wrote:

Because in most rural places with folks with lots of
trees and experience, bagging doesn't exist.

And it doesn't apply.

I'm talking about urban properties - not rural.

Here anyone who wants to have their leaves taken away, simply
blows or rakes them into the street. The township comes by
every couple of weeks from Nov thru Dec and vacuums them up.

But even in that case, the leaves are removed. Doesn't matter if it's
by blowing and then vacuuming or by raking and bagging.

If you did a little research, you'd find that there is widespread
agreement that mulching the clippings and leaving them is
beneficial to the lawn. The clippings decay and provide nutrients.

The nutient value of grass is so poor that nobody uses grass to make
compost.

You want a healthy lawn, you use fertilizer. The cut grass from last
season will not nourish your lawn anywhere near what a bag of fertilizer
will do. You want to promote thatch and give a home to bugs, then leave
your clippings on the lawn.

Beneficial to the companies harvesting trees to make those bags,

I highly doubt that paper leaf bags are made from anything other than
recycled paper and cardboard. Not freshly-cut trees. Maybe tree bark.

... I'd say there isn't anything natural or good for the environment
in the whole process.

I don't use paper bags for leaves because you can't pack them without
tearing them. That's why I use plastic garbage bags.

Hmmm, what about on all the streets and roads in a municipality
where there are just trees and no homes? Like in the country?

You don't have curbs and gutters and storm sewers on country roads. You
have paved or soft-shoulders where leaves don't accumulate on the
roads. So it's a non-issue in the country.

In conclusion, I'd like to see some credible reference that agrees
with your premise that mulching lawn grass clippings or mulching a
reasonable amount of leaves in-situ with a mower, is incompatible
with a healthy lawn.

If you already have a thatch buildup (1/2 inch or more) you do NOT want
to leave your cut grass on the lawn. If your grass has certain diseases
(snow mold, powdery mildew, etc) you DO NOT want to leave your cut grass
on the lawn.

If you want a THICK lawn that you don't need to cut every 5 days, then
bag your grass. The alternative being promoted to weed killer is to
regularly overseed your lawn, resulting in a thicker lawn. Again,
leaving the cut grass on the lawn only works if your lawn is relatively
sparse (vs thick) and requires more frequent cutting. The theoretical
BEST that grass cuttings can do when left on the lawn is to provide only
25% of the nutrients required. Water content claims of cut grass
varries wildly from 75% to 90%.

Bagging your grass has been villified in recent years because
municipalities want to desperately keep cut grass out of landfills
because many landfills are reaching capacity. That's why you hear so
much about the benefits of not bagging your grass. They're all
imaginary benefits. Terms like "Grasscycling" are being invented as
part of this propaganda.

If you want a good lawn, you bag your grass, and you deal with the
clippings by doing something other than putting them in your local
municiple landfill.

Many municipalities have yard waste drop-off depots where home owners
can bring various tree and brush cuttings for disposal for no charge.
The depots will grind them up and turn them into a compost or mulch, and
sell it back to the public. What you will find is that they won't
accept cut grass or use cut grass in the mulch, or will charge $1 a bag
and make you dump the grass into it's own dumpster. But why? Why not
take the grass for free? Why keep the grass segregated into it's own
pile? If cut grass is so beneficial and high in nutrients, why
discourage citizens from bringing it to the depots? Why doesn't this
grass get incorporated into the mulch along with tree branches and other
yard waste materials?

Why? Because cut grass is shit and has little to no nutrient value and
is high in carbon. If it's not good enough for municiple compost piles
it's not good enough for your lawn.

Quite the contrary, I've seen plenty of authorities
that say returning either grass clippings or other
organic matter in reasonable amounts is beneficial
to the lawn.

It's all propaganda.

They simply don't want to see the grass occupy valuble space in rapidly
shrinking municiple landfills.

Also, if you have something that supports your claim that
leaf removal is necessary to protect the health of trees
in the yard, I'd like to see that too.

-----------------
http://imfc.cfl.scf.rncan.gc.ca/mala...ng.asp?geID=29

Maple leaf spot

The fungus creates small brown spots on the leaves and, in severe
infections, when most of the foliage is affected, the leaves may be shed
prematurely. Growing leaves are infected in the spring and initially
develop yellowish-green spots. The leaves eventually die and turn a
brownish colour. Black fruiting bodies of the fungus develop in the
infected spots around the end of autumn. The spores produced by these
fruiting bodies over winter in the leaf litter and cause new infections
the following spring.

As with many foliar fungal diseases, cool, wet spring weather greatly
favours the spread of the disease. To protect ornamental trees, the
leaves of affected trees should be carefully collected and destroyed by
burning or composting.
-------------------

That is just one example of a tree disease that is promoted and
propagated year-after-year by not raking, bagging or otherwise removing
leaf litter in the fall.

See also

http://georgegosselin.com/nstsl/program_description.htm

------------------
.... plant disease pathogens form three groups: fungi, bacteria, and
viruses. Of the three the majority are fungi. These pathogens exist
virtually everywhere, but those causing plant diseases are found
primarily in the soil and plant debris such as mulch and leaf litter.
You can help to reduce diseases in you landscape by simply removing old
mulch. leaf litter, etc at the end of the season (mid November -
December) and leaving the soil naked over the winter months.
------------------

"Lawn Guy" wrote in message ...

If you did a little research, you'd find that there is widespread
agreement that mulching the clippings and leaving them is
beneficial to the lawn. The clippings decay and provide nutrients.

The nutient value of grass is so poor that nobody uses grass to make
compost.


Is that a fact? Maybe you'd like to educate my compost bin. It thinks otherwise.

