• Cethin@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    1 year ago

    That’s a stupid false dichotomy. Why would those be the only options. Clover is a good low growing grass substitute. You can also grow native pants in most of the space so cutting isn’t required. There are many options that aren’t grass lawns that require a ton of maintenance.

    • Rokk@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      You think if you told people they all had to get rid of their grass lawns heaps of them wouldn’t just replace them with a load of concrete if they didn’t want the maintenance? Enough people do it already without being forced to by a ban.

      • Cethin@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Sure, some would if that were the rule. How about we ban both. The option isn’t binary.

    • XIIIesq@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      We’re in a thread about astro turfing lawns, so when you paraphrase “a kept lawn is likely worse for the environment”, what you are implying is that astroturfing a lawn is better for the environment than a real one. Which I think is a very bold statement to make.

      That aside I do like the idea of things like clover lawns, but is that going to appeal to the sort of person that astroturfs their lawn because “muh dog shit and piss” or because they can’t be bothered to get the lawnmower out?