lawns take up more space in the US than even corn, says NASA

[moominmolly]

Whoa. From bitterlawngnome:

The map shows how common lawns are across the country, despite a wide variability of climate and soils. Indeed, the scientists who produced the map estimate that more surface area is devoted to lawns than to any other single irrigated crop in the country. For example, lawns appear to cover more than three times the number of acres that irrigated corn covers. The large image shows a more detailed look at fractional lawn surface area in urban areas. In many cities, the urban core—where buildings, parking lots, and roads are densest—appears paler green.

From here, more information available on how they got this data (interesting!) and the ecological impact of lawns here.

I like having an open space that I own, on which I can practice stilt tricks and play with kids and lay in the sun on warm days, but even I have to admit that our national lawn fetish is really kind of creepy.

Comments

[aroraborealis.livejournal.com]

I agree with your larger point, if I understand it correctly, which is that there are things that are good in the world for the pleasure people get out of them, even if they're resource-intensive. But I disagree that lawns are a good example of that for most people, and I think there's a great deal of social pressure to a) have a lawn and b) maintain it to a certain degree that puts it in a different category from pleasure goods like music, nice food, nice clothing, etc.

[muckefuck.livejournal.com]

The discussion in Bill's journal (http://bitterlawngnome.livejournal.com/749607.html?style=mine) brings up the vital point that many communities require property owners to have turf lawns. That definitely puts lawns in an entirely different class than these other goods. (At least, if there's a residential community out there which bans jeans and requires residents to buy only name-brand groceries, I probably don't want to know about it.)

Fortunately the conservationists have made some changes to the law in Missouri so my father's been able to plant a native garden on one side of the house. But, as you say, legality is one thing, social pressure another. He's gotten one nasty anonymous note about it and he can tell that most of the other neighbours aren't happy, but they're too passive-aggressively Midwestern to say anything to his face, even after he's invited them to.

[sandhawke.livejournal.com]

Okay, the peer pressure bit is awkward, because yeah, to the extent we feel good being surrounded by lawns (a point I make elsewhere), we have a free-rider problem.

Still, that's a lot like hygiene and styles and clothing. We want to be surrounded by people who look a certain way, so we pressure them to modify their looks and in some cases use vast resources to look that way.

So, are lawns any worse than clothing?

Possibly by degree -- I don't know the numbers -- but I think that's beside the point. (Which is that lawns make me feel good, so it's annoying to me that people who wear clothes for non-health reasons are telling me lawns are evil.)

Note that I'm a total free rider in my neighborhood, with the worst lawn on the block, because I'm bad that way.