A lot of the anti-lawn talk speaks to me of places that are arid and low on reliable rainfall and fields of grass are ecologically stupid and require watering e

A lot of the anti-lawn talk speaks to me of places that are arid and low on reliable rainfall and fields of grass are ecologically stupid and require watering etc. But anywhere in the humid temperate eastern half of North America, plants are just gonna take over like crazy anywhere, grasses included, and if you don't mow or have a goat, or carefully "curate" what's growing you're gonna just get something... crazy with knee high crab grass, thistles, brambles, and volunteer shrubs of a million kind. Here (southern Ontario, on 6 acres), if I leave an area unmowed, it'll be covered in staghorn sumac and invasive mulberries within a year. I deliberately let the back half the property go that way, but I absolutely have to mow elsewhere. Urban areas aren't quite the same but the same principle applies: it is often a lot more work to maintain something that looks like a nice "native plant pollinator" garden, so some of the "you shouldn't have a lawn, it's too much work, just let the native plants grow" talk I hear just makes me go cross-eyed "huh?" I don't seed or sod or fertilize or level or aerate. I just run over the grass with a mower and it just takes care of itself. A lot of what people hold up as "natural" alternatives to lawns are in fact highly cultivated and maintained patches of aesthetics.