4 ms·

We live by a creek in Appalachia. The creek sits at the end of our back yard. The previous owners kept the grass mowed short all the way to the banks of the cr

We live by a creek in Appalachia. The creek sits at the end of our back yard. The previous owners kept the grass mowed short all the way to the banks of the creek. It looked nice. On the other hand, there was a tendency toward erosion, and I feel its part of my responsibility to do what I can to encourage healthy waterways. Besides, this area is a really important pathway for migrating animals (see: https://www.climatecentral.org/news/map-animal-migration-climate-change-20646 https://www.climatecentral.org/news/map-animal-migration-cli...), and one of the most bio-diverse areas in the country. I don't want to be part of the problem, and I hate mowing. So, this early Spring, I decided that, city be damned, I'd not mow within 40' of the creek. It rapidly turned into a thick meadow. But then I chickened out, because I knew city officials were coming to inspect the neighboring property. I mowed. In addition to the enormous number of insects, I nearly mauled a turtle, a garden snake, and a bird's nest. So, I said screw it, and put the lawn mower away. I've got plenty of lawn for the kids to play on, and for me to sweat my undies mowing. And the city officials never said anything.

wishinghand 7y ago
Why would the city care about you having wild flora within 40’ of a river?
- driverdan 7y ago
  Because cities love to tell people what they can and can't do, like how tall their grass can be.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
pseudolus 7y ago
I genuinely salute you and your actions. Collectively, we need to get over this post-WWII 1950s white picket fence obsession with lawn care. It's bad for the planet, bad for our pocketbooks and takes away time that we could use for other more interesting activities.
bin0 7y ago
Others have mentioned the climate impacts, but I'd like to salute you for a different reason: your property is yours; good for you not listening to some BS regulation. The authority of others stops where your property begins.
- jonnycomputer 7y ago
  Well, because externalities, I guess. I'm originally from California. In my neighborhood, every 4th of July, someone's overgrown grass catches fires by some errant bottle-rocket. That's no joke, especially in a drought. I know some homeowners hate dandelions with a passion. I don't, and I let them grow. But there's no way my dandelions aren't invading my neighbors' yards (fortunately they don't give a fig). And if they sprayed pesticides to get rid of those dandelions, no way those pesticides aren't blowin into my yard. So both of us would be unhappy. I had a family friend who inherited an old olive orchard in California. He let it go wild, and it became a little wild-life park. It was fantastic. But the neighbor farmers didn't like it, because they believed that it harbored pests that would eat up their crops, and weeds that would compete with their crops. So the farmers complained, and the county forced him to mow it all down. Of course, all of this is about which externalities matter, and when, and to whom they matter. In a fair society, that requires examining the public purpose, what priorities we set as a people. In an unfair society, it means who has the power to get their way.
  - bin0 7y ago
    I sympathize with your problem, and it feels that things would be easier were the courts not so screwed up. It was formerly the case (hundreds of years ago) that if your neighbor burnt your lawn, you could sue him. No lawyers needed. It's sad that's no longer an option. That's how negative externalities were addressed in the past. The advantage to this system was that it didn't require the incompetent, corrupt, moronic politicians to stick their grubby hands into every thing; problems could be addressed on a case-by-case basis rather than some pencil-pusher with no wit deciding he knows best for a large group.
jelliclesfarm 7y ago
you are a hero. thank you. i am slowly moving my farm operation to no-till or minimal till. ag is the worst thing we have done to our planet and soil biome. soil is living medium.
- jonnycomputer 7y ago
  I've a friend who owns a small farm in North Carolina. It used to be used for tobacco. He tells me the soil is biotically dead. Sure, with fertilizers and all that you can still raise a crop, but there is nothing living in the soil anymore. His goal, more than making a buck, since he has a day job, is to restore the soil.

wishinghand 7y ago

Why would the city care about you having wild flora within 40’ of a river?

driverdan 7y ago
Because cities love to tell people what they can and can't do, like how tall their grass can be.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

pseudolus 7y ago

I genuinely salute you and your actions. Collectively, we need to get over this post-WWII 1950s white picket fence obsession with lawn care. It's bad for the planet, bad for our pocketbooks and takes away time that we could use for other more interesting activities.

bin0 7y ago

Others have mentioned the climate impacts, but I'd like to salute you for a different reason: your property is yours; good for you not listening to some BS regulation. The authority of others stops where your property begins.

jonnycomputer 7y ago
Well, because externalities, I guess. I'm originally from California. In my neighborhood, every 4th of July, someone's overgrown grass catches fires by some errant bottle-rocket. That's no joke, especially in a drought. I know some homeowners hate dandelions with a passion. I don't, and I let them grow. But there's no way my dandelions aren't invading my neighbors' yards (fortunately they don't give a fig). And if they sprayed pesticides to get rid of those dandelions, no way those pesticides aren't blowin into my yard. So both of us would be unhappy. I had a family friend who inherited an old olive orchard in California. He let it go wild, and it became a little wild-life park. It was fantastic. But the neighbor farmers didn't like it, because they believed that it harbored pests that would eat up their crops, and weeds that would compete with their crops. So the farmers complained, and the county forced him to mow it all down. Of course, all of this is about which externalities matter, and when, and to whom they matter. In a fair society, that requires examining the public purpose, what priorities we set as a people. In an unfair society, it means who has the power to get their way.
- bin0 7y ago
  I sympathize with your problem, and it feels that things would be easier were the courts not so screwed up. It was formerly the case (hundreds of years ago) that if your neighbor burnt your lawn, you could sue him. No lawyers needed. It's sad that's no longer an option. That's how negative externalities were addressed in the past. The advantage to this system was that it didn't require the incompetent, corrupt, moronic politicians to stick their grubby hands into every thing; problems could be addressed on a case-by-case basis rather than some pencil-pusher with no wit deciding he knows best for a large group.

jelliclesfarm 7y ago

you are a hero. thank you. i am slowly moving my farm operation to no-till or minimal till. ag is the worst thing we have done to our planet and soil biome. soil is living medium.

jonnycomputer 7y ago
I've a friend who owns a small farm in North Carolina. It used to be used for tobacco. He tells me the soil is biotically dead. Sure, with fertilizers and all that you can still raise a crop, but there is nothing living in the soil anymore. His goal, more than making a buck, since he has a day job, is to restore the soil.