"Lawn Guy" wrote in message ...
wrote:

Because in most rural places with folks with lots of
trees and experience, bagging doesn't exist.

And it doesn't apply.

I'm talking about urban properties - not rural.

Here anyone who wants to have their leaves taken away, simply
blows or rakes them into the street. The township comes by
every couple of weeks from Nov thru Dec and vacuums them up.

But even in that case, the leaves are removed. Doesn't matter if it's
by blowing and then vacuuming or by raking and bagging.

If you did a little research, you'd find that there is widespread
agreement that mulching the clippings and leaving them is
beneficial to the lawn. The clippings decay and provide nutrients.

The nutient value of grass is so poor that nobody uses grass to make
compost.

You want a healthy lawn, you use fertilizer. The cut grass from last
season will not nourish your lawn anywhere near what a bag of fertilizer
will do. You want to promote thatch and give a home to bugs, then leave
your clippings on the lawn.

Beneficial to the companies harvesting trees to make those bags,

I highly doubt that paper leaf bags are made from anything other than
recycled paper and cardboard. Not freshly-cut trees. Maybe tree bark.

... I'd say there isn't anything natural or good for the environment
in the whole process.

I don't use paper bags for leaves because you can't pack them without
tearing them. That's why I use plastic garbage bags.

Hmmm, what about on all the streets and roads in a municipality
where there are just trees and no homes? Like in the country?

You don't have curbs and gutters and storm sewers on country roads. You
have paved or soft-shoulders where leaves don't accumulate on the
roads. So it's a non-issue in the country.

In conclusion, I'd like to see some credible reference that agrees
with your premise that mulching lawn grass clippings or mulching a
reasonable amount of leaves in-situ with a mower, is incompatible
with a healthy lawn.

If you already have a thatch buildup (1/2 inch or more) you do NOT want
to leave your cut grass on the lawn. If your grass has certain diseases
(snow mold, powdery mildew, etc) you DO NOT want to leave your cut grass
on the lawn.

If you want a THICK lawn that you don't need to cut every 5 days, then
bag your grass. The alternative being promoted to weed killer is to
regularly overseed your lawn, resulting in a thicker lawn. Again,
leaving the cut grass on the lawn only works if your lawn is relatively
sparse (vs thick) and requires more frequent cutting. The theoretical
BEST that grass cuttings can do when left on the lawn is to provide only
25% of the nutrients required. Water content claims of cut grass
varries wildly from 75% to 90%.

Bagging your grass has been villified in recent years because
municipalities want to desperately keep cut grass out of landfills
because many landfills are reaching capacity. That's why you hear so
much about the benefits of not bagging your grass. They're all
imaginary benefits. Terms like "Grasscycling" are being invented as
part of this propaganda.

If you want a good lawn, you bag your grass, and you deal with the
clippings by doing something other than putting them in your local
municiple landfill.

Many municipalities have yard waste drop-off depots where home owners
can bring various tree and brush cuttings for disposal for no charge.
The depots will grind them up and turn them into a compost or mulch, and
sell it back to the public. What you will find is that they won't
accept cut grass or use cut grass in the mulch, or will charge $1 a bag
and make you dump the grass into it's own dumpster. But why? Why not
take the grass for free? Why keep the grass segregated into it's own
pile? If cut grass is so beneficial and high in nutrients, why
discourage citizens from bringing it to the depots? Why doesn't this
grass get incorporated into the mulch along with tree branches and other
yard waste materials?

Why? Because cut grass is shit and has little to no nutrient value and
is high in carbon. If it's not good enough for municiple compost piles
it's not good enough for your lawn.

Quite the contrary, I've seen plenty of authorities
that say returning either grass clippings or other
organic matter in reasonable amounts is beneficial
to the lawn.

It's all propaganda.

They simply don't want to see the grass occupy valuble space in rapidly
shrinking municiple landfills.

Also, if you have something that supports your claim that
leaf removal is necessary to protect the health of trees
in the yard, I'd like to see that too.

This is one of the worst lawn advise postings I think I've ever seen.

Bob F wrote:

This is one of the worst lawn advise postings I think I've ever seen.

Then why did you full-quote most of it?

And why did you not quote the last part pertaining to tree diseases
propagating from leaf litter? Are you also claiming that that was
innacurate, false or fabricated information?

It's a fact that municipal gov'ts do not want to see cut grass taking up
valuble space in landfills so they invent new propaganda that leaving
clippings on the lawn is better for your lawn.

It's a fact that you will need to mow more frequently if you don't bag
your grass.

It's a fact that you will need to pay more attention to thatch and that
grass cuttings will promote thatch buildup if you don't bag your grass.

It's a fact that grass clippings WILL NOT provide most of the nutrients
required by a healthy lawn, and at best will provide only 25% of the
required nutrients and that commercial fertilizer applications will be
necessary anyways.

It's a fact that the thicker the lawn, the more problematic it is to
leave the grass clippings on the lawn. This becomes important as people
resort to over-seeding as a method of weed control vs using herbicides.

Lawn Guy said:

Bob F wrote:

This is one of the worst lawn advise postings I think I've ever seen.

Then why did you full-quote most of it?

And why did you not quote the last part pertaining to tree diseases
propagating from leaf litter? Are you also claiming that that was
innacurate, false or fabricated information?

No, dumbass. They obviously claimed that what they quoted was the worst
lawn advice they'd ever seen. They were correct. Please try and keep up.


It's a fact that municipal gov'ts do not want to see cut grass taking up
valuble space in landfills so they invent new propaganda that leaving
clippings on the lawn is better for your lawn.

Source? Other than your own feeble mind, of course.


It's a fact that you will need to mow more frequently if you don't bag
your grass.

