Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
clover in lawn
This year I have been overrun with clover in the lawn.
What is the best way to get rid? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
clover in lawn
In message , Howard
Neil writes Japmark wrote: This year I have been overrun with clover in the lawn. You are fortunate. The clover will fix nitrogen from the air and save you from having to apply fertilizer. The benefit to the grass is minimal. To get rid of clover use a liquid lawn weed killer such as Verdone. For application see the label on the bottle. ( Note Verdone extra only one application per season. Once you've got it down to manageable proportions you can use apply as required with a spray bottle. Within a couple of seasons your lawn will be essentially weed free and then you will only need occasional application, unless of course you have the misfortune to live adjacent to someone who likes to grow every wed possible in their lawn. -- hugh Reply to address is valid at the time of posting |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
clover in lawn
In article , Douglas
writes Sack immediately all the green-keepers of the Ancient Scottish golf courses plus those 'wilderness' putting greens in Georgia U.S,of A. Also the groundsmen who dug the hole at the penalty spot and put our national Team out of the competition. (Don't blame that bloke with the hideous tattoo across his neck , - he wuz robbed!) They've All got it all wrong! (:^) Perhaps they should have tried 4-leaved clover? -- Alan & Joan Gould - North Lincs. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
clover in lawn
Kay wrote in message ...
In article , hugh ] writes In message , Kay writes [...] [Kay:] I'm prepared to accept a need for fertiliser application for food production. But it's not something I want to do for purely recreational purposes. [...] [Hugh:] The levels of nutrients in our waterways come from agriculture, precisely the use of fertilisers of which you approve, or at least you accept. No - I'm prepared to accept if it is necessary. I've not made my mind up on that. Well go away and decide what you mean b4 going into print. I meant precisely what I said. I'm sorry that I didn't say what you wanted me to say in order to suit your attack. No need to apologize: he can manage perfectly well without accurate data. Mike. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
clover in lawn
hugh wrote:
In message , Howard Neil writes hugh wrote: In message , Howard Neil writes Japmark wrote: This year I have been overrun with clover in the lawn. You are fortunate. The clover will fix nitrogen from the air and save you from having to apply fertilizer. The benefit to the grass is minimal. That is not the experience of livestock farmers who deliberately sow clover in their grass fields. See:- They don't feed graze their livestock on lawns - at least not deliberately. Maybe not but the effect of nitrogen fixing is the same. The point is that it is more economical to buy and sow clover seed than fertilizer. A lot depends on the desired effect of course but there seems to be an automatic desire to remove clover from lawns with no consideration to the benefits. It is as if there is a presumption that clover is bad for a lawn. I have clover both in my fields and in my lawn. I need to occasionally add farmyard manure to the fields to help support livestock but I have yet to add any fertilizer of any description to my lawn and the grass is in excellent condition. -- Howard Neil |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
clover in lawn
"Kay" wrote in message ... In article , BAC writes If that is your philosophy, then, presumably, you are also careful not to grow in your garden any alien or hybrid plants (including most clovers) which might escape into the wild, hence risking 'damaging' the diversity of the countryside? You seem to be saying that, unless one embraces a totally 'green' lifestyle, one should encourage a total disregard for the environment. I certainly did not say that, nor did I imply it. You said that gardens and nature were interlinked and implied that gardeners should not act in a manner which put at risk the 'diversity of our countryside'. I was enquiring whether your belief that use of fertilisers and pesticides for recreational purposes could not be justified, for that reason, also extended to the growing of non-native plants for recreational purposes. Although you did not directly answer my question, I assume from your response the answer is no, it doesn't. I also assume from your response that you feel entitled to exercise your own judgement as to what is and what is not reasonable for you to forego in the name of preservation of 'the environment', and that you might resent your decision in the matter being criticised by people who draw their own line on the subject in a different place. Rightly so, IMO. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
clover in lawn
"BAC" wrote in message t...
