Lawn Care Services
Margaret T Earl
Hi all,
I was wondering what opinions are regarding lawn services...the ones
that spray for weeds, fertilize, etc, etc. Are they any good? Better and
cheaper to do it yourself??
I'm also concerned about the chemicals used by these services. Are they
pet and kid safe? What chemicals should be avoided?
One service I've been eying is something like Barefoot Lawn....anyone
familiar with them? Other recommendations??
Thanks for all your help!
gregory anderson
As near as I know, all of the major lawn services addict your lawn to
chemical fetilizers and spray toxic chemicals. We have one acre but do
complete organic lawn care and gardening. No lawn service can take
care of the lawn the same way we do.
At this point, I can't see handing over money to companies who poison
the environment and care little about spraying their chemicals over the
fence into my lawn.
greg
In <4nvr3t$n...@trotsky.cig.mot.com> ear...@civet.cig.mot.com (Margaret
Mark Armstrong soft
In article <4o04md$g...@sjx-ixn6.ix.netcom.com> mkt...@ix.netcom.com(gregory anderson) writes:
>As near as I know, all of the major lawn services addict your lawn to
>chemical fetilizers and spray toxic chemicals. We have one acre but do
>complete organic lawn care and gardening. No lawn service can take
>care of the lawn the same way we do.
>
>
What is the difference between organic and chemical fertilizers? I am not
talking about weed killers, just fertilizers. Someone told me the major
difference between the two, organic will break down slowly
compared to chemical. But chemically, they are the same.
If you don't want any "toxic chemicals" on your lawn, don't put any weed killers
on it.
We did mess up this year, we changed lawn sevices and they sprayed some nasty
yellow stuff on the lawn. It had some weed killers in it, there is not a weed
to be seen in our backyard. Next application will be just fertilizers.
Mark
gregory anderson
In <4o1ol5$s...@elmgate.raster.Kodak.Com> m...@sisd.kodak.com (Mark
Armstrong soft) writes:
>
>What is the difference between organic and chemical fertilizers? I am
not
>talking about weed killers, just fertilizers. Someone told me the
major
>difference between the two, organic will break down slowly
>compared to chemical. But chemically, they are the same.
Organic is just that, made from organic or natural sources. In
general, yes, organic fertilizers do break down slowly and are much
less 'short-term potent' than the chemical fertilizers. As they are
usually plant or feed-based, they are in the same 'family' of feed that
the plant would normally see. When you use chemical fertilizers,
especially anything with numbers above 10 or 12, you are giving your
lawn a short-term fix, which like a human drug addict, makes the grass
become dependent upon the chemicals. That is why when you stop using a
chemical fertilizer or service, your lawn generally dies. Moreover,
most chemical lawn feed and/or weed killers tend to break down in the
soil and load it up with toxins.
The arguement that they are the same is the same analogy between
natural Vitamin E and sythetic Vitamin E. The natural one has been
proven easier for the human body to absorb.
>
>If you don't want any "toxic chemicals" on your lawn, don't put any
weed killers
>on it.
>
>We did mess up this year, we changed lawn sevices and they sprayed
some nasty
>yellow stuff on the lawn. It had some weed killers in it, there is not
a weed
>to be seen in our backyard. Next application will be just fertilizers.
>
>Mark
>
>m...@raster.kodak.com
>
We never use chemical weed killers. If you buy the right grass seed, a
vigorous growth of deep rooting grass will outcompete the weeds.
greg
Steve
In article <4nvr3t$n...@trotsky.cig.mot.com>, ear...@civet.cig.mot.com (Margaret T Earl) wrote:
>
>I was wondering what opinions are regarding lawn services...the ones
>that spray for weeds, fertilize, etc, etc. Are they any good? Better and
>cheaper to do it yourself??