No. It's a fact that you need to mow your lawn as often as needed, whether
you bag or not. Are you saying that if you bag it, you can just let it grow
longer, and cut more off of it?


It's a fact that you will need to pay more attention to thatch and that
grass cuttings will promote thatch buildup if you don't bag your grass.

Bullshit. Or, are you the only one that's right, and the major universities
that specialize in turf care management are wrong? I provided one source
(University of Missouri) to back up my statement, in another thread. I'll
happily provide more. I'm still waiting for you to back up yours. Oh,
that's right. You can't.

You obviously don't know shit about thatch, as your repeated statements
about it prove. I even provided the definition for you. Did you have
trouble comprehending it?

At the country club I work at, the *only* grass that gets "bagged" is the
bent grass greens, because of their cut height. They're mowed daily and the
clippings are practically powder. It would tend to cling to a rolling ball.
I don't think the membership would appreciate that. The Zoysia fairways and
Tall Fescue rough *never* get bagged, their clippings are dispersed. In the
six years I've been at this club, I've *never* seen a power rake have to go
out. Not one time. I can guarantee that your lawn doesn't look near as good
as any area of our course.


It's a fact that grass clippings WILL NOT provide most of the nutrients
required by a healthy lawn, and at best will provide only 25% of the
required nutrients and that commercial fertilizer applications will be
necessary anyways.

Noone said that it will "provide most of the nutrients required by a
healthy lawn". Show us where someone said that. Again, you can't.


It's a fact that the thicker the lawn, the more problematic it is to
leave the grass clippings on the lawn. This becomes important as people
resort to over-seeding as a method of weed control vs using herbicides.

Where's your /reliable/ source(s) for all of your 'facts'? Oh, that's
right. It's/they're in your head.

You're related to Stubby, aren't you.

Keep dancing, dumbass. You continuously show you don't know shit about lawn
care.
--

Eggs

-"God is dead." - Nietzsche
-"Nietzsche is dead" - God

Eggs Zachtly ) wrote:

X-NoArchive: YES

What kind of chicken-shit coward are you?

Why are you afraid of google archiving your posts?

No, dumbass. They obviously claimed that what they quoted was the
worst lawn advice they'd ever seen. They were correct. Please try
and keep up.

Why don't you let Bob F respond, instead of putting words in his mouth.

It's a fact that municipal gov'ts do not want to see cut grass
taking up valuble space in landfills so they invent new propaganda
that leaving clippings on the lawn is better for your lawn.

Source? Other than your own feeble mind, of course.

Practically all internet searches on the topic of grass cutting will
return content claiming that by not bagging your grass, that you're
reducing the amount of material going to landfill.

It's a fact that you will need to mow more frequently if you don't
bag your grass.

No. It's a fact that you need to mow your lawn as often as needed,

Yes it is. You must not cut more than 1/3 of the grass blade if you
want the cut blade to decay at ground level. Any longer and it will
decay at or near the lawn surface, and most of it's nutrients will be
consumed by bacteria or other organisms (or will blow away in the wind
or storm water runoff) and not returned to the soil.

In most cases, not cutting more than 1/3 of the blade means cutting your
grass more frequently at peak growing times - usually every 5 days. And
in fact, even proponents of leaving the clippings on the lawn recommend
raking / bagging during peak growing periods.

Are you saying that if you bag it, you can just let it grow
longer, and cut more off of it?

Yes, I do let my grass grow longer, and I usually do cut more than 1/3
of the blade during peak growing periods. I usually cut my grass every
7 to 10 days - never more frequently. And the grass looks great.

Bullshit. Or, are you the only one that's right, and the major
universities that specialize in turf care management are wrong?

It's politically incorrect to be a proponent of bagging your grass and
nobody will fund a research project that proves the benefits of bagging
your grass.

-----------------
"Grass clippings from mowing do not contribute to thatch. However, once
a thatch layer has developed, clippings may speed its formation."

http://extension.missouri.edu/explor...ort/G06708.htm
-----------------
"Despite popular belief, short clippings dropped on the lawn after
mowing are not the cause of thatch buildup. Clippings are very high in
water content and breakdown rapidly when returned to lawns after mowing,
assuming lawns are mowed on a regular basis (not removing more than
one-third of the leaf blade)."

http://www.urbanext.uiuc.edu/lawnchallenge/lesson5.html

So "short clippings" are not the cause of thatch buildup. Ok, what
about "long clippings" then?
-----------------

Any detailed source of information on thatch will always say that
"SHORT" clippings don't contribute to thatch, or that "FREQUENT" grass
cutting is required to prevent thatch buildup.

-------------------
"Approximately one quarter of a lawn’s fertilizer need can be met by
recycling grass clippings."

http://hoke.ces.ncsu.edu/index.php?page=news&ci=LAWN+6

So that dispells the myth that the lawn can receive all, or even the
majority, of it's nutrition from grass clippings. Some people claim
that their lawn gets all the nutrition it needs from the grass
clippings. They are obviously wrong.

The "don't bag your grass" crowd has given some people the idea that
fertilizer isin't needed.
-------------------

The truth is, grass clippings left on lawns will probably be blown away
onto nearby roads and get washed away in storm water runnoff. The
cuttings disappear, and most people think it's going down to the soil
surface, but I bet most of it ends up in storm sewers or roadside
ditches.

On the internet, many proponents of leaving the clippings on the grass
are lawn maintainence company web pages. Naturally, it's easier,
cheaper and faster for them to leave the clippings when they cut their
customer's lawns, so I'm not surprised that they would rather leave the
clippings on the lawn and say it's good or desirable.