"Kay" wrote in message ... In article , hugh ] writes In message , Kay writes In article , hugh ] writes OK, the OP doesn't want a wildflower meadow. But the more we encourage a style of gardening dependent on high levels of fertiliser, the more we contribute to high levels of nutrient in our wild countryside and in our waterways, which is damaging the diversity of our countryside. snip Gardens and countryside are intermixed, waterways go through both. Your personal use of fertiliser may not have much effect, but I was talking about an overall philosophy of gardening which regards regular fertiliser, pesticide and weedkiller use as a necessity. If you read what I said, I was suggesting that a dislike of this approach might be why people were suggesting that a pure grass lawn was not necessarily to be desired. If that is your philosophy, then, presumably, you are also careful not to grow in your garden any alien or hybrid plants (including most clovers) which might escape into the wild, hence risking 'damaging' the diversity of the countryside? Kay has spoken sensibly for herself; but it's my philosophy, too. Isn't it impressive how far some athletic readers can jump from '...suggesting...might be...suggesting that a pure xxx was not necessarily to be desired'? Your middle name must be Tarzan! Of _course_ I wouldn't plant alien species which I knew were likely to establish themselves in numbers in the wild, or interbreed with native species: I hope you aren't suggesting that _you would_. But I'll admit that I'm worried by those quotation marks you put round 'damaging': they're not entirely promising. And I don't quite know what to expect from one who's prepared to drop that unexplained 'including most clovers' into the discussion, so I'm on my guard for sophistry! Mike. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
clover in lawn
In article , BAC
writes You seem to be saying that, unless one embraces a totally 'green' lifestyle, one should encourage a total disregard for the environment. I certainly did not say that, nor did I imply it. You said that gardens and nature were interlinked and implied that gardeners should not act in a manner which put at risk the 'diversity of our countryside'. I was enquiring whether your belief that use of fertilisers and pesticides for recreational purposes could not be justified, I don't think I said that it could not be justified. I think I said it was something I did not want to do. for that reason, also extended to the growing of non-native plants for recreational purposes. Although you did not directly answer my question, I assume from your response the answer is no, it doesn't. I also assume from your response that you feel entitled to exercise your own judgement as to what is and what is not reasonable for you to forego in the name of preservation of 'the environment', and that you might resent your decision in the matter being criticised by people who draw their own line on the subject in a different place. Rightly so, IMO. I think you are assuming too much and not reading carefully enough. -- Kay "Do not insult the crocodile until you have crossed the river" |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
clover in lawn
On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 19:22:54 +0100, Howard Neil
wrote: That is not the experience of livestock farmers who deliberately sow clover in their grass fields. See:- http://www.dpw.wageningen-ur.nl/biob/EDUCAT/msc302.htm Shum mishtake? The motivation for spraying manure on fields in NL is that just the pig industry produces enough crap to cover the whole of the Netherlands in 3" of pig crap per annum. Enjoy your bacon. -- Martin |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
clover in lawn
In message , Mike Lyle
writes Kay wrote in message ... In article , hugh ] writes In message , Kay writes [...] [Kay:] I'm prepared to accept a need for fertiliser application for food production. But it's not something I want to do for purely recreational purposes. [...] [Hugh:] The levels of nutrients in our waterways come from agriculture, precisely the use of fertilisers of which you approve, or at least you accept. No - I'm prepared to accept if it is necessary. I've not made my mind up on that. Well go away and decide what you mean b4 going into print. I meant precisely what I said. I'm sorry that I didn't say what you wanted me to say in order to suit your attack. No need to apologize: he can manage perfectly well without accurate data. Mike. Eh? What inaccuracy have I used? -- hugh Reply to address is valid at the time of posting |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
clover in lawn
In message , Kay
writes In article , hugh ] writes In message , Kay writes In article , hugh ] writes OK, the OP doesn't want a wildflower meadow. But the more we encourage a style of gardening dependent on high levels of fertiliser, the more we contribute to high levels of nutrient in our wild countryside and in our waterways, which is damaging the diversity of our countryside. I'm prepared to accept a need for fertiliser application for food production. But it's not something I want to do for purely recreational purposes. What high levels of fertiliser? So far this year, one dose in the spring of fertiliser/moss killer/weed killer and that's it apart from 1/2 ton of horticultural sharp sand. Oh yes and one squirt of spot weed killer to remove a piece of clover which presumably had blown in from someone else's weed patch. Well, that's still more than I use ;-) But hardly "high level", and not affecting the levels of nutrient in our wild countryside and in our waterways as you alleged, so please withdraw you comment. Of course it affects it. Gardens and countryside are intermixed, waterways go through both. Your personal use of fertiliser may not have much effect, but I was talking about an overall philosophy of gardening which regards regular fertiliser, pesticide and weedkiller use as a necessity. If you read what I said, I was suggesting that a dislike of this approach might be why people were suggesting that a pure grass lawn was not necessarily to be desired. I did not in my original post comment on your personal use of fertilisers. The levels of nutrients in our waterways come from agriculture, precisely the use of fertilisers of which you approve, or at least you accept. No - I'm prepared to accept if it is necessary. I've not made my mind up on that. Well go away and decide what you mean b4 going into print. I meant precisely what I said. I'm sorry that I didn't say what you wanted me to say in order to suit your attack. Trouble is what you said wasn't very precise. -- hugh Reply to address is valid at the time of posting |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
clover in lawn
