The Future of Landscaping in Las Vegas: Artificial Grass Trends
Las Vegas Weekend Turf Installation
Benefits of Artificial Grass in the Las Vegas Climate
In the arid climate of Las Vegas, artificial grass has emerged as a game-changer for homeowners and businesses alike. Quality Artificial Grass in Las Vegas Nevada. The benefits of using synthetic turf in this desert environment are hard to ignore. For one, you don't have to worry about the relentless sun scorching your lawn or the constant need for watering (which can be a real pain!). Las Vegas School Turf Installation Traditional grass just can't keep up with the demands of the Vegas heat, but artificial grass thrives in it.
Water conservation is another huge plus! With the ongoing discussions about water shortages and sustainability, using artificial grass can significantly reduce your water usage. You wont be needing to waste gallons of water just to keep your lawn looking green. In fact, many folks have reported up to 70% savings on their water bills after switching to turf. That's a win-win situation!
Moreover, maintenance is a breeze. You wont have to spend your weekends mowing, fertilizing, or worrying about pesky pests. Just a simple rinse now and then is all it takes to keep it looking fresh. Best Turf For Hot Weather Las Vegas This means more time for enjoying the beautiful outdoor spaces instead of laboring over them. And let's be honest, who doesn't want to spend less time on yard work?
Theres also the aesthetic appeal to consider! Artificial grass looks great year-round, no matter the season. You can have a vibrant lawn without the hassle of reseeding or dealing with brown patches. This not only enhances the curb appeal of homes but also creates inviting spaces for gatherings and relaxation.
In conclusion, the benefits of artificial grass in the Las Vegas climate are truly remarkable. It's an eco-friendly, low-maintenance solution that meets the unique challenges posed by the desert environment. Las Vegas Weekend Turf Installation As the trends in landscaping continue to evolve, it's clear that synthetic turf is here to stay, and it's transforming the way we think about outdoor spaces!
Innovative Designs: Transforming Outdoor Spaces with Artificial Grass
Innovative Designs: Transforming Outdoor Spaces with Artificial Grass! The future of landscaping in Las Vegas is definitely headed in a new direction, and artificial grass trends are leading the way. You wouldnt believe the variety of designs and colors available now that can completely change the look of any outdoor space. And guess what? Maintaining this new artificial turf is a breeze compared to traditional grass. No more mowing, watering, or dealing with those pesky weeds! Its like having a perfect garden all year round without the hassle. Oh, and the durability of artificial grass cant be beat. Its resistant to wear and tear, which means no more worrying about your lawn getting damaged by pets or kids. Plus, its eco-friendly, using less water and reducing the need for harmful chemicals. So, if youre tired of the upkeep and want a modern, stylish look for your outdoor area, artificial grass might just be the answer youve been looking for in Las Vegas. Who knew transforming your yard could be so easy and exciting?
Environmental Impact and Sustainability of Artificial Turf
Artificial turf, eh? Its definitely become a big thing in Las Vegas landscaping, especially when thinking bout the future. But hold on a sec, while it looks great and saves water, we gotta think about its environmental impact and, ya know, sustainability!
It's not all sunshine and roses (or perfectly manicured blades). Manufacturing artificial turf? Well, that often involves fossil fuels! And what about when it needs replacing? Its not like you can just compost it! That's a whole lotta plastic waste that could end up in landfills. (Yikes!)
Furthermore, artificial turf can get seriously hot under the desert sun. This contributes to the urban heat island effect, making our city even warmer. That's definitely not ideal. Natural grass, on the other hand, helps cool things down.
However, its isnt all doom and gloom. Some companies are working on more sustainable options, like using recycled materials or developing turfs that dont last as long! And let's not forget the water savings; in a desert environment, cutting down on irrigation is a huge plus.
Ultimately, the future of artificial turf in Las Vegas depends on finding a balance. We need to consider both the benefits (like water conservation) and the drawbacks (like waste and heat). So, really, we should be asking, is there a way to make it truly sustainable? I think we can, but itll take innovation and a real commitment to minimizing its impact!.
Cost Analysis: Initial Investment vs. Long-Term Savings
When it comes to landscaping in Las Vegas, the choice between initial investment and long-term savings is a biggie! Artificial grass has been gaining traction in recent years, and it's not hard to see why. However, folks often find themselves caught in a tug-of-war between the upfront costs and the potential savings down the line.
Let's face it, installing artificial grass isn't exactly cheap. The initial investment can be pretty steep, especially when you factor in the materials and labor. But, it's important to take a step back and really consider what that cost means in the long run. You see, once that synthetic turf is laid down, you're not gonna have to worry about watering, mowing, or fertilizing it. That can lead to some serious savings on your water bill and maintenance costs. I mean, who wouldn't want to save money while also helping out the environment by reducing water usage?
Moreover, in a place like Las Vegas where the sun shines almost all year round, natural grass struggles to thrive. Many homeowners find themselves spending a fortune on keeping their lawns green and lush. With artificial grass, you won't be throwing money down the drain for irrigation systems or worrying about dead patches. There's no need to stress about drought restrictions either!
Now, you might think, “But what about the aesthetics?” Well, modern artificial grass looks and feels surprisingly realistic. It can provide the lush, green look that everyone wants without the hassle. Plus, it's durable and can withstand the heavy foot traffic that comes with hosting gatherings or letting kids play outside.
In conclusion, while the upfront costs of artificial grass might make you hesitate, the long-term savings and benefits can't be ignored. It's a smart investment for both your wallet and the planet. So, if you're considering a landscaping upgrade in Las Vegas, maybe it's time to give artificial grass a serious thought!
Surface of synthetic fibers made to look like natural grass
Artificial turf with rubber crumb infillSide view of artificial turfDiagram of the structure of modern artificial turfArtificial turf square mats
Artificial turf is a surface of synthetic fibers made to look like natural grass, used in sports arenas, residential lawns and commercial applications that traditionally use grass. It is much more durable than grass and easily maintained without irrigation or trimming, although periodic cleaning is required. Stadiums that are substantially covered and/or at high latitudes often use artificial turf, as they typically lack enough sunlight for photosynthesis and substitutes for solar radiation are prohibitively expensive and energy-intensive. Disadvantages include increased risk of injury especially when used in athletic competition, as well as health and environmental concerns about the petroleum and toxic chemicals used in its manufacture.
Artificial turf first gained substantial attention in 1966, when ChemGrass was installed in the year-old Astrodome, developed by Monsanto and rebranded as AstroTurf, now a generic trademark (registered to a new owner) for any artificial turf.
The first-generation system of shortpile fibers without infill of the 1960s has largely been replaced by two more. The second features longer fibers and sand infill and the third adds recycled crumb rubber to the sand. Compared to earlier systems, modern artificial turf more closely resembles grass in appearance and is also considered safer for athletic competition. However, it is still not widely considered to be equal to grass. Sports clubs, leagues, unions and individual athletes have frequently spoken out and campaigned against it, while local governments have enacted and enforced laws restricting and/or banning its use.
David Chaney, who moved to Raleigh, North Carolina, in 1960 and later served as Dean of the North Carolina State University College of Textiles, headed the team of Research Triangle Park researchers who created the first notable artificial turf. That accomplishment led Sports Illustrated to declare Chaney as the man "responsible for indoor major league baseball and millions of welcome mats."
Artificial turf was first installed in 1964 on a recreation area at the Moses Brown School in Providence, Rhode Island.[1] The material came to public prominence in 1966, when AstroTurf was installed in the Astrodome in Houston, Texas.[1] The state-of-the-art indoor stadium had attempted to use natural grass during its initial season in 1965, but this failed miserably and the field conditions were grossly inadequate during the second half of the season, with the dead grass painted green. Due to a limited supply of the new artificial grass, only the infield was installed before the Houston Astros' home opener in April 1966; the outfield was installed in early summer during an extended Astros road trip and first used after the All-Star Break in July.
