Lawns

[madrasahs]

Originally Posted by Lakegeezer

I don't understand your opinion. Lawns help prevent erosion into the lake. They are a good place to sit and walk in your bare feet. What is the problem with a lawn as long as you don't use fertilizer? The one at our place is a bit scraggley, but so what? I believe it has a positive impact on the quality of the lake.

Soils around Winnipesaukee are generally poor. Fifty years ago, rainwater washed little in the way of nutrients into the lake.

But a lawn gets its start in a bed of rich loam and the usual spraying and fertilizing "maintenance" greens it -- wastefully. Maintaining the nitrogen and phosphorus in the loam to keep lawns "green" will eventually make the lake green.

"Scraggly" lawns? Whatever floats your boat.

Come to think of it -- it may very well come to "whatever floats your boat".

[Fat Jack]

Whatever Lakegeezer might "think", it is a fact that lawns are extremely poor filters, do almost nothing to stop erosion and have an extremely detrimental effect on the quality of water in the Lake, even in the rare case where the Shoreland Protection Act is obeyed and they are not fertilized. The NHDES and their website are more authoritative and can give a more factual reasoning for this, based on science ratehr than opinion. Having lawns within the Winnipesaukee watershed is inarguably the worst thing that ever happened to the Lake, even if they do feel good on one's bare feet.

[Lakegeezer]

The lawn that I watch over is growing in sand, not rich loam. It helps to prevent erosion. Where there is no grass, heavy rains dig canyons in the sand washing who knows what into the lake. What is the alternative to a lawn? The best alternative I guess is to leave the woods natural right down to the shore and then put paths in. But, since true beaches are out - and given that many shorelines are rocky - a lawn is also a good alternative. The idea of having a beautiful lush green lawn is probably out of the question. Indeed, it should not be growing in nitrogen rich soil. It should not be fertilized - but, if you want a place to sit near the lake - with less bugs - I still contend that a lawn can be ecologically friendly.

[fpartri497]

Originally Posted by Lakegeezer

The lawn that I watch over is growing in sand, not rich loam. It helps to prevent erosion. Where there is no grass, heavy rains dig canyons in the sand washing who knows what into the lake. What is the alternative to a lawn? The best alternative I guess is to leave the woods natural right down to the shore and then put paths in. But, since true beaches are out - and given that many shorelines are rocky - a lawn is also a good alternative. The idea of having a beautiful lush green lawn is probably out of the question. Indeed, it should not be growing in nitrogen rich soil. It should not be fertilized - but, if you want a place to sit near the lake - with less bugs - I still contend that a lawn can be ecologically friendly.

well then how about artificial turf? would that work?

[meredith necker]

Aren't there any organically safe nutrients on the market? Do we have to use Scott's?

[dpg]

I don't know maybe it's me but if I spend $500,000+ for a waterfront home I want a nice lawn to walk on.

[islandAl]

When your nice lawn runoff has the lake too polluted for your to swim in, what will the value on your 5000,000 house be worth?

[Merrymeeting]

I go to the lakes to "get away from it all". To me, the idea of having to maintain a lawn is not part of that picture. If you have ever tried growing a lawn in most of the sandy soils around the lakes, you quickly realize there is a reason they are not there naturally. There are many other options that are more natural looking and just as easy on the feet, and you don't have to mow them every week.

When I am out on the boat, I find it very disappointing to see the increasing number of VERY green and healthy lawns by the shoreline (not to mention the clippings floating in the water as I drive by). There is no way they can be in that shape without a lot of chemical additives. Ignoring that part, it is also disappointing because the whole reason for coming to the lake is to enjoy the atmosphere of that setting. Having it become just another suburb with water is not my idea of a good future for the lakes.

I know that many will answer that money talks (and I know it does). But clearly the current laws and restrictions are not working. I am amazed by the number of construction projects going on around the lake where there seems to be a clear violation of the lot clearing rules. Just stand on the Wolfboro docks and look across at about 12 o clock to see an example.

I am not an extreme environmentalist. Far from it. But we seem to be destroying much of what brought most of us to the area to begin with.

[Bear Guy]

Originally Posted by meredith necker

Aren't there any organically safe nutrients on the market? Do we have to use Scott's?