Truth is, it's probably better for the ecology to bag and compost your
grass vs leaving the clippings on the grass for them to dry up and get
blown away and eventually end up in streams and rivers taking their
fertilizer and herbicide residues with them.

You obviously don't know shit about thatch,

You know, I don't have a thatch problem. Because I BAG my grass.

I don't care what you say about thatch. Unless you have a lawn that
you've been bagging for 5 to 10 years, you can't say that bagging your
grass does, or does not, reduce thatch.

If all those experts, if all those university studies, are ALWAYS
dealing with lawns where the clippings are left on the lawn, then how
can they say that bagging DOESN'T reduce thatch ??? To do a proper
test, you need to compare 2 lawns, side-by-side, where one lawn was
always bagged (at least for 5 seasons) and the other one wasn't. Show
me that study. I bet it doesn't exist.

I don't have thatch. I can see right down to the soil surface. I've
never de-thatched.

You want a healthy lawn?

You don't like cutting your lawn every 5 days?

You don't like it when dried up grass is blown around, on your driveway,
your front porch, being tracked into your house or garage?

Then bag your grass.

I can guarantee that your lawn doesn't look near as good
as any area of our course.

And I don't spend a fortune on fertilizer and water either.

Golf courses spend huge on water and fertilizer and pesticides and
herbicides.

It's just plain stupid to compare the care and maintenance of
residential lawns to golf courses. Different grasses, different uses,
different budgets.

Lawn Guy said:

Eggs Zachtly ) wrote:

X-NoArchive: YES

What kind of chicken-shit coward are you?

Why are you afraid of google archiving your posts?

ROFL No fear here. Google could care less about the archive, dumbass. Don't
believe me? Look at the changes they've made to their search abilities.
Google stopped caring about the archive, and it's accessability when they
came out with Google Groups. **** Google. They're about revenue, not the
archive.

What do my headers have to do with the topic at hand, anyway. Oh, that's
right, you can't find anything to back up your claims, so you type anything
that comes to mind.


No, dumbass. They obviously claimed that what they quoted was the
worst lawn advice they'd ever seen. They were correct. Please try
and keep up.

Why don't you let Bob F respond, instead of putting words in his mouth.

If he hasn't put you in the bozo-bin (where you really belong), he'll most
likely reply.


It's a fact that municipal gov'ts do not want to see cut grass
taking up valuble space in landfills so they invent new propaganda
that leaving clippings on the lawn is better for your lawn.

Source? Other than your own feeble mind, of course.

Practically all internet searches on the topic of grass cutting will
return content claiming that by not bagging your grass, that you're
reducing the amount of material going to landfill.

You *do* have reading comprehension problems, don't you. Re-read what I
quoted from you, and called you on. Pay particular attention to:

| so they invent new propaganda
| that leaving clippings on the lawn is better for your lawn.

You then respond with a comment about 'reducing the amount of material
going to a landfill'. That's comparing apples to oranges, dipshit. You
didn't backup your claim even one tenth of one percent.


It's a fact that you will need to mow more frequently if you don't
bag your grass.

No. It's a fact that you need to mow your lawn as often as needed,

Yes it is. You must not cut more than 1/3 of the grass blade if you
want the cut blade to decay at ground level. Any longer and it will
decay at or near the lawn surface, and most of it's nutrients will be
consumed by bacteria or other organisms (or will blow away in the wind
or storm water runoff) and not returned to the soil.

In most cases, not cutting more than 1/3 of the blade means cutting your
grass more frequently at peak growing times - usually every 5 days. And
in fact, even proponents of leaving the clippings on the lawn recommend
raking / bagging during peak growing periods.

Are you saying that if you bag it, you can just let it grow
longer, and cut more off of it?

Yes, I do let my grass grow longer, and I usually do cut more than 1/3
of the blade during peak growing periods. I usually cut my grass every
7 to 10 days - never more frequently. And the grass looks great.

So, now you say you shouldn't cut more than one third of the blade, but you
usually do. You're /really/ gaining credibility here. *rolls eyes*


Bullshit. Or, are you the only one that's right, and the major
universities that specialize in turf care management are wrong?

It's politically incorrect to be a proponent of bagging your grass and
nobody will fund a research project that proves the benefits of bagging
your grass.

Now you're going to whine that you can't find anything about the benefits
of bagging your grass. Maybe because they feel that it's *not* better to
bag. Do you think that the universities, when doing research, don't test
both methods? Most leading turf-management university programs are
recommending *not* bagging.


-----------------
"Grass clippings from mowing do not contribute to thatch. However, once
a thatch layer has developed, clippings may speed its formation."

http://extension.missouri.edu/explor...ort/G06708.htm
-----------------
"Despite popular belief, short clippings dropped on the lawn after
mowing are not the cause of thatch buildup. Clippings are very high in
water content and breakdown rapidly when returned to lawns after mowing,
assuming lawns are mowed on a regular basis (not removing more than
one-third of the leaf blade)."

http://www.urbanext.uiuc.edu/lawnchallenge/lesson5.html

So "short clippings" are not the cause of thatch buildup. Ok, what
about "long clippings" then?

Whether they're short or long, they're *still* 80% water. It doesn't matter
the length.

-----------------

Any detailed source of information on thatch will always say that
"SHORT" clippings don't contribute to thatch, or that "FREQUENT" grass
cutting is required to prevent thatch buildup.

Really? Not according to Ohio State (which, along with UC Davis, is
probably the leader in turf-care management universities).

http://ohioline.osu.edu/hyg-fact/1000/1191.html

"It is assumed that the return of grass clippings to the lawn will increase
thatch. This is not true. Grass clippings are about 75 to 85 percent water
and decompose readily. Thatch is formed from grass parts more resistant to
decay like roots, stems, nodes, crowns, etc."

http://www.coopext.colostate.edu/TRA...TS/thatch.html

"Do grass clippings contribute to thatch?