The use of AstroTurf and similar surfaces became widespread in the U.S. and Canada in the early 1970s, installed in both indoor and outdoor stadiums used for baseball and football. More than 11,000 artificial turf playing fields have been installed nationally.[2] More than 1,200 were installed in the U.S. in 2013 alone, according to the industry group the Synthetic Turf Council.[2]
Tropicana Field with its artificial turf field.An artificial-turf field at a high school in Oregon.
Artificial turf was first used in Major League Baseball in the Houston Astrodome in 1966, replacing the grass field used when the stadium opened a year earlier. Even though the grass was specifically bred for indoor use, the dome's semi-transparent Lucite ceiling panels, which had been painted white to cut down on glare that bothered the players, did not pass enough sunlight to support the grass. For most of the 1965 season, the Astros played on green-painted dirt and dead grass.
The solution was to install a new type of artificial grass on the field, ChemGrass, which became known as AstroTurf. Given its early use, the term astroturf has since been genericized as a term for any artificial turf.[3] Because the supply of AstroTurf was still low, only a limited amount was available for the first home game. There was not enough for the entire outfield, but there was enough to cover the traditional grass portion of the infield. The outfield remained painted dirt until after the All-Star Break. The team was sent on an extended road trip before the break, and on July 19, 1966, the installation of the outfield portion of AstroTurf was completed.
The Chicago White Sox became the first team to install artificial turf in an outdoor stadium, as they used it only in the infield and adjacent foul territory at Comiskey Park from 1969 through 1975.[4] Artificial turf was later installed in other new multi-purpose stadiums such as Pittsburgh's Three Rivers Stadium, Philadelphia's Veterans Stadium, and Cincinnati's Riverfront Stadium. Early AstroTurf baseball fields used the traditional all-dirt path, but starting in 1970 with Cincinnati's Riverfront Stadium,[5] teams began using the "base cutout" layout on the diamond, with the only dirt being on the pitcher's mound, batter's circle, and in a five-sided diamond-shaped "sliding box" around each base. With this layout, a painted arc would indicate where the edge of the outfield grass would normally be, to assist fielders in positioning themselves properly. The last stadium in MLB to use this configuration was Rogers Centre in Toronto, when they switched to an all-dirt infield (but keeping the artificial turf) for the 2016 season.[6][7]
Artificial turf being installed on a baseball field in Queens, New York City.
The biggest difference in play on artificial turf was that the ball bounced higher than on real grass and also traveled faster, causing infielders to play farther back than they would normally so that they would have sufficient time to react. The ball also had a truer bounce than on grass so that on long throws fielders could deliberately bounce the ball in front of the player they were throwing to, with the certainty that it would travel in a straight line and not be deflected to the right or left. The biggest impact on the game of "turf", as it came to be called, was on the bodies of the players. The artificial surface, which was generally placed over a concrete base, had much less give to it than a traditional dirt and grass field did, which caused more wear-and-tear on knees, ankles, feet, and the lower back, possibly even shortening the careers of those players who played a significant portion of their games on artificial surfaces. Players also complained that the turf was much hotter than grass, sometimes causing the metal spikes to burn their feet or plastic ones to melt. These factors eventually provoked a number of stadiums, such as the Kansas City Royals' Kauffman Stadium, to switch from artificial turf back to natural grass.
In 2000, St. Petersburg's Tropicana Field became the first MLB field to use a third-generation artificial surface, FieldTurf. All other remaining artificial turf stadiums were either converted to third-generation surfaces or were replaced entirely by new natural grass stadiums. In a span of 13 years, between 1992 and 2005, the National League went from having half of its teams using artificial turf to all of them playing on natural grass. With the replacement of Minneapolis's Hubert H. Humphrey Metrodome by Target Field in 2010, only two MLB stadiums used artificial turf from 2010 through 2018: Tropicana Field and Toronto's Rogers Centre. This number grew to three when the Arizona Diamondbacks switched Chase Field to artificial turf for the 2019 season; the stadium had grass from its opening in 1998 until 2018, but the difficulty of maintaining the grass in the stadium, which has a retractable roof and is located in a desert city, was cited as the reason for the switch.[8] In 2020, Miami's Marlins Park (now loanDepot Park) also switched to artificial turf for similar reasons, while the Texas Rangers' new Globe Life Field was opened with an artificial surface, as it is also a retractable roof ballpark in a hot weather city; this puts the number of teams using synthetic turf in MLB at five as of 2023.
In 2002, CenturyLink Field, originally planned to have a natural grass field, was instead surfaced with FieldTurf upon positive reaction from the Seattle Seahawks when they played on the surface at their temporary home of Husky Stadium during the 2000 and 2001 seasons. This would be the first of a leaguewide trend taking place over the next several seasons that would not only result in teams already using artificial surfaces for their fields switching to the new FieldTurf or other similar surfaces but would also see several teams playing on grass adopt a new surface. (The Indianapolis Colts' RCA Dome and the St. Louis Rams' Edward Jones Dome were the last two stadiums in the NFL to replace their first-generation AstroTurf surfaces for next-generation ones after the 2004 season). For example, after a three-year experiment with a natural surface, Giants Stadium went to FieldTurf for 2003, while M&T Bank Stadium added its own artificial surface the same year (it has since been removed and replaced with a natural surface, which the stadium had before installing the turf). Later examples include Paul Brown Stadium (now Paycor Stadium), which went from grass to turf in 2004; Gillette Stadium, which made the switch in 2006;[9] and NRG Stadium, which did so in 2015. As of 2021, 14 NFL fields out of 30 are artificial. NFL players overwhelmingly prefer natural grass over synthetic surfaces, according to a league survey conducted in 2010. When asked, "Which surface do you think is more likely to shorten your career?", 90% responded artificial turf.[10] When players were asked "Is the Turf versus Grass debate overblown or a real concern"[11] in an anonymous player survey, 83% believe it is a real concern while 12.3% believe it is overblown.
Following receiver Odell Beckham Jr.'s injury during Super Bowl LVI, other NFL players started calling for turf to be banned since the site of the game, SoFi Stadium, was a turf field.[12]
Arena football is played indoors on the older short-pile artificial turf.
The first professional Canadian football stadium to use artificial turf was Empire Stadium in Vancouver, British Columbia, then home of the Canadian Football League's BC Lions, which installed 3M TartanTurf in 1970. Today, eight of the nine stadiums in the CFL currently use artificial turf, largely because of the harsh weather conditions in the latter-half of the season. The only one that does not is BMO Field in Toronto, which initially had an artificial pitch and has been shared by the CFL's Toronto Argonauts since 2016 (part of the endzones at that stadium are covered with artificial turf).[13] The first stadium to use the next-generation surface was Ottawa's Frank Clair Stadium (now TD Place Stadium), which the Ottawa Renegades used when they began play in 2002. The Saskatchewan Roughriders' Taylor Field was the only major professional sports venue in North America to use a second-generation artificial playing surface, Omniturf, which was used from 1988 to 2000, followed by AstroTurf from 2000 to 2007 and FieldTurf from 2007 to its 2016 closure.[14]
Some cricket pitches are made of synthetic grass[15] or of a hybrid of mostly natural and some artificial grass, with these "hybrid pitches" having been implemented across several parts of the United Kingdom[16] and Australia.[17] The first synthetic turf cricket field in the USA was opened in Fremont, California in 2016.[18]
The introduction of synthetic surfaces has significantly changed the sport of field hockey. Since being introduced in the 1970s, competitions in western countries are now mostly played on artificial surfaces. This has increased the speed of the game considerably and changed the shape of hockey sticks to allow for different techniques, such as reverse stick trapping and hitting.
Field hockey artificial turf differs from artificial turf for other sports, in that it does not try to reproduce a grass feel, being made of shorter fibers. This allows the improvement in speed brought by earlier artificial turfs to be retained. This development is problematic for areas which cannot afford to build an extra artificial field for hockey alone. The International Hockey Federation and manufacturers are driving research in order to produce new fields that will be suitable for a variety of sports.
The use of artificial turf in conjunction with changes in the game's rules (e.g., the removal of offside, introduction of rolling substitutes and the self-pass, and to the interpretation of obstruction) have contributed significantly to change the nature of the game, greatly increasing the speed and intensity of play as well as placing far greater demands on the conditioning of the players.
