You may be correct in your assessment of your specific growing area due to
soil, grade, rainfall, and so forth. I've found this true as this varies
widely.

Your conclusions about mulch resulting from typical lawn grass cutting
lacking nutrients, I beg to differ. What municipalities do with cut grass,
leaves, and branches varies widely throughout the nation. There's less
liability in simply disposing it as there's more than just that in that
waste. A government employee isn't cheap either for tackling screening such
waste. So, that, is the usual method.
Dave

"Garden Guy" wrote in message
...
Eggs Zachtly wrote:

(lots of crap)

Listen shit-head.

I know my own turf, soil and weather conditions.

The best turf comes from bagging the clippings.

You're ****ing stupid if you think that crass clippings aren't
collected for use in municple compost because of the chemicals that
people *might* put on it (those chemicals have long since degraded and
broken down before the grass is cut and will further degrade when
composted).

The stubble left after food crops are harvested are turned back under
the soil. You can't do that for grass clipping left on the lawn (but
that's what really needs to be done if you are to recycle any
nutrients they have).

And, you disagree with that? Are you saying that grass
clippings have no nutritional value to turf?

What ever value they have, it does not outweigh the negative aspects
of leaving them on the grass, and can easily be replicated by a single
application per season of a liquid or granular fertilizer.

And what ever nutritional value crass clippings are purported to have,
it's apparently not enough to be attractive or desirable for municiple
composting operations, where grass clippings are avoided through the
application of a $1 a bag tipping fee, even though given their massive
stocks of other yard waste it would be easy to incorporate the grass
into that material stream where the grass would be evenly distributed
and anerobic decay would be prevented.