The Lawn Dog advertizes environmentally friendlier lawn treatments. Though they are in seacoast NH, you could contact them to see what they use. (Not an endorsement: I have never used this company.)
Lawn Dog
121 Lafayette Road, North Hampton, NH 03862
Tel: (603) 964-2292

Has anyone else seen this new lakefront lawn?

[meredith necker]

Actually I answered my own question by reading my last "people places and plants' magazine. There is a nice article about having a nice lawn and garden without using chemicals.
Yes money talks but if your money ruins the lake or anything else then your money can clean it up and fix it too. There are such things as ethics and responsibility

[Grant]

Let's ALL start lawns...let's ALL fertilize them VIGOROUSLY...let's ALL run our gas lawnmowers at least once a week...then fertilize some more -- preferably right before a BIG RAIN!!!!

Then we can see the algae blooms start earlier, grow larger, and become visible from the space shuttle! Slimy green lakes rule! Woo-hoo!

I LOVE cutting grass SO much that I INSIST on doing it while at the Lake.

[JDeere]

Who said you can’t fertilize your lawn? Not the Shoreland Protection Act. Everyone seems a little confused on this issue. Here is what Chapter 483-B The Comprehensive Shoreland Protection Act says.



You can’t fertilize within 25 feet of the shoreline. None of the new houses have lawns that are that close to the lake. Scotts fertilizer is acceptable to use. I have included direct text from the Shoreland Protection Act.



Sorry, I can’t say more I have to run out and fertilize my lawn so that it stays nice and green!

XVII. "Reference line" means:

(a) For natural fresh water bodies without artificial impoundments, the natural mean high water level as determined by the department of environmental services.

Fertilizer

(d) No fertilizer, except limestone, shall be used within 25 feet of the reference line of any property. Twenty-five feet beyond the reference line, low phosphate, slow release nitrogen fertilizer or limestone, may be used on lawns or areas with grass.



Chapter 483-B The Comprehensive Shoreland Protection Act

[Fat Jack]

Originally Posted by meredith necker

Aren't there any organically safe nutrients on the market? Do we have to use Scott's?

There are lots of "organically safe nutrients" that would do a fine job feeding your lawn without adding man-made chemicals to the lake. But anything that feeds your lawn will end up feeding the lake just the same. Best example: cow manure is surely an "organically safe nutrient", but will add nitrogen to the Lake and turn it green. Anything that will make your lawn green will make the lake water green the same way. Simply put, we can't have green lawns around the Lake and clean water in it for long.

[dpg]

Expecting people to not fertilize and/or not maintain a nice lawn is just not reasonable. I myself am not a "tree-hugger" and yes I do use and enjoy the lake - for about 25 years now. Lets see now, everybody with any kind of lakefront property with no lawns or maintained to bare minimums, not likely. Maybe bags and bags of Scotts (or other chemical-based) fertilizers is a bit harsh but not expecting people to use "organic" products is going too far. All the lake front septic systerms are doing as much or way more than any home owner with a $30.00 Scotts spreader. And no, I cannot validate this so lets not ask, but come on now!!!

[Merrymeeting]

>>Expecting people to not fertilize and/or not maintain a nice lawn is just not reasonable.

Why not? I also am not a "tree-hugger". But when I'm on the lake I prefer to see the shoreline as it has been for all the years I've known it (and more). I.e. with trees, rocks, etc. Most people have lawns at their primary homes. Why add all the hassle at the place they go to relax?

If you want large lawn expanses lot after lot, move to a subdivision. Leave the pine needles in place and stop fighting against what the soils want, and don't want to grow there.

I'm not against lawns. In fact I have a large one at home that I maintain and pamper. They just don't belong on the shore of the lakes.

[islandAl]

Very well said. Natural nature is the best looking.

[Grant]

My goal for '04: Whenever a lush, green (read: fertilized) lawn is spotted on the Lake, I will decorate it with one of those inside-out-painted-white truck tires with a big old Virgin Mary statue popping out of the middle.

Either that, or we paint some yard lines and erect a goal post!

Party on,

g

[RI Swamp Yankee]

Originally Posted by Grant

....I LOVE cutting grass SO much that I INSIST on doing it while at the Lake.