Aspmyra, Norway: home of the football club FK Bodø/GlimtA slide tackle driving up crumbed rubber in the playing surface
The use of artificial turf, and whether they are not allowed or not, varies between different tournaments and time periods. Though grass is preferred in general in association football, artificial turf is found in areas where it is seen as impractical to maintain natural grass season-long, with causes including very cold climates (For instance Norway's Eliteserien) or multi-purpose stadiums (Seattle's Lumen Field).
Some association football clubs in Europe installed synthetic surfaces in the 1980s, which were called "plastic pitches" (often derisively) in countries such as England. There, four professional club venues had adopted them; Queens Park Rangers's Loftus Road (1981–1988), Luton Town's Kenilworth Road (1985–1991), Oldham Athletic's Boundary Park (1986–1991) and Preston North End's Deepdale (1986–1994). QPR had been the first team to install an artificial pitch at their stadium in 1981, but were the first to remove it when they did so in 1988.
Artificial pitches were banned from top-flight (then First Division) football in 1991, forcing Oldham Athletic to remove their artificial pitch after their promotion to the First Division in 1991, while then top-flight Luton Town also removed their artificial pitch at the same time. The last Football League team to have an artificial pitch in England was Preston North End, who removed their pitch in 1994 after eight years in use. Artificial pitches were banned from the top four divisions from 1995.
Artificial turf gained a bad reputation[neutrality is disputed] globally, with fans and especially with players. The first-generation artificial turf surfaces were carpet-like in their look and feel, and thus, a far harder surface than grass and soon became known[by whom?] as an unforgiving playing surface that was prone to cause more injuries, and in particular, more serious joint injuries, than would comparatively be suffered on a grass surface. This turf was also regarded as aesthetically unappealing to many fans.
In 1981, London football club Queens Park Rangers dug up its grass pitch and installed an artificial one. Others followed, and by the mid-1980s there were four artificial surfaces in operation in the English league. They soon became a national joke: the ball pinged round like it was made of rubber, the players kept losing their footing, and anyone who fell over risked carpet burns. Unsurprisingly, fans complained that the football was awful to watch and, one by one, the clubs returned to natural grass.[21]
In November 2011, it was reported that a number of English football clubs were interested in using artificial pitches again on economic grounds.[22] As of January 2020, artificial pitches are not permitted in the Premier League or Football League but are permitted in the National League and lower divisions. Bromley are an example of an English football club who currently use a third-generation artificial pitch.[23] In 2018, Sutton United were close to achieving promotion to the Football League and the debate in England about artificial pitches resurfaced again. It was reported that, if Sutton won promotion, they would subsequently be demoted two leagues if they refused to replace their pitch with natural grass.[24] After Harrogate Town's promotion to the Football League in 2020, the club was obliged to install a natural grass pitch at Wetherby Road;[25] and after winning promotion in 2021 Sutton Utd were also obliged to tear up their artificial pitch and replace it with grass, at a cost of more than £500,000.[26] Artificial pitches are permitted in all rounds of the FA Cup competition.
In the 1990s, many North American soccer clubs also removed their artificial surfaces and re-installed grass, while others moved to new stadiums with state-of-the-art grass surfaces that were designed to withstand cold temperatures where the climate demanded it. The use of artificial turf was later banned by FIFA, UEFA and by many domestic football associations, but FIFA and UEFA allowed it again from the mid-2000's (UEFA from the 2005–06 season onwards), provided that the turfs are FIFA Recommended. UEFA has now been heavily involved in programs to test artificial turf, with tests made in several grounds meeting with FIFA approval. A team of UEFA, FIFA and German company Polytan conducted tests in the Stadion Salzburg Wals-Siezenheim in Salzburg, Austria which had matches played on it in UEFA Euro 2008. It is the second FIFA 2 Star approved artificial turf in a European domestic top flight, after Dutch club Heracles Almelo received the FIFA certificate in August 2005.[27] The tests were approved.[28]
FIFA originally launched its FIFA Quality Concept in February 2001.
A full international fixture for the 2008 European Championships was played on October 17, 2007, between England and Russia on an artificial surface, which was installed to counteract adverse weather conditions, at the Luzhniki Stadium in Moscow.[29][30] It was one of the first full international games to be played on such a surface approved by FIFA and UEFA. The latter ordered the 2008 European Champions League final hosted in the same stadium in May 2008 to place on grass, so a temporary natural grass field was installed just for the final.
In 2007, UEFA stressed that artificial turf should only be considered an option where climatic conditions necessitate.[31] One Desso "hybrid grass" product incorporates both natural grass and artificial elements.[32]
FIFA designated a star system for artificial turf fields that have undergone a series of tests that examine quality and performance based on a two star system.[34] Recommended one-star fields are mainly intended for recreational use, while Recommended two-star fields closely follows the standards of professional foodball may be used for FIFA Final Round Competitions as well as for UEFA Europa League and Champions League matches.[35] As of 29 October 2008[update], there were 104 FIFA Recommended 2-Star installations in the world.[36]
In 2009, FIFA launched the Preferred Producer Initiative to improve the quality of artificial football turf at each stage of the life cycle (manufacturing, installation and maintenance).[37] Currently, there are five manufacturers that were selected by FIFA: Act Global, Limonta, Desso, GreenFields, and Edel Grass. These firms have made quality guarantees directly to FIFA and have agreed to increased research and development.
In 2010, Estadio Omnilife with an artificial turf opened in Guadalajara to be the new home of Chivas, one of the most popular teams in Mexico. The owner of Chivas, Jorge Vergara, defended the reasoning behind using artificial turf because the stadium was designed to be "environment friendly and as such, having grass would result [in] using too much water."[38] Some players criticized the field, saying its harder surface caused many injuries. When Johan Cruyff became the adviser of the team, he recommended the switch to natural grass, which the team did in 2012.[39]
The 2015 FIFA Women's World Cup took place entirely on artificial surfaces, as the event was played in Canada, where almost all of the country's stadiums use artificial turf due to climate issues. This plan garnered criticism from players and fans, some believing the artificial surfaces make players more susceptible to injuries. Over fifty of the female athletes protested against the use of artificial turf on the basis of gender discrimination.[40][41]Australia winger Caitlin Foord said that after playing 90 minutes there was no difference to her post-match recovery – a view shared by the rest of the squad. The squad spent much time preparing on the surface and had no problems with its use in Winnipeg. "We've been training on [artificial] turf pretty much all year so I think we're kind of used to it in that way ... I think grass or turf you can still pull up sore after a game so it's definitely about getting the recovery in and getting it right", Foord said.[42] A lawsuit was filed on October 1, 2014, in an Ontario tribunal court by a group of women's international soccer players against FIFA and the Canadian Soccer Association and specifically points out that in 1994 FIFA spent $2 million to plant natural grass over artificial turf in New Jersey and Detroit.[43] Various celebrities showed their support for the women soccer players in defense of their lawsuit, including actor Tom Hanks, NBA player Kobe Bryant and U.S. men's soccer team keeper Tim Howard. Even with the possibility of boycotts, FIFA's head of women's competitions, Tatjana Haenni, made it clear that "we play on artificial turf and there's no Plan B."[44][45]
In UEFA tournaments, teams who are used to playing on artificial turf are seen as having a large home advantage against teams who don't, as was the case for Bodø/Glimt's semi-final campaign in the 2024–25 UEFA Europa League.[48]
Carpet has been used as a surface for indoor tennis courts for decades, though the first carpets used were more similar to home carpets than a synthetic grass. After the introduction of AstroTurf, it came to be used for tennis courts, both indoor and outdoor, though only a small minority of courts use the surface.[49][50] Both infill and non-infill versions are used, and are typically considered medium-fast to fast surfaces under the International Tennis Federation's classification scheme.[49] A distinct form found in tennis is an "artificial clay" surface,[49] which seeks to simulate a clay court by using a very short pile carpet with an infill of the same loose aggregate used for clay courts that rises above the carpet fibers.[49]
Tennis courts such as Wimbledon are considering using an artificial hybrid grass to replace their natural lawn courts. Such systems incorporate synthetic fibers into natural grass to create a more durable surface on which to play.[51] Such hybrid surfaces are currently used for some association football stadiums, including Wembley Stadium.
