5 ms·
Sounds like the easiest solution to that is to do-away with non-native plants (i.e. Kentucky bluegrass, which could be considered an invasive species in North A
by FractalParadigm 5y ago
Sounds like the easiest solution to that is to do-away with non-native plants (i.e. Kentucky bluegrass, which could be considered an invasive species in North America) and do something more along the lines of what the OP did in this Reddit post*[0], a wildflower alternative of all-native plants (and although it's only a small section this year, OP claims their parents have expressed interest in expanding it). It requires basically zero maintenance, and is incredibly beneficial to the local environment.
[0]: https://redd.it/oph88p https://redd.it/oph88p
*It's pointed out a few times that only a few of the plants are local native species, many aren't North American at all.
- spiderice 5y ago"Solutions" like these make me laugh. How is renovating the yard of essentially every urban/suburban home in North America even a remotely easy solution? This actually sounds like basically the hardest solution because the only way to make it happen is by passing laws that absolutely nobody is willing to pass.
- b3morales 5y agoA lot of public policy work is figuring out how to achieve a certain goal without directly mandating a particular action. For example, what if water wasn't billed at a flat rate? Each building could have an allotment based on size and expected occupancy. One rate within that amount, and a higher rate for each unit over it. Calculate the level such that essential water usage is affordable and watering a large lawn becomes a luxury. I doubt that exact plan is workable without further elaboration; the law of unintended consequences is powerful. But the point is that "we should have more sustainable landscaping" doesn't necessarily equate directly to "ban all grass".