In a word - NO!

Research shows that turf clippings are from 85 to 95 percent water.
During the summer months these leaves decompose quickly leaving nitrogen
and other beneficial nutrients for the turf. Clippings remaining on the
lawn in the fall may not decompose until warmer weather returns in the
spring.

Plant parts differ in cell wall content, with roots, rhizomes and
stolons containing the greatest levels of lignin and are resistant to
decomposition. Leaf blades contain cellulose and hemi-cellulose that are
readily broken down by microbes. Grass clippings contain little lignin."


-------------------
"Approximately one quarter of a lawn’s fertilizer need can be met by
recycling grass clippings."

http://hoke.ces.ncsu.edu/index.php?page=news&ci=LAWN+6

So that dispells the myth that the lawn can receive all, or even the
majority, of it's nutrition from grass clippings. Some people claim
that their lawn gets all the nutrition it needs from the grass
clippings. They are obviously wrong.

Noone here has made that claim.


The "don't bag your grass" crowd has given some people the idea that
fertilizer isin't needed.
-------------------

Noone in this group has stated anything of the sort.


The truth is, grass clippings left on lawns will probably be blown away
onto nearby roads and get washed away in storm water runnoff. The
cuttings disappear, and most people think it's going down to the soil
surface, but I bet most of it ends up in storm sewers or roadside
ditches.

There you go again, using that cavern between your ears as a source. Please
refrain from saying something is "the truth" if you can't reliably back it
up.


On the internet, many proponents of leaving the clippings on the grass
are lawn maintainence company web pages.

Every source I've given you has been reliable, and not from a 'lawn
maintainence company web page'.

[snipped. irrelevant]


Truth is, it's probably better for the ecology to bag and compost your
grass vs leaving the clippings on the grass for them to dry up and get
blown away and eventually end up in streams and rivers taking their
fertilizer and herbicide residues with them.

Truth again? Again, source? *yawn*


You obviously don't know shit about thatch,

You know, I don't have a thatch problem.

Noone said you did. You seem to be having that problem a lot, here. Do the
voices tell you things, and you simply add them to your posts?

Because I BAG my grass.

I don't care what you say about thatch.

You don't care what anyone says about anything, it appears. You know
everything there is to know, right?


Unless you have a lawn that
you've been bagging for 5 to 10 years, you can't say that bagging your
grass does, or does not, reduce thatch.

There's that comprehension problem, rearing it's ugly little head again.
Please re-read the sources above. Perhaps reading them slowly, or aloud
will help you grasp it better. I'm sure that everyone here is probably
getting tired of repeating it.


If all those experts, if all those university studies, are ALWAYS
dealing with lawns where the clippings are left on the lawn, then how
can they say that bagging DOESN'T reduce thatch ??? To do a proper
test, you need to compare 2 lawns, side-by-side, where one lawn was
always bagged (at least for 5 seasons) and the other one wasn't. Show
me that study. I bet it doesn't exist.

You don't know much about research, do you. Perhaps you should really take
some college courses (try Bio, first), and learn about how it's done,
before spewing your drivel all over yourself.


I don't have thatch. I can see right down to the soil surface. I've
never de-thatched.

You want a healthy lawn?

You don't like cutting your lawn every 5 days?

You don't like it when dried up grass is blown around, on your driveway,
your front porch, being tracked into your house or garage?

Then bag your grass.

Your opinion. Not fact. Please stop confusing the two.

[budget-related whine snipped]

--

Eggs

-Transported to a surreal landscape, a young girl kills the first woman she
meets and then teams up with three complete strangers to kill again. -
Marin County newspaper's TV listing for The Wizard of Oz

"Eggs Zachtly" wrote in message
...
Lawn Guy said:

Eggs Zachtly ) wrote:

X-NoArchive: YES

What kind of chicken-shit coward are you?

Why are you afraid of google archiving your posts?

ROFL No fear here. Google could care less about the archive, dumbass. Don't
believe me? Look at the changes they've made to their search abilities.
Google stopped caring about the archive, and it's accessability when they
came out with Google Groups. **** Google. They're about revenue, not the
archive.

What do my headers have to do with the topic at hand, anyway. Oh, that's
right, you can't find anything to back up your claims, so you type anything
that comes to mind.


No, dumbass. They obviously claimed that what they quoted was the
worst lawn advice they'd ever seen. They were correct. Please try
and keep up.

Why don't you let Bob F respond, instead of putting words in his mouth.

If he hasn't put you in the bozo-bin (where you really belong), he'll most
likely reply.


Actually, I said my piece, and you are doing just fine. Thanks for the backup.

Lawn Guy said:

Bob F wrote:

This is one of the worst lawn advise postings I think I've ever seen.

Then why did you full-quote most of it?

And why did you not quote the last part pertaining to tree diseases
propagating from leaf litter? Are you also claiming that that was
innacurate, false or fabricated information?

No, dumbass. They obviously claimed that what they quoted was the worst
lawn advice they'd ever seen. They were correct. Please try and keep up.


It's a fact that municipal gov'ts do not want to see cut grass taking up
valuble space in landfills so they invent new propaganda that leaving
clippings on the lawn is better for your lawn.

Source? Other than your own feeble mind, of course.


It's a fact that you will need to mow more frequently if you don't bag
your grass.

No. It's a fact that you need to mow your lawn as often as needed, whether
you bag or not. Are you saying that if you bag it, you can just let it grow
longer, and cut more off of it?