Synthetic turf can also be used in the golf industry, such as on driving ranges, putting greens and even in some circumstances tee boxes. For low budget courses, particularly those catering to casual golfers, synthetic putting greens offer the advantage of being a relatively cheap alternative to installing and maintaining grass greens, but are much more similar to real grass in appearance and feel compared to sand greens which are the traditional alternative surface. Because of the vast areas of golf courses and the damage from clubs during shots, it is not feasible to surface fairways with artificial turf.
The surface on Veikkolan pesäpallostadion in Lappajärvi.
Though all pesäpallo teams in the higher leagues (including Superpesis) play on clay courts, several teams' stadiums use carpet-type artificial grass below the clay.
Artificial grass is used to line the perimeter of some sections of some motor circuits, and offers less grip than some other surfaces.[52] It can pose an obstacle to drivers if it gets caught on their car.[53]
Since the early 1990s, the use of synthetic grass in the more arid western states of the United States has moved beyond athletic fields to residential and commercial landscaping.[54] New water saving programs, as of 2019, which grant rebates for turf removal, do not accept artificial turf as replacement and require a minimum of plants.[55][56]
The use of artificial grass for convenience sometimes faces opposition: Legislation frequently seeks to preserve natural gardens and fully water permeable surfaces, therefore restricting the use of hardscape and plantless areas, including artificial turf. In several locations in different countries, homeowners have been fined, ordered to remove artificial turf and/or had to defend themselves in courts. Many of these restrictions can be found in local bylaws and ordinances. These not always applied in a consistent manner,[57][58][59] especially in municipalities that utilize a complaint-based model for enforcing local laws.
Sunlight reflections from nearby windows can cause artificial turf to melt. This can be avoided by adding perforated vinyl privacy window film adhesive to the outside of the window causing the reflection.
Artificial turf has been used at airports.[60] Here it provides several advantages over natural turf – it does not support wildlife, it has high visual contrast with runways in all seasons, it reduces foreign object damage (FOD) since the surface has no rocks or clumps, and it drains well.[61]
Some artificial turf systems allow for the integration of fiber-optic fibers into the turf. This would allow for runway lighting to be embedded in artificial landing surfaces for aircraft (or lighting or advertisements to be directly embedded in a playing surface).[62]
Artificial turf is commonly used for tanks containing octopusses, in particular the Giant Pacific octopus since it is a reliable way to prevent the octopusses from escaping their tank, as they prevent the suction cups on the tentacles from getting a tight seal.[63]
The first major academic review of the environmental and health risks and benefits of artificial turf was published in 2014;[64] it was followed by extensive research on possible risks to human health, but holistic analyses of the environmental footprint of artificial turf compared with natural turf only began to emerge in the 2020s,[65][66] and frameworks to support informed policymaking were still lacking.[67][68] Evaluating the relative environmental footprints of natural and artificial turf is complex, with outcomes depending on a wide range of factors, including (to give the example of a sports field):[64]
what ecosystem services are lost by converting a site to a sports pitch
how resource-intensive is the landscaping work and transport of materials to create a pitch
whether input materials are recycled and whether these are recycled again at the end of the pitch's life
how resource-intensive and damaging maintenance is (whether through water, fertiliser, weed-killer, reapplication of rubber crumb, snow-clearing, etc.)
how intensively the facility is used, for how long, and whether surface type can reduce the overall number of pitches required
Artificial turf has been shown to contribute to global warming by absorbing significantly more radiation than living turf and, to a lesser extent, by displacing living plants that could sequester carbon dioxide through photosynthesis;[69] a study at New Mexico State University found that in that environment, water-cooling of artificial turf can demand as much water as natural turf.[70] However, a 2022 study that used real-world data to model a ten-year-life-cycle environmental footprint for a new natural-turf soccer field compared with an artificial-turf field found that the natural-turf field contributed twice as much to global warming as the artificial one (largely due to a more resource-intensive construction phase), while finding that the artificial turf would likely cause more pollution of other kinds. The study promoted improvements to usual practice such as the substitution of cork for rubber in artificial pitches and more drought-resistant grasses and electric mowing in natural ones.[65] In 2021, a Zurich University of Applied Sciences study for the city of Zurich, using local data on extant pitches, found that, per hour of use, natural turf had the lowest environmental footprint, followed by artificial turf with no infill, and then artificial turf using an infill (e.g. granulated rubber). However, because it could tolerate more hours of use, unfilled artificial turf often had the lowest environmental footprint in practice, by reducing the total number of pitches required. The study recommended optimising the use of existing pitches before building new ones, and choosing the best surface for the likely intensity of use.[66] Another suggestion is the introduction of green roofs to offset the conversion of grassland to artificial turf.[71]
Contrary to popular belief, artificial turf is not maintenance free. It requires regular maintenance, such as raking and patching, to keep it functional and safe.[72]
Some artificial turf uses infill such as silica sand, but most uses granulated rubber, referred to as "crumb rubber". Granulated rubber can be made from recycled car tires and may carry heavy metals, PFAS chemicals, and other chemicals of environmental concern. The synthetic fibers of artificial turf are also subject to degradation. Thus chemicals from artificial turfs leach into the environment, and artificial turf is a source of microplasticspollution and rubber pollution in air, fresh-water, sea and soil environments.[73][74][75][76][77][78][64][excessive citations] In Norway, Sweden, and at least some other places, the rubber granulate from artificial turf infill constitutes the second largest source of microplastics in the environment after the tire and road wear particles that make up a large portion of the fine road debris.[79][80][81] In samples of Mediterranean seawater, fibres from artificial turf made up more than 15% of the larger plastic particles.[82] As early as 2007, Environment and Human Health, Inc., a lobby-group, proposed a moratorium on the use of ground-up rubber tires in fields and playgrounds based on health concerns;[83] in September 2022, the European Commission made a draft proposal to restrict the use of microplastic granules as infill in sports fields.[84]
What is less clear is how likely this pollution is in practice to harm humans or other organisms and whether these environmental costs outweigh the benefits of artificial turf, with many scientific papers and government agencies (such as the United States Environmental Protection Agency) calling for more research.[2] A 2018 study published in Water, Air, & Soil Pollution analyzed the chemicals found in samples of tire crumbs, some used to install school athletic fields, and identified 92 chemicals only about half of which had ever been studied for their health effects and some of which are known to be carcinogenic or irritants. It stated "caution would argue against use of these materials where human exposure is likely, and this is especially true for playgrounds and athletic playing fields where young people may be affected".[85] Conversely, a 2017 study in Sports Medicine argued that "regular physical activity during adolescence and early adulthood helps prevent cancer later in life. Restricting the use or availability of all-weather year-round synthetic fields and thereby potentially reducing exercise could, in the long run, actually increase cancer incidence, as well as cardiovascular disease and other chronic illnesses."[86]
The possibility that carcinogenic substances in artificial turf could increase risks of human cancer (the artificial turf–cancer hypothesis) gained a particularly high profile in the first decades of the twenty-first century and attracted extensive study, with scientific reports around 2020 finding cancer-risks in modern artificial turf negligible.[87][88][89][90] But concerns have extended to other human-health risks, such as endocrine disruption that might affect early puberty, obesity, and children's attention spans.[91][92][93][94] Potential harm to fish[75] and earthworm[95] populations has also been shown.