Grant, does it hurt to have your tongue so firmly planted in your cheek?

[dpg]

Well, I suppose I agree to a point - not totally but that's what makes the world go round!!! I've got to go with the lawn on this one...

[Emeljee99]

I am not a tree hugger, and I'm not inconsiderate of the beauty and health of the lake either. I don't think the lake should be further polluted. HOWEVER, if someone is acting within their rights under the law (25 feet rule), I cannot fault them. Perhaps the laws should be changed and our distain for the pollution on the lake should be aimed at lawmakers for making wimpy laws in the first place. Don't know how things can be enforced, or even if it is lawful to tell people what to do with their property....but don't knock the guy who has a nice lawn and isn't breaking any environmental law doing it.

[JDeere]

I think emeljee99 says it correctly. If you are allowed to have a lawn and you are not breaking any rules or laws who can criticize?

For what it is worth I have done some homework on this issue and I am told that there is no runoff into the lake if you stay the 25 feet away. Lawns are not the problem. Overuse of the lake is a problem. Too many boats are on the lake during the summer and too much stuff goes overboard. Too many sleds in the winter. Did anyone see all the trash on the lake after the winter fishing derby?



The lake is getting overbuilt and overused.

[HUH]

Funny I dont see any algea blooms and I live in a small cove with many big green lawns and 3 Marinas ..When is the algea going to grow as these lawns have been well fertalized for 20+ years now.. Personally I like grass as opposed to dirt or needles so the stuff doesnt get tracked all over the house , boat , car ...

[Grant]

Originally Posted by HUH

Funny I dont see any algea blooms and I live in a small cove with many big green lawns and 3 Marinas ..When is the algea going to grow as these lawns have been well fertalized for 20+ years now.. Personally I like grass as opposed to dirt or needles so the stuff doesnt get tracked all over the house , boat , car ...

Where are the algae blooms? Do you you vacate the Lake before August? They are everywhere...and getting larger and thicker each year. We *aren't* on a cove, and we have MAJOR algae blooms now -- whereas there was nothing close to this as recently as 15-20 years ago. As a diver, I can tell you that the algae blooms are EVERYWHERE, and are slowly sapping the life out of the Lake. If that is a reasonable trade-off for not tracking a few needles into the house, then I maintain that your priorities are a bit askew.

Just my opinion. Your mileage may vary. Check warranty for details.

[JDeere]

Can someone please connect the dots for me! Those that are opposed to lawns are claim ing that they (lawns) are the cause of all the lakes problems. Can someone offer me proof that fertilizer is the culprit versus septic systems, overuse etc….



It is easy to pontificate about how wrong lawns are it is another to back it up with scientific proof. Can anyone do that?

[KPW]

Originally Posted by dpg

Expecting people to not fertilize and/or not maintain a nice lawn is just not reasonable. I myself am not a "tree-hugger" and yes I do use and enjoy the lake - for about 25 years now. Lets see now, everybody with any kind of lakefront property with no lawns or maintained to bare minimums, not likely. Maybe bags and bags of Scotts (or other chemical-based) fertilizers is a bit harsh but not expecting people to use "organic" products is going too far. All the lake front septic systerms are doing as much or way more than any home owner with a $30.00 Scotts spreader. And no, I cannot validate this so lets not ask, but come on now!!!

Sooo, because lakefront septic systems are a problem, lets add to it with fertilizer. They pollute, so why can't I? Just obey the 25' law.

[Grant]

Originally Posted by JDeere

Can someone please connect the dots for me! Those that are opposed to lawns are claim ing that they (lawns) are the cause of all the lakes problems. Can someone offer me proof that fertilizer is the culprit versus septic systems, overuse etc….



It is easy to pontificate about how wrong lawns are it is another to back it up with scientific proof. Can anyone do that?

Not saying that lawns are the sole cause -- they are merely ONE cause, and one that seems to be gaining momentum with the proliferation of McMansions around the Lake. Boats, gas spills, septic systems -- they all contribute. And let's not forget the introduction of non-native aquatic vegetation (Milfoil) and species (zebra mussels, rock bass, etc.). I guess the only constant is change -- too bad most of the bad change in the Lake has been happening so quickly over the past 10-20 years. The decline in water quality is alarming.

