4 ms·

Where this piece loses me is when it starts advocating for a science based approach to setting standards for our lawns. I don't want to replace the suburban ho

Where this piece loses me is when it starts advocating for a science based approach to setting standards for our lawns. I don't want to replace the suburban housewife lawn police with a new eco-centric version. Can't we just couch the argument in live and let live individual property rights? That way you can have your tall grass, they can have their trimmed shrubs, and we set out values at an individual and personal level rather than as a community.

throwanem 10y ago
That would be wonderful, but it falters on the idea that your tall grass attracts mice and snakes and suchlike which will then cause some sort of problem with my trimmed shrubs. (I don't think that's how it actually works, but it's the sort of counter-claim you hear advanced. Don't ask me to defend it; I can play devil's advocate pretty well, but to do so I need to be able to see the devil's point of view, and in this case I can't - where I live, the claim's often made about rats, but my observation has been that Baltimore rats don't give a good goddamn whether a yard is mowed or not.)
zdragnar 10y ago
If your lawn is unkempt, it may become a breeding ground for vermin and make weed and invasive species control all the more difficult. If I want to sell my house, the value is somewhat diminished by your presence. Ergo, peer pressure and government ordinance arise to settle the dispute. Otoh, if you want to live somewhere without those things, get a home in the country where you can get more acres for your buck. Normally, I would agree that individuals should be able to do as they please with their property; I'm typically a libertarian fellow. In this case, though, it's fairly obvious that "proper maintenance" is established to prevent harm to others, and that harm can be objectively measured. With all of that said, I definitely wouldn't live anywhere with a housing association; there are limits to the above argument that I find they frequently cross.
- DanBC 10y ago
  > get a home in the country where you can get more acres for your buck. > In this case S/he is living in the country.
  - zdragnar 10y ago
    I got that bit, though it's far less common to have problems out there like this. Being in the country isn't enough, of course, but it's a first step for the people most commonly afflicted with onerous (or seemingly onerous) regulations.
drivingmenuts 10y ago
> Can't we just couch the argument in live and let live individual property rights? Sure, but that's the easy road to never settling the burnt feelings and the idea that your neighbor is "getting away with lawn murder". Basing the standard in eco-science may mean a standard that everyone hates, but it's firmer ground that can be argued rationally.

throwanem 10y ago

That would be wonderful, but it falters on the idea that your tall grass attracts mice and snakes and suchlike which will then cause some sort of problem with my trimmed shrubs. (I don't think that's how it actually works, but it's the sort of counter-claim you hear advanced. Don't ask me to defend it; I can play devil's advocate pretty well, but to do so I need to be able to see the devil's point of view, and in this case I can't - where I live, the claim's often made about rats, but my observation has been that Baltimore rats don't give a good goddamn whether a yard is mowed or not.)

zdragnar 10y ago

If your lawn is unkempt, it may become a breeding ground for vermin and make weed and invasive species control all the more difficult. If I want to sell my house, the value is somewhat diminished by your presence. Ergo, peer pressure and government ordinance arise to settle the dispute. Otoh, if you want to live somewhere without those things, get a home in the country where you can get more acres for your buck. Normally, I would agree that individuals should be able to do as they please with their property; I'm typically a libertarian fellow. In this case, though, it's fairly obvious that "proper maintenance" is established to prevent harm to others, and that harm can be objectively measured. With all of that said, I definitely wouldn't live anywhere with a housing association; there are limits to the above argument that I find they frequently cross.

DanBC 10y ago
> get a home in the country where you can get more acres for your buck. > In this case S/he is living in the country.
- zdragnar 10y ago
  I got that bit, though it's far less common to have problems out there like this. Being in the country isn't enough, of course, but it's a first step for the people most commonly afflicted with onerous (or seemingly onerous) regulations.

drivingmenuts 10y ago

> Can't we just couch the argument in live and let live individual property rights? Sure, but that's the easy road to never settling the burnt feelings and the idea that your neighbor is "getting away with lawn murder". Basing the standard in eco-science may mean a standard that everyone hates, but it's firmer ground that can be argued rationally.