A study for the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection analyzed lead and other metals in dust kicked into the air by physical activity on five artificial turf fields. The results suggest that even low levels of activity on the field can cause particulate matter containing these chemicals to get into the air where it can be inhaled and be harmful. The authors state that since no level of lead exposure is considered safe for children, "only a comprehensive mandated testing of fields can provide assurance that no health hazard on these fields exists from lead or other metals used in their construction and maintenance."[96]
A number of health and safety concerns have been raised about artificial turf.[2] Friction between skin and older generations of artificial turf can cause abrasions and/or burns to a much greater extent than natural grass.[97] Artificial turf tends to retain heat from the sun and can be much hotter than natural grass with prolonged exposure to the sun.[98]
There is some evidence that periodic disinfection of artificial turf is required as pathogens are not broken down by natural processes in the same manner as natural grass. Despite this, a 2006 study suggests certain microbial life is less active in artificial turf.[97]
There is evidence showing higher rates of player injury on artificial turf. By November 1971, the injury toll on first-generation artificial turf had reached a threshold that resulted in congressional hearings by the House subcommittee on commerce and finance.[99][100][101] In a study performed by the National Football League Injury and Safety Panel, published in the October 2012 issue of the American Journal of Sports Medicine, Elliott B. Hershman et al. reviewed injury data from NFL games played between 2000 and 2009, finding that "the injury rate of knee sprains as a whole was 22% higher on FieldTurf than on natural grass. While MCL sprains did not occur at a rate significantly higher than on grass, rates of ACL sprains were 67% higher on FieldTurf."[102]Metatarsophalangeal joint sprain, known as "turf toe" when the big toe is involved, is named from the injury being associated with playing sports on rigid surfaces such as artificial turf and is a fairly common injury among professional American football players. Artificial turf is a harder surface than grass and does not have much "give" when forces are placed on it.[103]
^ abDave Brady, "It's All So Artificial: The Uncommon Ground", Petersen's 12th Pro Football Annual, 1972. Los Angeles: Petersen Publishing Co., 1972; pp. 62–65.
^ abcd
Weeks, Jennifer (2015). "Turf Wars". Distillations Magazine. 1 (3): 34–37. Archived from the original on March 21, 2018. Retrieved March 22, 2018.
^"Definition of Astroturf – Dictionary.com". dictionary.com. Archived from the original on April 18, 2023. Retrieved May 7, 2023. This sense of the word has come to be frequently used as a generic term for any artificial turf (in the same way that other brand names have been genericized, such as xerox). When used this way, it's often seen in lowercase (astroturf).
^"History". Saskatchewan Roughriders. June 12, 2002. Retrieved January 10, 2021. In 1988, the Roughriders replaced the first artificial turf with a new type of system called OmniTurf. Unlike AstroTurf, OmniTurf was an inlay turf system, which relied on 300 tons of sand to hold it in place (rather than the traditional glued-down system). Over the years, a number of problems occurred with this system and it eventually became necessary to replace it prior to its usable age being reached.
^ abcCheng H, Hu Y, Reinhard M (2014). "Environmental and health impacts of artificial turf: a review"(PDF). Environ Sci Technol. 48 (4): 2114–29. doi:10.1021/es4044193. PMID24467230. Archived from the original(PDF) on March 29, 2024. Retrieved July 1, 2023. The major concerns stem from the infill material that is typically derived from scrap tires. Tire rubber crumb contains a range of organic contaminants and heavy metals that can volatilize into the air and/or leach into the percolating rainwater, thereby posing a potential risk to the environment and human health.
^Golden, Leslie M. (2021) "The Contribution of Artificial Turf to Global Warming," Sustainability and Climate Change, December,14 (6) 436-449; http://doi.org/10.1089/scc.2021.0038
^"Microplastics in agricultural soils: A reason to worry?". Norwegian Institute for Water Research (NIVA). February 3, 2017. Archived from the original on April 19, 2017. Retrieved April 19, 2017. Microplastics are increasingly seen as an environmental problem of global proportions. While the focus to date has been on microplastics in the ocean and their effects on marine life, microplastics in soils have largely been overlooked. Researchers are concerned about the lack of knowledge regarding potential consequences of microplastics in agricultural landscapes from application of sewage sludge.
^"Tire wear foremost source of microplastics". IVL Swedish Environmental Research Institute. March 29, 2016. Archived from the original on April 19, 2017. Retrieved April 19, 2017. researchers have ranked the sources of microplastic particles by size. The amount of microplastic particles emitted by traffic is estimated to 13 500 tonnes per year. Artificial turf ranks as the second largest source of emissions and is responsible for approximately 2300-3900 tonnes per year.
^Brown, Sc.D., David R. (2007). Artificial Turf(PDF) (Report). The Board of Environment & Human Health, Inc. Archived from the original(PDF) on April 10, 2008. Retrieved December 21, 2007.
^Shalat SL. An evaluation of potential exposures to lead and other metals as the result of aerosolized particulate matter from artificial turf playing fields. 2011. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. http://www.nj.gov/dep/dsr/publications/artificial-turf-report.pdf
^Williams, C. Frank; Pulley, Gilbert E. (2002). Synthetic Surface Heat Studies(PDF) (Report). Brigham Young University. Archived(PDF) from the original on April 10, 2008. Retrieved February 19, 2008.
This article incorporates text by National Center for Health Research available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 license. The text and its release have been received by the Wikimedia Volunteer Response Team
Science of relationships between ecological processes in the environment and particular ecosystems
Land cover surrounding Madison, Wisconsin. Fields are colored yellow and brown and urban surfaces are colored red.Impervious surfaces surrounding Madison, WisconsinCanopy cover surrounding Madison, Wisconsin
Landscape ecology is the science of studying and improving relationships between ecological processes in the environment and particular ecosystems. This is done within a variety of landscape scales, development spatial patterns, and organizational levels of research and policy.[1][2][3] Landscape ecology can be described as the science of "landscape diversity" as the synergetic result of biodiversity and geodiversity.[4]
As a highly interdisciplinary field in systems science, landscape ecology integrates biophysical and analytical approaches with humanistic and holistic perspectives across the natural sciences and social sciences. Landscapes are spatially heterogeneous geographic areas characterized by diverse interacting patches or ecosystems, ranging from relatively natural terrestrial and aquatic systems such as forests, grasslands, and lakes to human-dominated environments including agricultural and urban settings.[2][5][6]
The most salient characteristics of landscape ecology are its emphasis on the relationship among pattern, process and scales, and its focus on broad-scale ecological and environmental issues. These necessitate the coupling between biophysical and socioeconomic sciences. Key research topics in landscape ecology include ecological flows in landscape mosaics, land use and land cover change, scaling, relating landscape pattern analysis with ecological processes, and landscape conservation and sustainability.[7] Landscape ecology also studies the role of human impacts on landscape diversity in the development and spreading of new human pathogens that could trigger epidemics.[8][9]
The German term Landschaftsökologie – thus landscape ecology – was coined by German geographerCarl Troll in 1939.[10] He developed this terminology and many early concepts of landscape ecology as part of his early work, which consisted of applying aerial photograph interpretation to studies of interactions between environment and vegetation.
Heterogeneity is the measure of how parts of a landscape differ from one another. Landscape ecology looks at how this spatial structure affects organism abundance at the landscape level, as well as the behavior and functioning of the landscape as a whole. This includes studying the influence of pattern, or the internal order of a landscape, on process, or the continuous operation of functions of organisms.[11] Landscape ecology also includes geomorphology as applied to the design and architecture of landscapes.[12]Geomorphology is the study of how geological formations are responsible for the structure of a landscape.
One central landscape ecology theory originated from MacArthur & Wilson'sThe Theory of Island Biogeography. This work considered the biodiversity on islands as the result of competing forces of colonization from a mainland stock and stochasticextinction. The concepts of island biogeography were generalized from physical islands to abstract patches of habitat by Levins' metapopulation model (which can be applied e.g. to forest islands in the agricultural landscape[13]). This generalization spurred the growth of landscape ecology by providing conservation biologists a new tool to assess how habitat fragmentation affects population viability. Recent growth of landscape ecology owes much to the development of geographic information systems (GIS)[14] and the availability of large-extent habitat data (e.g. remotely sensed datasets).
Landscape ecology developed in Europe from historical planning on human-dominated landscapes. Concepts from general ecology theory were integrated in North America.[when?] While general ecology theory and its sub-disciplines focused on the study of more homogenous, discrete community units organized in a hierarchical structure (typically as ecosystems, populations, species, and communities), landscape ecology built upon heterogeneity in space and time. It frequently included human-caused landscape changes in theory and application of concepts.[15]
By 1980, landscape ecology was a discrete, established discipline. It was marked by the organization of the International Association for Landscape Ecology (IALE) in 1982. Landmark book publications defined the scope and goals of the discipline, including Naveh and Lieberman[16] and Forman and Godron.[17][18] Forman[6] wrote that although study of "the ecology of spatial configuration at the human scale" was barely a decade old, there was strong potential for theory development and application of the conceptual framework.
