4 ms·

You're presenting a false dichotomy. Sure, you may value a lawn, but it comes at a price with little return. There's environmental issues with lawns. No, that d

You're presenting a false dichotomy. Sure, you may value a lawn, but it comes at a price with little return. There's environmental issues with lawns. No, that doesn't mean putting in concrete would be better. Here's some examples: http://www.sunset.com/garden/earth-friendly/lose-the-lawn-low-water-landscaping http://www.sunset.com/garden/earth-friendly/lose-the-lawn-lo... You can have a space filled with vegetables, fruits, shrubs etc.

cpwright 12y ago
There is a lot of work involved in vegetables and fruits, and to some degree shrubs. Most anything that you like, deer will also like. You also can't as easily run around and play various games in something that has shrubs all over it. All of the examples you are showing are, in my opinion, trying to create an outdoor sitting room; which is not what many families want (in my case, I have a deck for that). I don't water my grass, and it isn't as pretty as some people's yards; but it is perfectly fine for playing in; and looks decent enough. The whole "sprinkler systems are bad" argument doesn't hold much water in suburban NY.
oh_sigh 12y ago
> with little return Isn't that the entire point of my post? That different people value things differently? You may see it as "little return", but other people may not. There are environmental issues with lawns in some locations. I don't suggest having a lawn in the desert. There are a ton of areas throughout the US where having a lawn is just fine, and is environmentally neutral.