It depends. If you're able-bodied and like to work outside, there's almost
nothing more psychologically rewarding than coming home to a beautiful yard
you've done yourself. I get a kick out of yardwork and wouldn't dare let a
lawn care company near it. Besides, everyone I know who's used a lawn
service has been basically unhappy, especially those who use the big-name
national franchise operations.
Any yes, it's cheaper in the long run to simply do it yourself, at least
that's my experience.
On the other hand...if I didn't like yardwork or had no time for it, then
it would make sense to pay lawn service - but I'd select a smaller local
firm over one of the big franchise operations.
-Steve
r.marcus
> As near as I know, all of the major lawn services addict your lawn to
There's a new product for lawns with a chemical dependency: Scotts 12-step :-)
Mark Armstrong soft
In article <4o2o7r$g...@tofu.alt.net> sr...@amsupply.com (Steve) writes:
>
>Any yes, it's cheaper in the long run to simply do it yourself, at least
>that's my experience.
>
We got together with about 5 of our neighbors and got quotes from
different services. If the lawn care companies can come in a do
a bunch of lawns in one area, they should give you better rates.
I pay about $37/visit for about 1 acre, it is about the same cost
as buying it myself. I have heard of people paying $60/visit with
smaller yard, same company. Let them compete against each other.
Mark
gregory anderson
In all seriousness, Scotts' products are just another series of
chemical fertilizers that when stopped, kill your lawn. Although, they
recently came out with a 'natural' brand, it is not organic, nor much
better than their standard chemical fertilizers.
In <4o46vu$3...@nntpa.cb.att.com> r...@wibea.mv.att.com (r.marcus)
writes:
Mark Armstrong soft
In article <4o24jf$g...@sjx-ixn6.ix.netcom.com> mkt...@ix.netcom.com(gregory anderson) writes:
>When you use chemical fertilizers,
>especially anything with numbers above 10 or 12, you are giving your
>lawn a short-term fix, which like a human drug addict, makes the grass
>become dependent upon the chemicals.
So if you used an organic fertilizer which breaks down quickly, you
would have the same problem? How about using the dry fertilizer instead
of liquid? I have heard that the liquid fertilizers are bad, big dose
then nothing.
>Moreover,
>most chemical lawn feed and/or weed killers tend to break down in the
>soil and load it up with toxins.
Once again, what is toxic with a chemical fertilizer (no weed killer).
I though it is just Nitrogen, potassium (sp) and I forget the another
one.
>
>We never use chemical weed killers. If you buy the right grass seed, a
>vigorous growth of deep rooting grass will outcompete the weeds.
Ok, now what should I have done differently. The lawn started out very bad, the
grass was thin and there were alot of weeds. Not just dandilions, whole sections
would bloom with these little blue flowers. Lots of different weeds. How do you
get rid of the weed to allow the grass to dominate?
I am concern about that yellow stuff they sprayed on my lawn and I might
cancel my lawn service if they don't offer any other plans. My backyard has
no weeds, why put down weed killer.
Mark
Joe Polvino
In article <4o4m9i$1...@sjx-ixn2.ix.netcom.com>, mkt...@ix.netcom.co gives
us these words of wisdom...
>
>In all seriousness, Scotts' products are just another series of
>chemical fertilizers that when stopped, kill your lawn. Although, they
>recently came out with a 'natural' brand, it is not organic, nor much
>better than their standard chemical fertilizers.
This is simply not true. I used Scott's Weed and Feed for the last two
years and didn't apply any this years, because I didn't have that many
weeds and the grass was lush. Plus, the previous owners had some
professional lawn company apply liquid fertilizer and weed killer for
at least 3 years before that.
My grass is alive and healthy, thank you very much. The soil has been
analyzed...near perfect chemical balance.
I saw your other post where you said you and most of your neighbors
despise the use of chemical herbicides. If this holds true for
fertilizers, you have a right to that opinion. But please don't
spread rumors.
Just curious: did you have a lawn which died after you stopped using
Scott's fertilizer products?