Today, theory and application of landscape ecology continues to develop through a need for innovative applications in a changing landscape and environment. Landscape ecology relies on advanced technologies such as remote sensing, GIS, and models. There has been associated development of powerful quantitative methods to examine the interactions of patterns and processes.[5] An example would be determining the amount of carbon present in the soil based on landform over a landscape, derived from GIS maps, vegetation types, and rainfall data for a region. Remote sensing work has been used to extend landscape ecology to the field of predictive vegetation mapping, for instance by Janet Franklin.
Nowadays, at least six different conceptions of landscape ecology can be identified: one group tending toward the more disciplinary concept of ecology (subdiscipline of biology; in conceptions 2, 3, and 4) and another group—characterized by the interdisciplinary study of relations between human societies and their environment—inclined toward the integrated view of geography (in conceptions 1, 5, and 6):[19]
Interdisciplinary analysis of subjectively defined landscape units (e.g. Neef School[20][21]): Landscapes are defined in terms of uniformity in land use. Landscape ecology explores the landscape's natural potential in terms of functional utility for human societies. To analyse this potential, it is necessary to draw on several natural sciences.
Topological ecology at the landscape scale[22][23] 'Landscape' is defined as a heterogeneous land area composed of a cluster of interacting ecosystems (woods, meadows, marshes, villages, etc.) that is repeated in similar form throughout. It is explicitly stated that landscapes are areas at a kilometres wide human scale of perception, modification, etc. Landscape ecology describes and explains the landscapes' characteristic patterns of ecosystems and investigates the flux of energy, mineral nutrients, and species among their component ecosystems, providing important knowledge for addressing land-use issues.
Organism-centered, multi-scale topological ecology (e.g. John A. Wiens[24][25]): Explicitly rejecting views expounded by Troll, Zonneveld, Naveh, Forman & Godron, etc., landscape and landscape ecology are defined independently of human perceptions, interests, and modifications of nature. 'Landscape' is defined – regardless of scale – as the 'template' on which spatial patterns influence ecological processes. Not humans, but rather the respective species being studied is the point of reference for what constitutes a landscape.
Topological ecology at the landscape level of biological organisation (e.g. Urban et al.[26]): On the basis of ecological hierarchy theory, it is presupposed that nature is working at multiple scales and has different levels of organisation which are part of a rate-structured, nested hierarchy. Specifically, it is claimed that, above the ecosystem level, a landscape level exists which is generated and identifiable by high interaction intensity between ecosystems, a specific interaction frequency and, typically, a corresponding spatial scale. Landscape ecology is defined as ecology that focuses on the influence exerted by spatial and temporal patterns on the organisation of, and interaction among, functionally integrated multispecies ecosystems.
Analysis of social-ecological systems using the natural and social sciences and humanities (e.g. Leser;[27] Naveh;[28][29] Zonneveld[30]): Landscape ecology is defined as an interdisciplinary super-science that explores the relationship between human societies and their specific environment, making use of not only various natural sciences, but also social sciences and humanities. This conception is grounded in the assumption that social systems are linked to their specific ambient ecological system in such a way that both systems together form a co-evolutionary, self-organising unity called 'landscape'. Societies' cultural, social and economic dimensions are regarded as an integral part of the global ecological hierarchy, and landscapes are claimed to be the manifest systems of the 'total human ecosystem' (Naveh) which encompasses both the physical ('geospheric') and mental ('noospheric') spheres.
Ecology guided by cultural meanings of lifeworldly landscapes (frequently pursued in practice[31] but not defined, but see, e.g., Hard;[32] Trepl[19]): Landscape ecology is defined as ecology that is guided by an external aim, namely, to maintain and develop lifeworldlylandscapes. It provides the ecological knowledge necessary to achieve these goals. It investigates how to sustain and develop those populations and ecosystems which (i) are the material 'vehicles' of lifeworldly, aesthetic and symbolic landscapes and, at the same time, (ii) meet societies' functional requirements, including provisioning, regulating, and supporting ecosystem services. Thus landscape ecology is concerned mainly with the populations and ecosystems which have resulted from traditional, regionally specific forms of land use.
Some research programmes of landscape ecology theory, namely those standing in the European tradition, may be slightly outside of the "classical and preferred domain of scientific disciplines" because of the large, heterogeneous areas of study. However, general ecology theory is central to landscape ecology theory in many aspects. Landscape ecology consists of four main principles: the development and dynamics of spatial heterogeneity, interactions and exchanges across heterogeneous landscapes, influences of spatial heterogeneity on biotic and abiotic processes, and the management of spatial heterogeneity. The main difference from traditional ecological studies, which frequently assume that systems are spatially homogenous, is the consideration of spatial patterns.[33]
Landscape ecology not only created new terms, but also incorporated existing ecological terms in new ways. Many of the terms used in landscape ecology are as interconnected and interrelated as the discipline itself.
Certainly, 'landscape' is a central concept in landscape ecology. It is, however, defined in quite different ways. For example:[19]Carl Troll conceives of landscape not as a mental construct but as an objectively given 'organic entity', a harmonic individuum of space.[34]Ernst Neef[20][21] defines landscapes as sections within the uninterrupted earth-wide interconnection of geofactors which are defined as such on the basis of their uniformity in terms of a specific land use, and are thus defined in an anthropocentric and relativistic way. According to Richard Forman and Michel Godron,[22] a landscape is a heterogeneous land area composed of a cluster of interacting ecosystems that is repeated in similar form throughout, whereby they list woods, meadows, marshes and villages as examples of a landscape's ecosystems, and state that a landscape is an area at least a few kilometres wide. John A. Wiens[24][25] opposes the traditional view expounded by Carl Troll, Isaak S. Zonneveld, Zev Naveh, Richard T. T. Forman/Michel Godron and others that landscapes are arenas in which humans interact with their environments on a kilometre-wide scale; instead, he defines 'landscape'—regardless of scale—as "the template on which spatial patterns influence ecological processes".[25][35] Some define 'landscape' as an area containing two or more ecosystems in close proximity.[15]
Scale and heterogeneity (incorporating composition, structure, and function)
A main concept in landscape ecology is scale. Scale represents the real world as translated onto a map, relating distance on a map image and the corresponding distance on earth.[36] Scale is also the spatial or temporal measure of an object or a process,[33] or amount of spatial resolution.[6] Components of scale include composition, structure, and function, which are all important ecological concepts. Applied to landscape ecology, composition refers to the number of patch types (see below) represented on a landscape and their relative abundance. For example, the amount of forest or wetland, the length of forest edge, or the density of roads can be aspects of landscape composition. Structure is determined by the composition, the configuration, and the proportion of different patches across the landscape, while function refers to how each element in the landscape interacts based on its life cycle events.[33]Pattern is the term for the contents and internal order of a heterogeneous area of land.[17]
A landscape with structure and pattern implies that it has spatial heterogeneity, or the uneven distribution of objects across the landscape.[6] Heterogeneity is a key element of landscape ecology that separates this discipline from other branches of ecology. Landscape heterogeneity is able to quantify with agent-based methods as well.[37]
Patch, a term fundamental to landscape ecology, is defined as a relatively homogeneous area that differs from its surroundings.[6] Patches are the basic unit of the landscape that change and fluctuate, a process called patch dynamics. Patches have a definite shape and spatial configuration, and can be described compositionally by internal variables such as number of trees, number of tree species, height of trees, or other similar measurements.[6]
Matrix is the "background ecological system" of a landscape with a high degree of connectivity. Connectivity is the measure of how connected or spatially continuous a corridor, network, or matrix is.[6] For example, a forested landscape (matrix) with fewer gaps in forest cover (open patches) will have higher connectivity. Corridors have important functions as strips of a particular type of landscape differing from adjacent land on both sides.[6] A network is an interconnected system of corridors while mosaic describes the pattern of patches, corridors, and matrix that form a landscape in its entirety.[6]
Landscape patches have a boundary between them which can be defined or fuzzy.[15] The zone composed of the edges of adjacent ecosystems is the boundary.[6]Edge means the portion of an ecosystem near its perimeter, where influences of the adjacent patches can cause an environmental difference between the interior of the patch and its edge. This edge effect includes a distinctive species composition or abundance.[6] For example, when a landscape is a mosaic of perceptibly different types, such as a forest adjacent to a grassland, the edge is the location where the two types adjoin. In a continuous landscape, such as a forest giving way to open woodland, the exact edge location is fuzzy and is sometimes determined by a local gradient exceeding a threshold, such as the point where the tree cover falls below thirty-five percent.[33]
A type of boundary is the ecotone, or the transitional zone between two communities.[12] Ecotones can arise naturally, such as a lakeshore, or can be human-created, such as a cleared agricultural field from a forest.[12] The ecotonal community retains characteristics of each bordering community and often contains species not found in the adjacent communities. Classic examples of ecotones include fencerows, forest to marshlands transitions, forest to grassland transitions, or land-water interfaces such as riparian zones in forests. Characteristics of ecotones include vegetational sharpness, physiognomic change, occurrence of a spatial community mosaic, many exotic species, ecotonal species, spatial mass effect, and species richness higher or lower than either side of the ecotone.[38]
An ecocline is another type of landscape boundary, but it is a gradual and continuous change in environmental conditions of an ecosystem or community. Ecoclines help explain the distribution and diversity of organisms within a landscape because certain organisms survive better under certain conditions, which change along the ecocline. They contain heterogeneous communities which are considered more environmentally stable than those of ecotones.[39] An ecotope is a spatial term representing the smallest ecologically distinct unit in mapping and classification of landscapes.[6] Relatively homogeneous, they are spatially explicit landscape units used to stratify landscapes into ecologically distinct features. They are useful for the measurement and mapping of landscape structure, function, and change over time, and to examine the effects of disturbance and fragmentation.
