Throw away your rake?
By Greg | Published: August 17th, 2009Recently while reading through the blog on the ASLA website I came across an article called “Jayne Poynter: “Throw Away Your Rakes” which as a landscape professional peaked my interest. The article linked to a video on www.ted.com, which was of Poynter giving a 15-minute lecture about time she spent living in the “Biosphere 2″ in Arizona. Towards the end of the clip she showed a photo of her backyard in Tucson: sand, some weeds, a tree or two. The she said “I threw away my rake” and showed how over a period of time not raking her backyard, leaf litter broke down, created fertile soil with organic matter, which in turn allowed plants to grow. The next thing you know she has this lush sustainable landscape with birds and wildlife that would make any landscape architect tip his hat from basically doing nothing. She goes on to claim that all of Tucson could be like that if people would just stop raking their leaves.
What does this have to do with landscaping in New Hampshire? One phrase that always comes up in our designs is “plant with native and naturalized species.” Your front lawn is not a native species, and while its definitely large part of the American landscape identity, and at risk of alienating our allies in the landscape maintenance industry, I think our most attractive properties are ones that have no lawn at all. I would like to think that we tend to accelerate the process Poynter talks about in our designs. Yeah, we place plants with aesthetics in mind, but the spirit behind “throw away your rakes” is still there. The idea is that these beautiful native plants could have grown in your back yard if it was just left alone. I can’t endorse leaving a disturbed site bare and waiting for it to fill on its own for a multitude of reasons, primarily erosion and invasive plants species, but I can endorse the idea of having a native landscape that doesn’t need to be mowed or raked every week.
This is definitely an increasing trend, particularly in the Lake Sunapee Region. With the passing of the Comprehensive Shoreland Protection Act last year, the Department of Environmental Services is putting a lot of emphasis on preserving native, undisturbed woodlands around New Hampshire’s water bodies, and replanting areas of disturbance with native material. While the intention of this CSPA is largely to protect the quality of water in NH lakes and rivers, it does a fine job of promoting native, sustainable landscapes as well.
dblandscaping.biz |
December 8th, 2009 at 3:09 pm
Any move to expand our industry horizons is good news, as long as it is market-driven. The majority of Americans(our customers)want to be good stewards of the earth and in some way do their part to make a difference.
We must always remember the customer’s needs come first. If they like a lush lawn, we are to do our best to provide that for them. A sustainable landscape may interest them, or it may not. There are other concerns they may have as well. How does this effect my property value? What is the cost-benefit-ROI of the landscape project? Or it could simply be a desire to see created what they envision their little garden paradise to be.
We should objectively evaluate current trends and market them to as an added value to our services. There are many ideas that come across the table to help the planet. Some are practical, some are not. Recycling rain water, or permeable pavement is practical anywhere. But what about a green roof in Buffalo? We know that Mercury is harmful, but it’s O.K. to put into low-energy light bulbs? Does this help the planet? Sanity and pragmatism is a valuable asset in today’s world.
One caveat I would add is to be aware of the dangers of litigating our industry into a little green corner. What’s our servant today can become our master tomorrow.
The Dark Sky movement has succeeded in putting through legislation that regulates lighting options for municipalities that receive state funds. Lighting must be at 90 degrees to the ground, specific out-put, time on/time off, etc. That’s fine for the state, but is this is a foot in the door to regulating private industry or private citizens? How should we strike a balance between the rights of someone to be able to see the stars, vs. a private citizen’s right to light their yard the way they like? Removing the option of vertical lighting or mandating LEDs will certainly affect the quality of a lighting design and make it un-marketable. This limits the options, profitability, and ultimately the the success of the hard working service providers in the Green Industry.
January 17th, 2010 at 2:39 pm
Good post, thanks for the good info
January 17th, 2010 at 5:33 pm
Thanks for the useful info.
February 8th, 2010 at 1:29 pm
It’s like you took the words right out of my mouth. Seriously, great job.
February 19th, 2010 at 7:48 pm
I stumbled onto your blog and read a few post. I like your style of writing.