Food Not Lawns’: Organic Gardens vs. Chem-Fed Lawns (grass 3X biggest US crop, $57 Billion per Year)

[Shallah Kali]

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/03/28/137

About 400 people attended a recent conference titled “Cultivating Justice” under the aegis of “Food Not Lawns ( http://www.sdfoodnotlawns.com )“, a grassroots organization that combines gardening with political action. On a sunny Saturday, the guerrilla gardening wing of the social justice movement broke bread with foodies to network and share information with other like-minded people who are concerned not just with what people eat, but how they go about procuring food.

{snip}

This historical trend would have far-reaching repercussions for middle-class home owners in the 21St century who are willing to spend hundreds of dollars every year on the upkeep and maintenance of their lawns. According to a 2002 economic impact study published by the University of Florida, the lawn care and turf industry generated a staggering 57 billion dollars annually and employed 800,000-plus people.

Using satellite and aerial imagery, research scientists from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration have calculated that approximately 162,000 square kilometers of the United States is covered in turf — an area roughly three times larger than any irrigated crop currently under cultivation. And lawns are thirsty, consuming approximately 270 billion gallons of water a week in the U.S. — enough to irrigate 327,000 square kilometers of organic vegetables.

For Maschka, lawns represent a paradox, having the outward appearance of vitality when in fact most of the microorganisms that support plant growth have been killed off. Lawns are fed something on the order of 10 times more pesticides and herbicides than commercial crops, he adds.



http://www.sdfoodnotlawns.com/

[bananas]

1. "an area roughly three times larger than any irrigated crop"

Did I read that right?
Oh, I guess I did.

[Shallah Kali]

3. Since I learned how wasteful cultivated lawns are I groan when commercials come on TV

One that has played alot recently is a man saying he is the first in his family to have a perfect lawn and it's all 'thanks' to the chemicals he uses. (sigh) like this ranks up there with being the first in one's family to go to collage or own a home :rolleyes.

[hunter]

2. We ripped out our front lawn shortly after we got this house.

It freaked some of our neihbors out, but one of the reasons we chose this place is that there is no homeowners association. The city doesn't care. The back has grass for the kids to play on, but we're organic. The "lawn" is whatever survives the electric lawnmower and the dogs and the kids, well, except for the most obnoxios spikey things, which I pull out by hand.

[K8-EEE]

4. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THIS!!!

Well right ON!! I'm a So CA gardener with big yards NO grass whatsoever....I have a few small areas with a bit of ground cover (creeping thyme, ivy) but mostly I have a series of herb, veggie & flower beds, gosh, what does grass DO it just LIES there looking green, it's always bored me and the amount of time, money, chems people spend on it, I've never understood it!

[Shallah Kali]

8. in a way typical lawns are crazy. put chems to make it grow, grumble because you have to cut it down

put more chemicals on it to make it grow more, cut it back again. And these chemicals are not good for people especially children and pets. nor are they good for nearby bodies of water and the creatures that depend upon them. It is very good to read of groups like Food Not Lawns, Kitchen Gardner and Revive the Victory Garden are out there encouraging others to go against the flow.

[skids]

5. The heathen that moved in next door...

...is big into his lawn. He ripped up 2/3rds of a nice patch of Raspberry plants that was partially on his side. Feh.

[Eclipsenow]

6. Amazing

Those are, in a way, encouraging statistics. It shows that at least there is some land where some stuff can be grown... but it's just under the suburban backyard.

Now my thing is that if peak oil hits TOO quickly and agriculture does not have time to relocalize around New Urbanism and local city markets, then we could be in serious trouble... even here down in Australia. We have also followed your suburban pattern.

But if we simply rezone suburban homes into New Urbanism, and don't replace a suburban home when it "dies of old age" but instead sell it and move the family into a New Urban home somewhere else, bulldoze the house, and return it to local land... America and Australia could undo a lot of the Suburban mistake in about 50 years.

Check this out.

"A normal city is changing all the time - buildings grow old and are replaced. Just look at a picture of your city fifty or a hundred years ago. If the average building life is 60 years, then the city changes at the rate of 1.6% per year.

I took as the basis for this scenario the average size of an average Swedish municipality - 36,000 inhabitants. I assumed that instead of building the houses on that same plot as the one demolished you build eco units on the periphery of the city, along the roads preferably. Then you start to ruralise at the same pace as the normal replacement rate. After 50 years, only ten percent of the city is left."
Folke Günther

Also not that after 10 years, that's 16% of domestic suburban oil dependency permanently removed from the marketplace. A walk, pushbike or local tram should do the job in a well designed New Urban district. Beautiful places to live, quiet, friendly, the smell of your favourite coffee shop as you walk to work instead of getting stressed driving in peak hour.

And, getting back to the subject, then it's not just a tiny little pocket of backyard land, but a more efficient farmers block nearer a New Urban outpost. More on New Urbanism here.
http://eclipsenow.blogspot.com/2007/06/relocalize.html

[Shallah Kali]

10. 40% of food in the US during WWII came from Victory Gardens - lawns, rooftops, empty lots

The government taught clases on gardening and preserving. of course they won't do that now because they would have to admit something is wrong so groups like these are very important if more of the world is to avoid slipping back into subsistance living.

[formercia]

7. Been turning my lawn into a garden for the last few years.

For me it has been because it's the sunniest place on the property, but I also resent having to maintain a lawn which provides little return for the energy and resources expended.

[knitter4democracy]

9. We refuse to water or fertilize.

I'm putting in more veggies this year in the landscaped plantings around the house (done before we bought it), and I'll be ripping out the prickly bushes on the side of the house for blueberries and putting in raspberry canes down by the drainage pond where there used to be a flower bed ages ago that went to weeds.

I'm worried we'll need all the food we can get with the way food prices are going. We also belong to a local CSA farm-group (several family farms have joined in now), so that helps.