Disturbance is an event that significantly alters the pattern of variation in the structure or function of a system. Fragmentation is the breaking up of a habitat, ecosystem, or land-use type into smaller parcels.[6] Disturbance is generally considered a natural process. Fragmentation causes land transformation, an important process in landscapes as development occurs.
An important consequence of repeated, random clearing (whether by natural disturbance or human activity) is that contiguous cover can break down into isolated patches. This happens when the area cleared exceeds a critical level, which means that landscapes exhibit two phases: connected and disconnected.[40]
Landscape ecology theory stresses the role of human impacts on landscape structures and functions. It also proposes ways for restoring degraded landscapes.[16] Landscape ecology explicitly includes humans as entities that cause functional changes on the landscape.[15] Landscape ecology theory includes the landscape stability principle, which emphasizes the importance of landscape structural heterogeneity in developing resistance to disturbances, recovery from disturbances, and promoting total system stability.[17] This principle is a major contribution to general ecological theories which highlight the importance of relationships among the various components of the landscape.
Integrity of landscape components helps maintain resistance to external threats, including development and land transformation by human activity.[5] Analysis of land use change has included a strongly geographical approach which has led to the acceptance of the idea of multifunctional properties of landscapes.[18] There are still calls for a more unified theory of landscape ecology due to differences in professional opinion among ecologists and its interdisciplinary approach (Bastian 2001).
An important related theory is hierarchy theory, which refers to how systems of discrete functional elements operate when linked at two or more scales. For example, a forested landscape might be hierarchically composed of drainage basins, which in turn are composed of local ecosystems, which are in turn composed of individual trees and gaps.[6] Recent theoretical developments in landscape ecology have emphasized the relationship between pattern and process, as well as the effect that changes in spatial scale has on the potential to extrapolate information across scales.[33] Several studies suggest that the landscape has critical thresholds at which ecological processes will show dramatic changes, such as the complete transformation of a landscape by an invasive species due to small changes in temperature characteristics which favor the invasive's habitat requirements.[33]
Developments in landscape ecology illustrate the important relationships between spatial patterns and ecological processes. These developments incorporate quantitative methods that link spatial patterns and ecological processes at broad spatial and temporal scales. This linkage of time, space, and environmental change can assist managers in applying plans to solve environmental problems.[5] The increased attention in recent years on spatial dynamics has highlighted the need for new quantitative methods that can analyze patterns, determine the importance of spatially explicit processes, and develop reliable models.[33]Multivariate analysis techniques are frequently used to examine landscape level vegetation patterns. Studies use statistical techniques, such as cluster analysis, canonical correspondence analysis (CCA), or detrended correspondence analysis (DCA), for classifying vegetation. Gradient analysis is another way to determine the vegetation structure across a landscape or to help delineate critical wetland habitat for conservation or mitigation purposes (Choesin and Boerner 2002).[41]
Climate change is another major component in structuring current research in landscape ecology.[42] Ecotones, as a basic unit in landscape studies, may have significance for management under climate change scenarios, since change effects are likely to be seen at ecotones first because of the unstable nature of a fringe habitat.[38] Research in northern regions has examined landscape ecological processes, such as the accumulation of snow, melting, freeze-thaw action, percolation, soil moisture variation, and temperature regimes through long-term measurements in Norway.[43] The study analyzes gradients across space and time between ecosystems of the central high mountains to determine relationships between distribution patterns of animals in their environment. Looking at where animals live, and how vegetation shifts over time, may provide insight into changes in snow and ice over long periods of time across the landscape as a whole.
Other landscape-scale studies maintain that human impact is likely the main determinant of landscape pattern over much of the globe.[44][45] Landscapes may become substitutes for biodiversity measures because plant and animal composition differs between samples taken from sites within different landscape categories. Taxa, or different species, can "leak" from one habitat into another, which has implications for landscape ecology. As human land use practices expand and continue to increase the proportion of edges in landscapes, the effects of this leakage across edges on assemblage integrity may become more significant in conservation. This is because taxa may be conserved across landscape levels, if not at local levels.[46]
Land change modeling is an application of landscape ecology designed to predict future changes in land use. Land change models are used in urban planning, geography, GIS, and other disciplines to gain a clear understanding of the course of a landscape.[47] In recent years, much of the Earth's land cover has changed rapidly, whether from deforestation or the expansion of urban areas.[48]
Landscape ecology has been incorporated into a variety of ecological subdisciplines. For example, it is closely linked to land change science, the interdisciplinary of land use and land cover change and their effects on surrounding ecology. Another recent development has been the more explicit consideration of spatial concepts and principles applied to the study of lakes, streams, and wetlands in the field of landscape limnology. Seascape ecology is a marine and coastal application of landscape ecology.[49] In addition, landscape ecology has important links to application-oriented disciplines such as agriculture and forestry. In agriculture, landscape ecology has introduced new options for the management of environmental threats brought about by the intensification of agricultural practices. Agriculture has always been a strong human impact on ecosystems.[18]
In forestry, from structuring stands for fuelwood and timber to ordering stands across landscapes to enhance aesthetics, consumer needs have affected conservation and use of forested landscapes. Landscape forestry provides methods, concepts, and analytic procedures for landscape forestry.[50] Landscape ecology has been cited as a contributor to the development of fisheries biology as a distinct biological science discipline,[51] and is frequently incorporated in study design for wetland delineation in hydrology.[39] It has helped shape integrated landscape management.[52] Lastly, landscape ecology has been very influential for progressing sustainability science and sustainable development planning. For example, a recent study assessed sustainable urbanization across Europe using evaluation indices, country-landscapes, and landscape ecology tools and methods.[53]
Landscape ecology has also been combined with population genetics to form the field of landscape genetics, which addresses how landscape features influence the population structure and gene flow of plant and animal populations across space and time[54] and on how the quality of intervening landscape, known as "matrix", influences spatial variation.[55] After the term was coined in 2003, the field of landscape genetics had expanded to over 655 studies by 2010,[56] and continues to grow today. As genetic data has become more readily accessible, it is increasingly being used by ecologists to answer novel evolutionary and ecological questions,[57] many with regard to how landscapes effect evolutionary processes, especially in human-modified landscapes, which are experiencing biodiversity loss.[58]
^Troll C (1939). "Luftbildplan und ökologische Bodenforschung" [Aerial photography and ecological studies of the earth]. Zeitschrift der Gesellschaft für Erdkunde (in German). Berlin: 241–298.