[dpg]

Not a you do it so I can situation at all! No, I'm not a marine bioligist at all but I'd bet fertilizer is a smaller part of the whole picture than people think. Milfoil spreads like a raving disease and does not need fertilizer to do it.

[JDeere]

Appreciate Grant’s reply but I would still like someone from a scientific background tell me that fertilizing the lawn and staying within the law does ANY harm to the lake. My understanding from the folks in conservation that provided I stay 25 feet away and use a slow release fertilizer I am doing NO HARM to that lake whatsoever. If the conservation department folks are wrong can someone give me some evidence? People are just bashing lawns with the occasional McMansion shot mixed in. Then again what fun would the forum be if people backed up their opinions with facts?

[harbor guy]

All one has to do, is type in "Lakes & Fertilizer".
There are quite a few sites on the Web from all over the country that state how the effects of fertilizers are bad for the enviroment.
Want specifics, add New Hampshire to your search.
I understand there many different opinions when it comes to this forum.
My folks place is pretty much natural, as it has been and should be (my opinion).
Guess all I can say is do some research first. Then if you really need that green lawn. Please be smart about it and do it without the chemicals.
Harbor Guy

[JDeere]

Cultural Influences
Although eutrophication is the natural aging process of all lakes, cultural eutrophication is an immediate threat to our lakes and ponds. Cultural influences accelerate this geologic process. Erosion from unvegetated soils can quickly cover a lake bottom. Polluted runoff from non-absorbent surfaces such as driveways and building roofs carries nutrients which act as fertilizer, promoting the growth of plants and algae. Improper fertilization of lawns and gardens as well as failed septic systems also contribute these nutrients.

Key to me are the words ...Improper fertilization of lawns...AND...Erosion from unvegetated soils. Maybe we should just give all the land back to the Indians.

[Frdxplorer]

Although I like Deers, I prefer a 52 Farmall Cub. But if you like lawns so much, I have about 2 acres in PA, feel free. My opinion is this... We have a small lawn on the lake that we recently tried to reseed. We were unsucessful. So the moss and roots will take their orginal shape, God forbid. During my youth ( only a few years ago), I attended Camp Belknap. They are diligently working to maintain the natural beauty around camp's shore for future generations. Much mention has been made to the idea of spending hundreds of thousands of dollars for homes and wishing they had lucious green lawns. To me, this view is near-sighted. How wonderful a place this lake would be if my grandchildren (about 100 years away) were able to enjoy this place as I have been. We would be silly if we didn't believe that the only constant is change. However, we are all being very selfish if we do not try to preserve this precious piece of nature for future generations. Many ask for proof that their actions are causing harm. Alot of people were asking to see the PROOF of a terrorist attack before 9-11. Obviously not on the same level, but a thought just he same.

[JDeere]

Understand and agree that the lake in its natural state is better. My property is heavily treed but the land surrounding the house was disturbed by construction. I would actually prefer the pine needles but it is tougher than you think to replace years of what nature has put down. I did try and then finally surrendered to a small lawn that keep things tidy and I think prevent more runoff into the lake than then the disturbed area.

The only real point I am trying to make is simply that if people follow the rules fertilizing is probably way down on the list of containment reaching the lake.

As to the terrorist comment. WHAT? When they tried to take the Tower down the first time we had all the proof we needed that US soil was not safe anymore. Seems to me someone name Bill should have pulled his pants up and done something. But I guess he was too busy with Monica.

[Grant]

Originally Posted by Frdxplorer

During my youth ( only a few years ago), I attended Camp Belknap. They are diligently working to maintain the natural beauty around camp's shore for future generations.

Hey -- what years were you @ Belknap? I was there '70-'77, and then came back for a stint in the kitchen crew in '78. My brother was ten-year guy, and a leader. My son is going for his sixth season this summer. Place looks as great as ever. Oh to be a Cadet again!

[Grant]

Originally Posted by JDeere

Cultural Influences
[font=ZapfCalligr BT]...Key to me are the words ...Improper fertilization of lawns...AND...Erosion from unvegetated soils. Maybe we should just give all the land back to the Indians.

