The Grass That's Always Greener Sets Off Turf Wars

Courtesy of Newhouse News Service
Written by Dru Sefton
August 19, 2005

Talk about turf wars. When it comes to artificial lawns, there's scant neutral ground.

Manufacturers tout savings of costs and maintenance, while turfgrass experts say natural is better for drainage and wildlife. There are communities that have banned it and others considering rebates for it; homeowners eager to give up mowing and their landscape architects reluctant to go faux.

It's a topic of talk across the country as residents cope with drought-withered lawns and restricted water usage. With synthetic, it's permanent green with zero water.

Fake grass sprouted into the public consciousness in 1966 with the installation of AstroTurf®, an ultra-tough, grasslike playing surface, in the Houston Astrodome.

Many people still envision synthetic grass as hard, bristly and more suited to the pounding of football cleats than the scampering of bare feet.

"That's one hurdle we've had to overcome," said Chris Doherty, spokesman for SYNLawn in Orlando, Fla.

Homeowners such as Jack Wojslawowicz insist this new generation of fake lawn is different.

"It looks just like regular grass. You have to get down close to really see it's plastic," Wojslawowicz said of his lawn in Bayonne, N.J. "And it's a nice green color, not brash. The green of early to late spring when it's growing well."

Wojslawowicz said he's received "more compliments than complaints" from neighbors.

Such enthusiasm has prompted artificial turf businesses that previously focused on supplying putting greens and athletic fields to add residential lawns to their repertoire.

So nowadays AstroTurf, LLC. also sells AstroLawn® (www.astrolawn.com). And there are other fake-sod companies such as Waterless Grass and Forever Lawn and ProGreen -- more than 20 firms, according to the Synthetic Turf Council in Dalton, Ga.

Some have found a specific niche, such as Dog Lawn. No more pet urine stains.

Joe Kurung in Chico, Calif., markets his product this way: "You just hose it down to clean it, deodorize it if need be, and it'll last the entire life of your dog." He even sells small chunks, 2 by 2 feet, for dog owners to take on the road.

Sprinturf in Wayne, Pa., has been selling its residential version, LawnScape, for about a year, said marketing coordinator Crystal Parsons. It also offers SkyTurf, a lightweight version for decks and high-rise balconies.

The products are "very soft but quite durable," Parsons said.

Fans of artificial grass say there's no mowing, watering or fertilizers. And the lawn may last 15 years. Maintenance consists of fluffing with a rake, vacuuming leaves or spraying for the occasional weed at the edges.

Opponents say there's more to consider.

"People don't think about lawns as ecosystems, but they are," said Peter J. Landschoot, professor of turfgrass science at Penn State's Department of Crop and Soil Sciences. "There's microbial activity, as well as bird life and small mammals. What about squirrels, where will they bury their nuts?"

SYNLawn's Doherty pointed out that could be a positive: "In Florida, there are fire ants. I have this in my backyard -- no fire ants."

What most troubles Landschoot are the unknown, long-term effects of artificial turf in home landscaping.

"This is kind of an untested commodity right now," he said. "It's really not a lawn. You're more or less putting down some kind of carpet."

Turfgrass Producers International in East Dundee, Ill., a trade association, also is concerned.

"Real turfgrass has a significant cooling effect, helps eliminate dust and biohazards and filters air and groundwater," all of which fake grasses do not, said Bob O'Quinn, spokesman.

All sides agree that synthetic grass is pricey. At $6 to $8 a square foot, a faux lawn is often several times more expensive than living grass.

But, as Doherty said, "what we've found is while it's more expensive upfront, the investment is returned within about two and a half years," from savings on water and maintenance.

So some communities are considering encouraging residents to install the fake lawns. The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California currently is studying five homes with synthetic turf in Anaheim, mulling possible rebates.

Mike Ebbing, spokesman for Anaheim Public Utilities, said that so far, the average residential savings per square foot is about 457 gallons over the estimated 15-year life of the synthetic turf.

On the opposing side is Thornton, Colo.

During a drought in 2002, five homeowners installed synthetic lawns, said David Nighswonger, development engineering director for the city. They weren't aware of an existing ban on artificial landscaping.

When told to remove the lawns, they petitioned the city council to revisit the policy, Nighswonger said. After research, the council voted to uphold the ban.

"It was quite a heated debate," he admitted. Ultimately, the council was concerned about environmental factors including "the runoff due to zero absorption." If an entire subdivision chose artificial grass, which doesn't absorb water, the runoff could overwhelm the storm drains.

That also worries Peggy A. Brown, a landscape architect in Cleveland Heights, Ohio. She's had one request for synthetic grass, "and I steered her someplace else."

So the debate continues. Trevor Brooks, an entrepreneur in Arlington, Texas, has been following the controversy for two years and is detailing his findings at www.syntheticgrassblog.com.

It's so confusing that one section is titled "Cutting Through the Crap." "I'm just trying to make sense of it all," Brooks said.