-joe
--
joseph s. polvino | "The reasons there are so many problems in
eastman kodak company | the world today is because God didn't unit
716-588-0659 | test."
pol...@sector.kodak.com | -- me
gregory anderson
Boy, you usenet folks are just so snappy with the obtuse sarcasm ...
In <4ofccp$l...@kodak.rdcs.Kodak.COM> pol...@sector.kodak.com (Joe
Polvino) writes:
>This is simply not true. I used Scott's Weed and Feed for the last two
>years and didn't apply any this years, because I didn't have that many
>weeds and the grass was lush. Plus, the previous owners had some
>professional lawn company apply liquid fertilizer and weed killer for
>at least 3 years before that.
>
>My grass is alive and healthy, thank you very much. The soil has been
>analyzed...near perfect chemical balance.
It is in fact true in many cases. I have seen it happen many times.
Moreover, it is more likely to happen when suddenly in the middle of
the summer, you stop using chemical fertilizers. The lawn does in
fact, on most occasions, go into shock.
>
>I saw your other post where you said you and most of your neighbors
>despise the use of chemical herbicides. If this holds true for
>fertilizers, you have a right to that opinion. But please don't
>spread rumors.
No rumors, just simple data collection and analysis based upon
empirical data. I say, hat's off to you if you have been able to get
away with it.
>
>Just curious: did you have a lawn which died after you stopped using
>Scott's fertilizer products?
>
I would never wasted any of my money on Scott's products. However, in
the past my parents had used Scott's grass seed and fertilizers. They
found the result of stopping the fertilizers was weak grass.
Of the commercially available fertilzers, I use Ringer only. I usually
use many of the more obscure organic fertilizers.
Doug Hood
somebody wrote:
*> joe polvino wrote:
*>This is simply not true. I used Scott's Weed and Feed for the last two
*>years and didn't apply any this years, because I didn't have that many
*>weeds and the grass was lush. Plus, the previous owners had some
*>professional lawn company apply liquid fertilizer and weed killer for
*>at least 3 years before that.
*>
*>My grass is alive and healthy, thank you very much. The soil has been
*>analyzed...near perfect chemical balance.
*
*It is in fact true in many cases. I have seen it happen many times.
*Moreover, it is more likely to happen when suddenly in the middle of
*the summer, you stop using chemical fertilizers. The lawn does in
*fact, on most occasions, go into shock.
It is in fact not true in most cases. I have never seen it happen at any
time. Moreover, it is just as unlikely to happen when suddenly in the
middle of the summer, you stop using chemical fertilizers. The lawn
never in fact, on most occasions, go into shock.
There. That just goes to show you that anyone can say anything on the
internet that may (or may not) have any basis in fact and still sound
like it comes from someone speaking with authority. I'm with Joe on this
one. Frankly, I have seen lawns die on only a few occasions: newly
planted lawns exposed to severe heat, herbicides, fungus/disease. A lawn
is alive. Give it food and it will grow fast and lush. Give it no food
and it will grow much more slowly. To imply that Scott's Weed and Feed
is some kind of drug that your lawn gets "hooked" on and will die
without is just plain stupid (Unless you are growing fescue in sand).
I've used all kinds of fertilizer, and started/stopped in the middle of
the summer with no ill affects. In fact, it is advised NOT to fertilize
if you are in the middle of a summer drought. If you want to lay your
organic fertilizer propoganda on us, then do so. The Scott's bashing
just makes you look like a fool.
doug
John P. Curcio
In article <4oi1i3$8...@dfw-ixnews5.ix.netcom.com>, mkt...@ix.netcom.com(gregory anderson) writes:
|> Boy, you usenet folks are just so snappy with the obtuse sarcasm ...