^Turner MG (1989). "Landscape ecology: the effect of pattern on process". Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics. 20: 171–197. doi:10.1146/annurev.es.20.110189.001131.
^ abcAllaby M (1998). Oxford Dictionary of Ecology. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
^Banaszak J, ed. (2000). Ecology of Forest Islands. Bydgoszcz, Poland: Bydgoszcz University Press. p. 313.
^ abcKirchhoff T, Trepl L, Vicenzotti V (February 2013). "What is landscape ecology? An analysis and evaluation of six different conceptions". Landscape Research. 38 (1): 33–51. doi:10.1080/01426397.2011.640751. S2CID145421450. All the following quotations and descriptions come from this source.
^ abNeef E (1967). Die theoretischen Grundlagen der Landschaftslehre [The theoretical basics of landscape science] (in German). Gotha: Haack.
^ abHaase G (1990). "Approaches to, and methods of landscape diagnosis as a basis of landscape planning and landscape management". Ekológia. 9 (1): 31–44.
^ abForman RT, Godron M (November 1981). "Patches and structural components for a landscape ecology". BioScience. 31 (10): 733–40. doi:10.2307/1308780. JSTOR1308780.
^Forman RT, Godron M (1986). Landscape ecology. NY: Wiley.
^ abWiens JA, Milne BT (December 1989). "Scaling of 'landscapes' in landscape ecology, or, landscape ecology from a beetle's perspective". Landscape Ecology. 3 (2): 87–96. doi:10.1007/BF00131172. S2CID15683804.
^ abcWiens JA (1999). "The science and practice of landscape ecology.". In Klopatek JM, Gardner RH (eds.). Landscape ecological analyses: Issues and applications. NY: Springer. pp. 371–383.
^Leser H (1991). Landschaftsökologie. Ansatz, Modelle, Methodik, Anwendung. Stuttgart: Ulmer.
^Naveh Z, Lieberman AS (1984). Landscape ecology. Theory and application. NY: Springer.
^Naveh N (2000). "What is holistic landscape ecology? A conceptual introduction". Landscape and Urban Planning. 50 (1–3): 7–26. doi:10.1016/S0169-2046(00)00077-3.
^Zonneveld IS (1995). Land ecology: an introduction to landscape ecology as a base for land evaluation, land management and conservation. Amsterdam: SPB.
^However, not always under the designation 'landscape ecology', but as part of landscape stewardship, landscape architecture and, first and foremost, environmental or urban and landscape planning.
^Hard G (1973). Die Geographie. Eine wissenschaftstheoretische Einführung. Berlin: deGruyter. pp. 92–95.
^ abcdefgTurner MG, Gardner RH, eds. (1991). Quantitative Methods in Landscape Ecology. New York, NY, USA: Springer-Verlag.
^Troll C (2007). "The geographic landscape and its investigation.". In Wiens JA, Moss MR, Turner MG, Mladenoff DJ (eds.). Foundation papers in landscape ecology. New York: Columbia University Press. pp. 71–101. First published as: Troll C (1950). "Die geographische Landschaft und ihre Erforschung". Studium Generale. Vol. 3. pp. 163–181. doi:10.1007/978-3-662-38240-0_20. ISBN978-3-662-37475-7. cite book: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help)
^Wiens JA (2005). "Toward a unified landscape ecology". In Wiens JA, Moss MR (eds.). Issues and perspectives in landscape ecology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 365–373.
^Malczewski J (1999). GIS and Multicriteria Decision Analysis. New York, NY, USA: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
^Lyon J, Sagers CL (September 1998). "Structure of herbaceous plant assemblages in a forested riparian landscape". Plant Ecology. 138 (1): 1–6. doi:10.1023/A:1009705912710. S2CID28628830.
^Ochoa-Hueso R, Delgado-Baquerizo M, King PT, Benham M, Arca V, Power SA (February 2019). "Ecosystem type and resource quality are more important than global change drivers in regulating early stages of litter decomposition". Soil Biology and Biochemistry. 129: 144–152. doi:10.1016/j.soilbio.2018.11.009. hdl:10261/336676. S2CID92606851.
^Shaker RR (September 2015). "The well-being of nations: an empirical assessment of sustainable urbanization for Europe". International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology. 22 (5): 375–87. doi:10.1080/13504509.2015.1055524. S2CID154904536.
^Manel S, Schwartz MK, Luikart G, Taberlet P (April 2003). "Landscape genetics: combining landscape ecology and population genetics". Trends in Ecology & Evolution. 18 (4): 189–197. doi:10.1016/S0169-5347(03)00008-9. S2CID2984426.
My initial contact was with Ray, whom did an excellent job giving me an estimate on what I wanted done in my small yard and walkway., the guys that came out and did the work were superior. They did an excellent job. I’m very pleased with this company. I will highly recommend them to family and friends, and I will be using them in the near future for other little projects.
Eric and team did an amazing job. They worked with me for months while I got HOA approval for the project. Once they began working they were great, going over everything in detail and making sure things were perfect. This project included wall repair, stucco and paint repair, paver and turf installation. Extremely satisfied with this experience.
Above and beyond. I’ve got 20 years in the construction industry and these guys are top notch. Tell them what you need, they’ll work with you. Communication is clear and they want to make you feel good about the whole process: If I had to do our back yard 100 more times I’d use rock n block every time.
The owner is a stand up man, his project managers, even down to his workers. All respectful, hard working people. This is a call you won’t regret making.
I had turf and a sidewalk of pavers put down. Wes was amazing and got me all hooked up with a plan and had tons of options for me to choose from. He handled everything. After we got locked in the crew showed up a few weeks later and the went to work like animals. Those guys killed it. Everything looks amazing. I plan to call Wes back when I'm ready for my next project in the front of the yard. Thank you Wes and everyone who killed this project
We have been working with Al and the team for many years (8) to be exact. We have had the pleasure of working with many of their clients throughout this time and we absolutely love how their clients are so pleased with the work they do and the outcome of the projects!
The sales team and staff have been very supportive and professional and that’s hard to come by.
We look forward to many more years of this partnership with a very positive and motivated company that’s always looking out for the best interests of the community!
Is artificial grass a good option for the Las Vegas climate?
Absolutely! Artificial grass is ideal for Las Vegas due to its extreme heat and water restrictions. It stays green year-round without the need for constant watering or mowing. It also holds up well against UV rays, making it a durable and eco-friendly alternative to natural grass in desert environments
With proper installation and minimal maintenance, artificial grass in Las Vegas can last 15–20 years. The synthetic turf is designed to withstand high temperatures, intense sun exposure, and heavy foot traffic—making it a long-lasting landscaping investment for homeowners and businesses alike.
Artificial grass can become warm during peak summer heat, but modern turf products often come with cooling technologies or heat-reflective infills to reduce surface temperatures. You can also cool it down quickly with a light spray of water. Most homeowners find it still comfortable enough for pets and kids with some shading or planning.
Yes! Most artificial grass products are non-toxic, lead-free, and soft underfoot, making them safe for children and pets. Many Las Vegas residents choose turf specifically designed for pet areas, which includes effective drainage systems and odor-reducing infill for cleanliness and hygiene.
While artificial grass requires much less upkeep than natural grass, it still benefits from occasional maintenance. Light brushing, removing debris, and rinsing with water can keep your turf clean and looking fresh. For pet areas, routine deodorizing and proper drainage ensure a clean and odor-free space.
Definitely. One of the biggest advantages of installing artificial grass in Las Vegas is the significant reduction in water usage. Since there's no need for irrigation, homeowners often see a noticeable drop in their water bills—plus it supports Las Vegas’ water conservation efforts amid ongoing drought conditions.