1. Missed the live Ask the Expert event?
    Not to worry. Check out the archived thread of the Q&A with Ken Hutcheson, President of U.S. Lawns, and the LawnSite community in the Franchising forum .

    Dismiss Notice

Phosphorus runoff from Lawns

Discussion in 'Pesticide & Herbicide Application' started by Ric, Dec 18, 2010.

  1. Ric

    Ric LawnSite Fanatic
    Posts: 11,956

    Worth watching. Be sure to send links to all your Tree Hugging friends. U of F released a similar finding in response to Local County Tree hugger ordinances here in Florida. The U of F's take was same, No Fert Laws were causing more damage than proper fertilization.

  2. grass4gas

    grass4gas LawnSite Senior Member
    Posts: 473


    Very interesting. I'm book marking this and saving it in case I need it for reference.

    Even more interesting was the fact that they are using a

    I think I'll sit back and watch the debate roll on.

    Thanks for posting.
  3. rcreech

    rcreech Sponsor
    Male, from OHIO
    Posts: 6,059

    Very nice!

    Thanks for sharing Ric!

    Makes a lot of sense.
  4. greendoctor

    greendoctor LawnSite Fanatic
    Posts: 9,064

    Thank you Ric. Confirms what I have observed over the years. Starved lawns contribute to more water and soil runoff vs a well fed lawn.
  5. grassman177

    grassman177 LawnSite Fanatic
    Posts: 9,795

    absolutely interesting.

    makes total sense and wonder why states did not do research like this before they imposed bans. i think more research is needed in this subject before states should regulate things like this. often times law makers jump the gun and on the bandwagon without having all the facts, and then it becomes law which can sometimes have a negative effect on everyone, but no one is seemingly willing to get it repealed or ammended to correct for wrong information or guidlines
  6. phasthound

    phasthound LawnSite Platinum Member
    Posts: 4,583

    The law makers in NJ received info like this from the industry, but still passed the strictest fert law in the nation last week. For the past 2 years there was a great deal of negotiations and I believe the bill that passed is a workable compromise. However, when politicians receive 7,000 letters in favor of banning P & only 70 letters opposed, you know what they are going to do.

    I agree with the findings but many people will dismiss the study as biased because it was funded by industry.
  7. quiet

    quiet LawnSite Senior Member
    Posts: 720

    I would have liked to hear them specifically address the P runoff differences of the fertilized plots. Did the "fertilized, but with no phosphorus" plot have the least P runoff after the heavy rain? He said there was a linear relationship of P runoff from the Zero P, 1X P, and 3X P plots.

    But did the Zero P plot have the least P runoff after the rainfall? In other words, I'm asking if the "Zero P" turf was sufficiently dense and developed to provide the least amount of nutrient run off.

    That would be justification for just N and K fertilizing, without additional P.
  8. grassman177

    grassman177 LawnSite Fanatic
    Posts: 9,795

    very good question and i would also like an answer.

    anyone know? maybe we could contact this guy for the info.
  9. gregory

    gregory LawnSite Bronze Member
    Posts: 1,068

    great video... makes sense......
  10. ted putnam

    ted putnam LawnSite Platinum Member
    Posts: 4,539

    Same here. And as far as what Phasthound posted, misinformation coupled with media hype is the root of all evil. That applies to more than just the P debate as well. It's a shame that we can't live in a "no spin" zone.

Share This Page