...I guess you get what you pay for ;-)...
|> In <4ofccp$l...@kodak.rdcs.Kodak.COM> pol...@sector.kodak.com (Joe
|> Polvino) writes:
|>
|> >This is simply not true. I used Scott's Weed and Feed for the last two
|> >years and didn't apply any this years, because I didn't have that many
|> >weeds and the grass was lush. Plus, the previous owners had some
|> >professional lawn company apply liquid fertilizer and weed killer for
|> >at least 3 years before that.
|> >
|> >My grass is alive and healthy, thank you very much. The soil has been
|> >analyzed...near perfect chemical balance.
|>
|> It is in fact true in many cases. I have seen it happen many times.
|> Moreover, it is more likely to happen when suddenly in the middle of
|> the summer, you stop using chemical fertilizers. The lawn does in
|> fact, on most occasions, go into shock.
Add me to the "I can stop at any time without my grass having become
addicted" crowd. I think that perhaps part of the problem with the people
who have the problem is that they have the "if 1 ounce is good, 2 ounces
are twice as good" mentality. This will obviously destroy one's lawn.
|> >I saw your other post where you said you and most of your neighbors
|> >despise the use of chemical herbicides. If this holds true for
|> >fertilizers, you have a right to that opinion. But please don't
|> >spread rumors.
|>
|> No rumors, just simple data collection and analysis based upon
|> empirical data. I say, hat's off to you if you have been able to get
|> away with it.
|> I would never wasted any of my money on Scott's products. However, in
|> the past my parents had used Scott's grass seed and fertilizers. They
|> found the result of stopping the fertilizers was weak grass.
Did they continue with another fertilizer? If they didn't, that could
explain it....
|> Of the commercially available fertilzers, I use Ringer only. I usually
|> use many of the more obscure organic fertilizers.
There is no difference chemically between the nitrogen, potassium, and
phosphorous in organic and non-organic fertilizers. There may be a
difference in the amounts, but that varies from brand to brand within either.
I don't see why people pay more for organic fertilizers (in most cases, about
double), when the results are just the same. If the costs were comparable,
I'd think about going with the organic, but I prefer not to waste my money on
the overpriced organic stuff...
-JPC
--
=============================================================================
John P. Curcio j...@philabs.philips.com Philips Labs Briarcliff Manor, NY
"The only thing the Democrats have to offer is fear itself"
"No goats, no boats, no motorcars, not a single 'yes-siree!'" -BH
gregory anderson
I can see that most of you chemical users have very unpleasant
attitudes and poor manners. I still can not figure out why many of
usenet posters seem fit to caustically chastize people who are trying
to give some advice. Like you, I have the right to my beliefs and my
experiences.
I maintain, and have both seen and experienced first hand that using
chemically based fertilizers does in fact condition your lawn to
'needing' a fix of high nitrogen fertilizer after a number of weeks.
If I first used the term 'die' I made a mistake. Become sparser, less
vigorous, wilty, etc. would be more appropriate terms. I have no
reason to lie as I am not a wholesaler of organic fertilizers and such,
I am just a person who believes in a more natural lifestyle and to
avoid commercial chemicals if possible.
You sir, are in fact the one who quite possibly looks like a fool when
you begin your tirade on how I am just talking out the side of my
mouth.
Why don;t you try going to your local university extension program and
read some article in the horticultural journals on the drawbacks of
chemically based high potency fertilizers.
WHen it comes right down to it, if you regularly applied composted cow
manure on your lawn as a top dressing, it would work much better than
either organic or chemical fertilizers.
In <31ADF8...@sware.com> Doug Hood <ho...@sware.com> writes:
>
>somebody wrote:
>*> joe polvino wrote:
>*>This is simply not true. I used Scott's Weed and Feed for the last
two
>*>years and didn't apply any this years, because I didn't have that
many
>*>weeds and the grass was lush. Plus, the previous owners had some
>*>professional lawn company apply liquid fertilizer and weed killer
for
>*>at least 3 years before that.
