. They do this to make money rather than being honest about their work. If they don't mow they don't get paid in most cases.

That bold faced line is the reason why I'll never get rich at what I do. I'll tell my customers how to save money with their property, rather than do something that will cost them more down the road.

Quetico -

I agree with you on some accounts, no mow fescues and native plants are a good alternative. The biggest problem I have with it is it's going to be very hard to get commercial properties and alot of residentials to go that route.

There are some out in my area which are starting to mow less areas, letting grasses grow and native plants take over. The biggest issue is getting the customers of these properties and neighbors of homeowners to not think these properties have gone out of business or into foreclosure now.

[Quetico]

Actually check out East Riverside Park in Minneapolis. I know the landscape Architect that designed this park. (And no I'm not the LA that designed it.) He used no-mow fescues and its been a huge success.

People need to realize the deal with no mow is that it's maximum height of growth is 4". It grows to 4" then stops growing to focus on root growth and staying green in times of limited water resources. Thus no mowing in the summer heat and no need for irrigation.

I've actually found larger properties are eager to listen to you when your talking about no-mow fescues. Some are eager to make the switch. Simply because the conversion costs are paid for within 5 years and there's a huge savings over 10 years. Everyone wants to reduce their long term overhead, well here's how. You still get the beautiful green lawn without all the expenses.

Maintenance contracts and irrigation systems are both expensive. There's a lot of people who make their living on these two items. If we reduce the maintenance and eliminate the need for irrigation, people will save tons of money and help the environment. Yet at the same time there will be a loss of jobs.

[Charley]

Quetico--- You should be on T.V. or something. You need to talk to lake associations. People attitudes need changing. Education is the way to go.

[goblueM]

lake associations are a great way to start. I know we've worked on many properties where people are losing ground into the lake - they dump sand, dirt, use hard-stabilization, etc. Next door the neighbors will have planted natives, which look beautiful, can still offer a view of the lake, and prevent erosion. Often times they'll have 2 or 3 feet more of land sticking out into the lake because neighbors on either side have so much erosion

[Tom7227]

So how would I change to a no mow fescue? Current is the standard blue grass and whatever mix. Do I start over, seed the no mow stuff in, or what? Where do you get the stuff? Details on how to change will help with real change a lot more than the bickering that's taking place on this thread so far.

[Shack]

Native prairie needs no irrigation and fertilizers. You conserve water while avoiding the chemical pollution to our lakes, rivers and ground water supplies.

I am sure the city would love it when everyone on the block switch's , or the lake associations have knee high to waist high lawns all over their part of the lake. I agree about the fertilizers, but with no water, it will never past muster for most that have to live or drive by the home. Believe me; I have about 1.5 acre area of Native prairie grass. I do not mind the look (because it is not in my front yard), but I get all kinds of grief from my neighbors about it. From it looks not kept up, down to it is a major infester of other weeds into other neighborhood lawns and straight out called lazy (by my wife ) because one of the pitch I sold her on was not having to mow it...

Plus, native prairie grasses are not all that cheap. Throw in some native wild flowers and enough seed to make 1.5 acres look very nice, you are up to over $300.00 for a small area.

We will see. I did everything right last year again and this year it should look like a beautiful prairie. Again, we will see . Do not forget the 2-3 years to set up for reestablishment of the flowers and reapplication of seed. It is just like starting out a lawn, but cost's more and takes longer.

[Shack]

LwnmwnMan2- I just got to take the first shot for the season:

Everyone resolve your lawn maintenance issues by switching to no-mow fescue and restored prairie. Cut your maintenance costs by 75% over night. The cost savings in maintenance will pay for the cost of the conversions within 5 years and I'll even put a guarantee on it.

Ok now, a couple questions

Let's say I was to do the switch, I would guess this would entail killing off my entire current K blue grass lawn with chemicals? The old grass would become pretty much a weed of sorts, which I would not want in the lawn. If you do not kill all of the former grasses, they will still grow, defeating the purpose of switching to no-mow fescue. Ok, once your lawn has had a couple chemical treatments to kill off all other grasses, you can rip out your irrigation system and lay down the no-mow fescue seed.

I get the idea behind it growing only to 4"'s and stopping, but what keeps it green? Or is it brown? If you do not water it, do not fertilize it, how does this grass stay looking good? How do you even get it to start growing?

It sounds "too" good to be true, kind of like a snake oil type thing. Next thing you know, you are having an irrigation system reinstalled and watering it all the time like regular lawn grasses and putting down the fertilizer to keeps it looking dark green????

[LwnmwnMan2]

So how would I change to a no mow fescue? Current is the standard blue grass and whatever mix. Do I start over, seed the no mow stuff in, or what? Where do you get the stuff? Details on how to change will help with real change a lot more than the bickering that's taking place on this thread so far.

Tom is right. This thread has gotten away from what it started as, a weekly tips thread.

It'll be locked where it stands.

Quetico and goblueM are more than welcome to start threads on their subjects, I'll certainly be willing to help anyone with more 'traditional' lawn questions.