In message , BAC
writes "Kay" wrote in message ... In article , BAC writes If that is your philosophy, then, presumably, you are also careful not to grow in your garden any alien or hybrid plants (including most clovers) which might escape into the wild, hence risking 'damaging' the diversity of the countryside? You seem to be saying that, unless one embraces a totally 'green' lifestyle, one should encourage a total disregard for the environment. I certainly did not say that, nor did I imply it. You said that gardens and nature were interlinked and implied that gardeners should not act in a manner which put at risk the 'diversity of our countryside'. I was enquiring whether your belief that use of fertilisers and pesticides for recreational purposes could not be justified, for that reason, also extended to the growing of non-native plants for recreational purposes. Although you did not directly answer my question, I assume from your response the answer is no, it doesn't. I also assume from your response that you feel entitled to exercise your own judgement as to what is and what is not reasonable for you to forego in the name of preservation of 'the environment', and that you might resent your decision in the matter being criticised by people who draw their own line on the subject in a different place. Rightly so, IMO. I think he actually wants to dictate where everyone's line is drawn. As far as I am concerned, the only studies I have ever seen on the subject of excess nutrients in waterways have laid the blame firmly at the door of agriculture. If someone can produce evidence to the contrary or scale the level of damage due to *excess* use in domestic gardening I may change my position. Until then I will continue to use modest amounts of fertiliser and weedkillers on the area of grass in front of my house to maintain it as I like it. Incidentally, I can't imagine anyone wanting to use pesticides on a lawn. -- hugh Reply to address is valid at the time of posting |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
clover in lawn
hugh wrote:
Incidentally, I can't imagine anyone wanting to use pesticides on a lawn. Really? Why then did you advise the OP "To get rid of clover use a liquid lawn weed killer such as Verdone" Weed killer is a pesticide. -- Howard Neil |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
clover in lawn
"Kay" wrote in message ... In article , BAC writes You seem to be saying that, unless one embraces a totally 'green' lifestyle, one should encourage a total disregard for the environment. I certainly did not say that, nor did I imply it. You said that gardens and nature were interlinked and implied that gardeners should not act in a manner which put at risk the 'diversity of our countryside'. I was enquiring whether your belief that use of fertilisers and pesticides for recreational purposes could not be justified, I don't think I said that it could not be justified. I think I said it was something I did not want to do. It seemed to me you had been implying you did not consider use of pesticides and chemical fertilisers for frivolous purposes was justifiable. If that is not the case, I stand corrected. for that reason, also extended to the growing of non-native plants for recreational purposes. Although you did not directly answer my question, I assume from your response the answer is no, it doesn't. I also assume from your response that you feel entitled to exercise your own judgement as to what is and what is not reasonable for you to forego in the name of preservation of 'the environment', and that you might resent your decision in the matter being criticised by people who draw their own line on the subject in a different place. Rightly so, IMO. I think you are assuming too much and not reading carefully enough. LOL. I hope what I wrote served its purpose. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
clover in lawn
"hugh" ] wrote in message ... In message , BAC writes "Kay" wrote in message ... In article , BAC writes If that is your philosophy, then, presumably, you are also careful not to grow in your garden any alien or hybrid plants (including most clovers) which might escape into the wild, hence risking 'damaging' the diversity of the countryside? You seem to be saying that, unless one embraces a totally 'green' lifestyle, one should encourage a total disregard for the environment. I certainly did not say that, nor did I imply it. You said that gardens and nature were interlinked and implied that gardeners should not act in a manner which put at risk the 'diversity of our countryside'. I was enquiring whether your belief that use of fertilisers and pesticides for recreational purposes could not be justified, for that reason, also extended to the growing of non-native plants for recreational purposes. Although you did not directly answer my question, I assume from your response the answer is no, it doesn't. I also assume from your response that you feel entitled to exercise your own judgement as to what is and what is not reasonable for you to forego in the name of preservation of 'the environment', and that you might resent your decision in the matter being criticised by people who draw their own line on the subject in a different place. Rightly so, IMO. I think he actually wants to dictate where everyone's line is drawn. As far as I am concerned, the only studies I have ever seen on the subject of excess nutrients in waterways have laid the blame firmly at the door of agriculture. If someone can produce evidence to the contrary or scale the level of damage due to *excess* use in domestic gardening I may change my position. Until then I will continue to use modest amounts of fertiliser and weedkillers on the area of grass in front of my house to maintain it as I like it. Sounds perfectly reasonable and responsible to me. It's your garden, and you have the right to make up your own mind about what you want to grow there and how you should maintain it. Even 'conservation' organisations like the Woodland Trust make judicious use of weedkiller in their woodlands. Incidentally, I can't imagine anyone wanting to use pesticides on a lawn. Sorry about that - I use the term 'pesticides' to include herbicides, insecticides, fungicides, etc. I don't think I'm alone in that, but apologise for any confusion. In this context, I meant weedkiller, specifically one not fatal to lawn grass. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Time to Nuke the Clover?--in defense of ridding clover | Gardening | |||
red clover grow whereever white clover grows | Plant Science | |||
red clover height too tall for white clover | Plant Science | |||
red clover grows whereever white clover grows | Plant Science | |||
red clover grow whereever white clover grows | Plant Science |