It's a fact that you will need to pay more attention to thatch and that
grass cuttings will promote thatch buildup if you don't bag your grass.

Bullshit. Or, are you the only one that's right, and the major universities
that specialize in turf care management are wrong? I provided one source
(University of Missouri) to back up my statement, in another thread. I'll
happily provide more. I'm still waiting for you to back up yours. Oh,
that's right. You can't.

You obviously don't know shit about thatch, as your repeated statements
about it prove. I even provided the definition for you. Did you have
trouble comprehending it?

At the country club I work at, the *only* grass that gets "bagged" is the
bent grass greens, because of their cut height. They're mowed daily and the
clippings are practically powder. It would tend to cling to a rolling ball.
I don't think the membership would appreciate that. The Zoysia fairways and
Tall Fescue rough *never* get bagged, their clippings are dispersed. In the
six years I've been at this club, I've *never* seen a power rake have to go
out. Not one time. I can guarantee that your lawn doesn't look near as good
as any area of our course.


It's a fact that grass clippings WILL NOT provide most of the nutrients
required by a healthy lawn, and at best will provide only 25% of the
required nutrients and that commercial fertilizer applications will be
necessary anyways.

Noone said that it will "provide most of the nutrients required by a
healthy lawn". Show us where someone said that. Again, you can't.


It's a fact that the thicker the lawn, the more problematic it is to
leave the grass clippings on the lawn. This becomes important as people
resort to over-seeding as a method of weed control vs using herbicides.

Where's your /reliable/ source(s) for all of your 'facts'? Oh, that's
right. It's/they're in your head.

You're related to Stubby, aren't you.

Keep dancing, dumbass. You continuously show you don't know shit about lawn
care.
--

Eggs

-"God is dead." - Nietzsche
-"Nietzsche is dead" - God

trader4 wrote:

Lawn Guy wrote:
trad... wrote:
Because in most rural places with folks with lots of
trees and experience, bagging doesn't exist.

And it doesn't apply.

I'm talking about urban properties - not rural.

No, it does apply, because in an urban area, with a lot with few
trees, it's very easy and effective to just use a mulching mower and
grind up the modest amount of leaves on the lawn. I do it. Others
here do it. And contrary to your nonsense, it's not because we're
lazy. It's because it's less work, returns organic matter to the
soil, and is environmentally sound. But go ahead and keep shoving
your leaves in bags if you want. We really don't care. Just don't
go around calling those of us who choose not to lazy or claim that
doing so is incompatible with a healthy lawn.


trader4, actually gave good advice on the mulching mower.
however it is important to note how this method is not going
to work for the quadruple chin porker beast who is only going
to mow once a month.

a good high quality mulching mower such as the Snapper 21 inch
walk behind is going to be the best lawn care investment any
person living on a postage stamp size lot could ever make for
the over all health of their lawn.

mowing with a mulching mower once a week and sometimes twice a week
will create a great food supply for the lawn. the increased frequency
of cutting produces smaller clippings. during the fall of the year
when leaves are being mulched the increased frequency of cutting
allows for a better mulching of the leaves.

there are only two ways to have a great lawn. one is to actually
love and enjoy the performing and doing of the various procedures
required. educating ones self by seeking correct information such
as what is available from various universities and agricultural
extension services so as to get the best return from your investment
of time and money will also go a long way towards being able to produce
for yourself your overall desired outcome.

the other method is to contract the service of a lawn care service
who has already established a reputation for being able to deliver
an overall quality product.

On Nov 3, 9:16*pm, Lawn Guy wrote:
wrote:
Because in most rural places with folks with lots of
trees and experience, bagging doesn't exist. *

And it doesn't apply.

I'm talking about urban properties - not rural.


No, it does apply, because in an urban area, with a lot with few
trees, it's very easy and effective to just use a mulching mower and
grind up the modest amount of leaves on the lawn. I do it. Others
here do it. And contrary to your nonsense, it's not because we're
lazy. It's because it's less work, returns organic matter to the
soil, and is environmentally sound. But go ahead and keep shoving
your leaves in bags if you want. We really don't care. Just don't
go around calling those of us who choose not to lazy or claim that
doing so is incompatible with a healthy lawn.



Here anyone who wants to have their leaves taken away, simply
blows or rakes them into the street. * The township comes by
every couple of weeks from Nov thru Dec and vacuums them up.

But even in that case, the leaves are removed. *Doesn't matter if it's
by blowing and then vacuuming or by raking and bagging.

Well, I would say yes it does. Because for those unfortunate enough
to live somewhere that makes you stuff them in bags, it's an even
bigger pain in the ass, plus a waste of time, money, and resources.




If you did a little research, you'd find that there is widespread
agreement that mulching the clippings and leaving them is
beneficial to the lawn. * The clippings decay and provide nutrients.

The nutient value of grass is so poor that nobody uses grass to make
compost.

You want a healthy lawn, you use fertilizer. *The cut grass from last
season will not nourish your lawn anywhere near what a bag of fertilizer
will do. *You want to promote thatch and give a home to bugs, then leave
your clippings on the lawn.


So says you. No let's see what some qualified and knowledgeable
folks have to say.

From Agri Extension of the Univ of Missouri:

Q What is the "Don't Bag It" lawn care plan?


A This MU Extension educational program involves recycling grass
clippings. Instead of collecting clippings, the "Don't Bag It" plan
encourages people to return them to the lawn.


Q What benefits do grass clippings provide if returned to the lawn?


A Grass clippings returned to the lawn provide up to 25 percent of
your lawn's total fertilizer needs. Clippings contain about 4 percent
nitrogen, 2 percent potassium and 1 percent phosphorus. While
decomposing, they also serve indirectly as a food source for the
bacteria in the soil, which are doing many beneficial things (such as
decomposing thatch) for a healthy turf environment.


