Comparative evaluation of aesthetic, biological, and economic effectiveness of different lawn management programs

We evaluated aesthetic (lawn quality), biological (weeds and insect pests), and economic (management costs) effectiveness of a commercial (managed by a professional company), consumer (managed using consumer lawn care products following labeled instructions), integrated pest management (IPM) (pesticide applications based on monitoring and thresholds), organic (monitoring and need-based organic and natural product applications), and an untreated lawn care program. Percent weed cover was the lowest in the commercial followed by IPM, organic, and consumer programs. The commercial program had lower white grub density than all other programs, and the organic program had lower white grub density than the untreated program. The commercial program had the highest lawn quality while the untreated program had the lowest. The IPM and organic programs did not differ significantly in lawn quality, but both rated significantly higher than the consumer program. Annual costs were highest in the commercial ($382/0.05 ha) followed by the organic ($305/0.05 ha), IPM ($252/0.05 ha), and consumer program ($127/0.05 ha), respectively. We conclude that the commercial program produced the highest lawn quality, and weed and insect control, and was the most expensive. The IPM and organic programs were cheaper than the commercial program and produced slightly lower lawn quality. Although the consumer program was the cheapest, it produced the lowest weed control and lawn quality among treated lawns.