Excellent point. And, again, I wasn't pointing the finger at lawns as a primary culprit, and certainly there are those lawns that are either unfertilized or, as you point out, properly fertilized. It just seems that the recent proliferation of lakeside lawns can only lead to an increase in the fertilizer run-off. Your point about the not-absorbent surfaces is dead-on. Think about road salts, motor oils, etc. Just more by-products of human habitation. Bottom line -- we all have to be a little more careful and minimize our impact, whether it's lawn fertilizer, a leaking septic system, a boat or PWC -- whatever. Let's enjoy it and preserve it for future generations to enjoy as well!

[Frdxplorer]

Grant,

I was @ Belknap during the mid & late 90's. The current director often refers to Belknap as Camelot. I think he has hit the nail right on the head. They are doing a magnificent job preserving the lake for future generations.

JDeere,

Excellent point that it is nearly impossible to replace what years of nature's work has produced. We faced the same issue with construction a few years ago.

[LakeLover]

We are on Winnisquam and definitely spotted algae blooms last summer. What a disappointment. The Shorleand Protection Act is there to protect our waterways, but at the same time, protect our properties. Law or no law, why use fertilizer and jeopardize your lake quality, and your property values as well? When the lake is polluted or has no life left, who will want to own waterfront property? Not at the prices that are out there now!
And I'll never understand going to the lake to get away from it all, but then fertilize, and mow, mow, mow.... What ever happened to Natural Beauty?

[Caruso]

Algae blooms can be caused by a number of things. I do not think you can generalize and say it is the direct result of someone fertilizing his or her lawn. You may not remember but 20 years ago when most toilets flushed directly into the ground, or the lake, algae blooms were a common thing. Just a couple of years ago when the air temperature was very hot and the water temperature was unusually high we had an algae bloom. It was the first and last one I have seen in the 10 years that I have owned property on Winni.

[madrasahs]

Originally Posted by JDeere

Appreciate Grant’s reply but I would still like someone from a scientific background tell me that fertilizing the lawn and staying within the law does ANY harm to the lake.

Although I have been educated, trained, and have careered in science, the best education one can get is to simply watch the lake for fifty years from one spot.

We plopped ourselves onto an acre -- surrounded by piney woods -- and marked about a dozen trees to build a modest "camp", as they are called in NH.

Through a "misunderstanding", all the eastern white pines on our lot were felled, and some trees that we had marked for removal (with a painted white circle) were left standing. We had to saw those down -- as well as the double-insult of having to carry away all the branches left from the white pines. (White pine is still a very valuable tree commodity, and comprise 99% of double-trailer logging truck loads). I mention "sawing", as "chainsaws" back then were as heavy as outboards -- a two-handled steel saw was easier for a man (and this boy).

Now, mine is the first Winnipesaukee generation since the 1920's to stop drinking Winnipesaukee water, and what does this have to do with white pines?

Since the last Ice Age -- or, for a hundred centuries -- huge mats of pine-needles have retained the soil, slowed soil movement for moss, and filtered the surface water that flows into Lake Winnipesaukee from all of the surrounding land higher in elevation than the Lake. (The Lake Winnipesaukee Basin).

We have watched a hundred lots around us drop the marketable white pines, spread loam, and plant and fertilize lawns -- right down to Winnipesaukee's rocky edge. The lawn-maintenance people, (whose lakefront clientele are a small part of their business) are only concerned that their absentee clients' lawns are an even, and deep, green.

The lower branches of a few remaining trees are removed so that the new homes can have "a view from every room", and allow the sun to "grow" the lawn -- and, incidentally, to warm shallow waters. A lawn can't grow in a forest.

We also watch as the algae starts growing earlier after each ice-out and spread long green slimey threads from plants and twigs in the lake throughout the summer. The threads are also growing in deeper water than ever before. The lake bottom feels gooey.

Our neighbors are having truckloads of pine needles brought in to keep their lots from washing into the lake! What's wrong with this picture?

I'm not optimistic about saving the lake, and there's still many more lake problems that would fill still more space here. (Fortunately, nobody's devised a giant wave-making machine for the Weirs yet).

The State doesn't have the will to obstruct newcomers' whims, and to possibly slow this state's growth. (Now one of the fastest in the U.S., according to today's SPNHF newsletter).

Shorefront Protection enforcement is nil -- something else I have been watching from the same spot for 50 years.