From Univ of Virginia, AG Ext:

Valuable Nutrients Lost!
The most unappreciated problem with off-site clipping disposal is that
potentially valuable commodities, plant organic matter and the
nutrients derived from it, are being discarded as a waste material!
When clippings are continually removed from a lawn, natural nutrient
cycling is partially reduced.

Rethinking Clipping Removal
The most prevalent reasons that people give for removing clippings may
reflect misconceptions and habit. Such reasons include:


Bagging may be the accepted practice in the neighborhood.
Clippings can become unsightly when they lay on top of the turf
canopy.
Turf can be smothered due to the inconsistent clipping dispersal of
side discharge rotary mowers.
Some believe clippings enhance turf disease.
Concern over clippings being tracked into a home or swimming pool.
The notion that clippings will accumulate and form a detrimental
thatch layer.



Grasscycling and Thatch Buildup
The idea that grass clippings form a major part of thatch has been
refuted in the literature. Thatch forms when turf roots, stems
(crowns, rhizomes, and stolons), and leaves are sloughed faster than
they can decompose. The negative aspects of thatch layers in excess of
1/2 inch a 1) increased potential for cold, heat or drought-related
injury, 2) more problems with insect pests and fungal diseases, and 3)
additional irrigation required by the turf.


From Ohio Sate Univ:

http://ohioline.osu.edu/hyg-fact/1000/1189.html

"Don't Bag It-The Lawn Maintenance Plan
The "Don't Bag It" lawn care plan can save the homeowner time, energy,
fertilizers, pesticides, and money, and can reduce the amount of waste
going to our landfills. The principle is simple: return clippings to
your lawn. By leaving your clippings on the lawn and allowing them to
work their way back into soil, you will improve soil health and reduce
pesticide and fertilizer use.

In fact, grass clippings contain valuable nutrients that can generate
up to 25 percent of your lawn's total fertilizer needs. A hundred
pounds of grass clippings can generate and recycle as much as three to
four pounds of nitrogen, one-half to one pound of phosphorus, and two
to three pounds of potassium back to the lawn. These are the three
most important nutrients needed by lawns, and are commonly supplied in
lawn fertilizers. Also, grass clippings do not contribute to thatch
(an organic debris layer between the soil and live grass) since grass
clippings are 75-85 percent water and decompose readily.

Why, then, do many homeowners bag grass clippings? Basically, it is a
personal preference and habit most homeowners have acquired. Proper
lawn care practices will usually eliminate surface clipping debris and
ensure a successful "Don't Bag It" program.

In summary, by composting at home, you can help protect the
environment, save money, and improve your soil at the same time. "




Beneficial to the companies harvesting trees to make those bags,

I highly doubt that paper leaf bags are made from anything other than
recycled paper and cardboard. *Not freshly-cut trees. *Maybe tree bark.

... I'd say there isn't anything natural or good for the environment
in the whole process.

I don't use paper bags for leaves because you can't pack them without
tearing them. *That's why I use plastic garbage bags.

Even worse, using plastics made of oil to stuff full of leaves.
Again, if it makes you happy, go ahead. But don't come around here
giving advice based on ignorance and junk science, then calling others
who use easier methods that make excellent sense, lazy.




Hmmm, what about on all the streets and roads in a municipality
where there are just trees and no homes? * Like in the country?

You don't have curbs and gutters and storm sewers on country roads. *You
have paved or soft-shoulders where leaves don't accumulate on the
roads. *So it's a non-issue in the country.

In conclusion, I'd like to see some credible reference that agrees
with your premise that mulching lawn grass clippings or mulching a
reasonable amount of leaves in-situ with a mower, is incompatible
with a healthy lawn.

If you already have a thatch buildup (1/2 inch or more) you do NOT want
to leave your cut grass on the lawn. *If your grass has certain diseases
(snow mold, powdery mildew, etc) you DO NOT want to leave your cut grass
on the lawn.

Another one of your misinformed opinions is not a credible source.
Normal grass clippings do not create a thatch problem. Here again
from the Univ of Missouri:

Q Do clippings returned to the lawn contribute to thatch problems?


A Thatch is a layer of undecomposed or partially decomposed grass
roots, stems, crowns, runners and lower shoots that accumulate between
the soil surface and actively growing turf. Grass clippings contain 80
to 85 percent water and decompose much more quickly than other grass
plant parts. Research at MU and other universitites indicates that
clippings do not contribute to thatch buildup on any cool- or warm-
season grasses, including zoysiagrass





If you want a THICK lawn that you don't need to cut every 5 days, then
bag your grass.

More nonsense. I have a dense tall fescue/blue grass turf and cut it
once a week. Once again, I'd like to see a credible reference that
using a mulching mower is incompatible with a thick, healthy lawn.



*The alternative being promoted to weed killer is to
regularly overseed your lawn, resulting in a thicker lawn.

More wasted time and money. You overseed a lawn IF it needs it
because the grass has thinned out for some reason.


*Again,
leaving the cut grass on the lawn only works if your lawn is relatively
sparse (vs thick) and requires more frequent cutting.

Nonsense as demonstrated by my years of actual experience maintaining
my own lawn. I mulch, cut it once a week, and it's DENSE, as least
as dense as you.



*The theoretical
BEST that grass cuttings can do when left on the lawn is to provide only
25% of the nutrients required. *Water content claims of cut grass
varries wildly from 75% to 90%.