>*>
>*>My grass is alive and healthy, thank you very much. The soil has
been
>*>analyzed...near perfect chemical balance.
>*
>*It is in fact true in many cases. I have seen it happen many times.
>*Moreover, it is more likely to happen when suddenly in the middle of
>*the summer, you stop using chemical fertilizers. The lawn does in
>*fact, on most occasions, go into shock.
>
>
>
>It is in fact not true in most cases. I have never seen it happen at
any
>time. Moreover, it is just as unlikely to happen when suddenly in the
>middle of the summer, you stop using chemical fertilizers. The lawn
>never in fact, on most occasions, go into shock.
>
>
>There. That just goes to show you that anyone can say anything on the
>internet that may (or may not) have any basis in fact and still sound
>like it comes from someone speaking with authority. I'm with Joe on
this
>one. Frankly, I have seen lawns die on only a few occasions: newly
>planted lawns exposed to severe heat, herbicides, fungus/disease. A
lawn
>is alive. Give it food and it will grow fast and lush. Give it no food
>and it will grow much more slowly. To imply that Scott's Weed and Feed
>is some kind of drug that your lawn gets "hooked" on and will die
>without is just plain stupid (Unless you are growing fescue in sand).
>I've used all kinds of fertilizer, and started/stopped in the middle
of
gregory anderson
>
>Add me to the "I can stop at any time without my grass having become
>addicted" crowd. I think that perhaps part of the problem with the
people
>who have the problem is that they have the "if 1 ounce is good, 2
ounces
>are twice as good" mentality. This will obviously destroy one's lawn.
You are very correct here. That will in fact exponentially multiply
the problem.
>Did they continue with another fertilizer? If they didn't, that could
>explain it....
Yes, they switched to Green Power or Greenview .. I can't quite
remember the brand name.
>
>|> Of the commercially available fertilzers, I use Ringer only. I
usually
>|> use many of the more obscure organic fertilizers.
>
>There is no difference chemically between the nitrogen, potassium, and
>phosphorous in organic and non-organic fertilizers. There may be a
>difference in the amounts, but that varies from brand to brand within
either.
Again, I have a different analysis than you. There are no structural
difference between organic and synthetic, however, the delivery systems
are different and the mechanism of absorption is different. It's the
same analogy of human absorption of synthetic vitamin E and natural
vitamin E.
The whole trick to growing lush grass that is naturally healthy is to
modify and support the soil subsystem. Chemical fertilizers such as
Scotts do nothing to enrich the organic matter in the soil and in fact,
according to some studies, deplete the soil of natural organisms,
especially when used with chemical insecticides.
BTW, if you purchase Ringer on sale (as I did), I believe you can match
the Scott's price.
SInce we planted special bred varities of dwarf turf type fescue, dwarf
alpine kentucky blue grass, and dwarf fine blade annual ryegrasses (all
are naturally insect resistant, drought resistant [roots down up to 48
inches)) that all require much less nitrogen than standard grasses, we
only need to apply fertilizers at 2/3 of the recommended rate. What I
usually do is to purchase the 40lb bag of RInger for $20 or so and than
add 2 lbs of Epsom salts per 40 lb bag. Shake it well and put it on
the lawn at 50% of the recommended rate. Works fantastic for me.
Again, it is not a control study, but of all the lawns in this new
development(8 houses), our lawn is the newest (only 6 months old) and
is the finest, greenest, and easiest to take care of lawn on the
street.
>I don't see why people pay more for organic fertilizers (in most
cases, about
>double), when the results are just the same. If the costs were
comparable,
>I'd think about going with the organic, but I prefer not to waste my
money on
>the overpriced organic stuff...
>
>-JPC
>
>--
>======================================================================
======
loren
Bert
A post from India in response to a 17 year old post, just to shill for
some two-bit landscape company.
Could this be some sort of record?
Or just another attempt to cover up a blatant piece of spam?
--
be...@iphouse.com St. Paul, MN