Well, Duh? First you claim that grass clippings are worthless. Now
it's that they can provide 25% of the nutrients required and are 90%
water. Hmmm, let's think about this. What's better? Wasting
time bagging, emptying bags, dealing with the clippings, and buying
extra fertilizer? Or just leaving the mulched clippings so they
provide 25% of the fertilizer? And which wastes less resources and
is better for the environment?



Bagging your grass has been villified in recent years because
municipalities want to desperately keep cut grass out of landfills
because many landfills are reaching capacity. *That's why you hear so
much about the benefits of not bagging your grass. *They're all
imaginary benefits. *Terms like "Grasscycling" are being invented as
part of this propaganda.

So far, all the propaganda, without any credible references, is coming
from you.



If you want a good lawn, you bag your grass, and you deal with the
clippings by doing something other than putting them in your local
municiple landfill. *

I've left clippings for 13 years and have the nicest lawn in the
neighborhood.



Many municipalities have yard waste drop-off depots where home owners
can bring various tree and brush cuttings for disposal for no charge.
The depots will grind them up and turn them into a compost or mulch, and
sell it back to the public. *What you will find is that they won't
accept cut grass or use cut grass in the mulch, or will charge $1 a bag
and make you dump the grass into it's own dumpster. *But why? *Why not
take the grass for free? *Why keep the grass segregated into it's own
pile? *If cut grass is so beneficial and high in nutrients, why
discourage citizens from bringing it to the depots? *Why doesn't this
grass get incorporated into the mulch along with tree branches and other
yard waste materials? *

Whether it's the ideal material for a great general purpose mulch for
a municipality presented with abundant other options, isn't the
issue. There are some negative qualities specific to clippings that
have nothing to do with it's nutrient value that make it less
desirable to use for compost. And that is that lawn clippings are
more likely to contain herbicides, pesticides, etc, that alternatives,
like leaves. The issue is whether it's a sound practice to leave
clippings on a lawn. And the overwhelming consensus from
authorities, is YES.




Why? *Because cut grass is shit and has little to no nutrient value and
is high in carbon. *If it's not good enough for municiple compost piles
it's not good enough for your lawn.

Now we've gone from clippings can provide 25% of a lawns fertilizer
requirements, back to it has little to no nutrient value. Do you
even read what you post?

I was gonna let it go, but just to show that you don't have a clue,
let's look at your statement that clippings are high in carbon.
That's easily refuted. From Ohio State Univ here's a list of some
compost materials and there carbon content:

http://ohioline.osu.edu/hyg-fact/1000/1189.html

Table 1. Carbon:Nitrogen Ratio

Food wastes 15:1
Sawdust, wood, paper 400:1
Straw 80:1
Grass clippings 15:1
Leaves 50:1
Fruit wastes 35:1
Rotted manures 20:1
Cornstalks 60:1
Alfalfa hay 12:1

At 15, clippings are clearly near the bottom of the list. Highest on
the list though at a whopping 400, are paper bags, which most people
use to bag leaves.






Quite the contrary, I've seen plenty of authorities
that say returning either grass clippings or other
organic matter in reasonable amounts is beneficial
to the lawn.

It's all propaganda.

They simply don't want to see the grass occupy valuble space in rapidly
shrinking municiple landfills.

Sure, reducing the need to haul clippings and the space they take is a
benefit. But how does that make all the other benefits of clippings
cited by an overwhelming number of credible authorities into
propaganda?



Also, if you have something that supports your claim that
leaf removal is necessary to protect the health of trees
in the yard, I'd like to see that too.

-----------------http://imfc.cfl.scf.rncan.gc.ca/maladie-disease-eng.asp?geID=29

Maple leaf spot

The fungus creates small brown spots on the leaves and, in severe
infections, when most of the foliage is affected, the leaves may be shed
prematurely. Growing leaves are infected in the spring and initially
develop yellowish-green spots. The leaves eventually die and turn a
brownish colour. Black fruiting bodies of the fungus develop in the
infected spots around the end of autumn. The spores produced by these
fruiting bodies over winter in the leaf litter and cause new infections
the following spring.

As with many foliar fungal diseases, cool, wet spring weather greatly
favours the spread of the disease. To protect ornamental trees, the
leaves of affected trees should be carefully collected and destroyed by
burning or composting.
-------------------

That is just one example of a tree disease that is promoted and
propagated year-after-year by not raking, bagging or otherwise removing
leaf litter in the fall.

It doesn't say what you claim, which is that in general leaf removal
is necessary for healthy trees and that if you in situ mulch them it
will cause problems. It says if you have this particular disease,
then you should remove the leaves. It's like the Dr. telling you if
you have a sprained ankle, to keep it immobile. Do you think that
translates into being immobile is a good and necessary practice in
general?





See also

http://georgegosselin.com/nstsl/program_description.htm

------------------
... plant disease pathogens form three groups: *fungi, bacteria, and
viruses. *Of the three the majority are fungi. *These pathogens exist
virtually everywhere, but those causing plant diseases are found
primarily in the soil and plant debris such as mulch and leaf litter.
You can help to reduce diseases in you landscape by simply removing old
mulch. leaf litter, etc at the end of the season (mid November -
December) and leaving the soil naked over the winter months.
------------------

Cool, so now we're supposed to remove mulch over the winter? Now
that's pretty laughable. You do that too? I don't know anyone who
has ever done that and by observation, I've never seen it done. All
the landscape beds around here are mulched year round. And also the
mulch helps protect plants over any extreme cold temps.

And I'd point out that this is just some random guy's opinion, with
an amateur website. Why would you think some random hack has any
qualifications to give advice?

Lawn Guy wrote:
I'm talking about urban properties - not rural.

Try alt.home.lawn.garden.urban next time, "lawn guy" --lol

Otherwise get lost.