From a Buddhist perspective, the act of purchasing--voting with the dollar--a product that is toxically produced and shipped to its desired location is ethically and morally wrong. It is against the interconnectedness of beings, as the destruction of one habitat is also a destruction of the extended self. From a Jesuit-Catholic perspective, Genesis dictates that all Earthly creations are impoverished of their own, independent nature (they are /of/ God) and are sacramental (they provide a vessel for us to experience God). By mistreating or misguiding our efforts in the natural world, we are misguiding our efforts to respect God as it exists in all things. Religious theory aside; As a geologist, I have an academic bias towards the use of any chemical fertilizer, especially in coastal habitats like southeastern MA. Because Rehoboth/Seekonk are part of the Ten Mile sub-watershed, my groundwater's "drainage path" to the ocean is through the Narragansett basin. Any and all pollution that enters the groundwater table in the Rehoboth/Seekonk area WILL OVER TIME flow to its final destination. Parameters that impede the flow of pollutants are typically Darcy's Law parameters: the density of the chemical, the nature/likelihood of the chemical to adsorb (chemically 'stick') to rock particles, the porosity of the aquifer through which the water is flows, the amount of water flowing through the aquifer, and the relief/topography of the watertable as a whole. Flatter, more coastal areas will see pollutants slowly bloom and spread over time. There is less gravitational potential 'flowing' water downstream to the ocean, and therefore less energy to disperse pollutants. In some areas with typically sandier soil, high porosity can lead to extremely fast chemical/pollutant leaching from the area. Especially at risk to water pollution are those on Cape, where the groundwater is focused into fresh water 'lenses' due to salt water intrusion of the watertable. The freshwater rain that falls onto the Cape is the only way for the watertable to recharge itself. Research conducted at the MMR at the bicep of the Cape has shown that pollutants deposited here from the military as earlier as 40 years ago are still leaching through the groundwater, and are toxifying the deep-earth environment of the region. Even scarier, underground glacial flow channels carved from the region approx. 14-12,000 years ago have become "high ways", regions of increased flow potential, for these pollutants to be directed to Buzzards Bay and the Sounds. After studying the estuarine and coastal hydrophysics which actively shape our coastline, I've come to realize that pollutant in the water table all drain, eventually, to one place. And that's the estuary at the mouth of your watershed. Through processes like eutrophication (in my opinion one of the milder consequences of pollution), estuarine grass and sea-weed organisms cannot survive. Because their main function in an estuary is to collect and trap sediments, essentially building out the estuary and protecting the coastline from sever coastal storms, the destruction of these organisms by human pollution WILL cause the landward migration of sand bars, "outer banks", and the ocean front. We saw the effects of this in New Jersey on the Shore. We are beginning to see the effects of this on the South shore of Cape Cod, an area that is NOT environmentally protected by the national government. When chemicals are applied to the lawn properly, and at the right time, the plants that are supposed to be fertilized will act on the chemicals to grow. But what sorts of pollution issues does this cause across the globe? Minerals are being extracted from locations across the globe in order to synthesize the chemical fertilizer that you're desiring to put into your lawn. Minerals, that, without the pollution of fossil fuels, you wouldn't have in your area or at your immediate disposal. What about the others' environment that you might be polluting? Mineral mining for fertilizers may not cause immediate damage. But fossil fuel mining across the globe is making places literally uninhabitable for any species, not just humans. According to my friend Seun, also a geologist, places like his home in Southern Nigeria host oil companies that have lobbies so extensively in the local and federal government that the government has stolen millions of dollars from the people in exchange for selling their land to oil companies for drilling. Seun discussed with me the implications that fossil fuel mining has had on his home town. People's farms are covered in spilled petrochemicals and other inorganic wastes so badly that these people can no longer grow food and are being forced to flee the region as refugees. My friend is unsure if he will be able to return home after he completes his Masters degree because he doesn't know if there will be food for him to eat. His family's farm has fallen victim to the humanitarian crimes that are being undertaken in Southern Nigeria. So for me it's not about proving one person right, one person wrong, another person a crazy liberal, and another person a mad scientist. By default, I think we're all scientists (because we're all experimenting with plants through the act of gardening) and what each of us has to say has equal importance. TL-DR: The issue of purposely adding pollutants to the earth and also the issue of indirectly supporting industries that do so are issues that require all of us to join in discussion. Is it worth having the greenest, healthiest lawn? From a chemists' perspective, as long as the chemistry is handled right, yes. From a geologists' perspective (and not a petro-chemical geologist, mind you), I'll tell you that any pollutants added to any groundwater system can be considered pollution when the scope of the pollution is taken into consideration, so no. From a religious perspective, we have a higher calling to educate ourselves on the dangers that we are presenting to the natural creation that we have the privilege of experiencing, although we are aiding in the growth of life on our own soil, is it truly balancing the harm that we are causing in other parts of the globe? Please consider Steve's suggestion of topping off the soil in your yard with an organic amendment. Please consider that grass is one (1) of many, many, many plants and biodiversity never hurt a single being.

I'm so sorry for the grief and stress you've felt throughout this time. You've done a kindness -don't forget that. It was difficult, but you did it because you loved Keo and wanted her to stop hurting. I've had to do it a number of times, and it's always so incredibly difficult, and always followed by weeks of melancholy. But I've never regretted it. Right now I know of a kitty, about 17 years old, who weighs about 3 lbs., and is truly suffering every day from many ailments. Her owners believe they'll 'know' when the time is right to put her down, but to everyone else, it looks like the time is right here, right now, and we feel such sorrow and pity for this poor, frail, hurting kitty..... You did the right thing. I don't know whether you're familiar with this poem, or whether it will resonate with you, but I thought I'd pass it on... The Last Battle If it should be that I grow frail and weak And pain should keep me from my sleep, Then will you do what must be done, For this " the last battle" can't be won. You will be sad I understand, But don't let grief then stay your hand, For on this day, more than the rest, Your love and friendship must stand the test. We have had so many happy years, You wouldn't want me to suffer so. When the time comes, please, let me go. Take me to where to my needs they'll tend, Only, stay with me till the end And hold me firm and speak to me Until my eyes no longer see. I know in time you will agree It is a kindness you do to me. Although my tail its last has waved, From pain and suffering I have been saved. Don't grieve that it must be you Who has to decide this thing to do; We've been so close "we two" these years, Don't let your heart hold any tears. - Unknown

Neither I nor anyone else suggested that, Glenda. In fact, I was careful to say I didn't want to criticize. With that in mind, Suzieque's post was well said. I don't recall seeing the "Pet Peeves" thread, but I'll hazard a guess that some of the things that annoy some people are not a source of annoyance to others. And, as Suzieque said, most annoyances are not big things. But of course that doesn't stop them from being annoying . . . to some. I guarantee that those of us who do find those teaser subject lines annoying (just annoying, mind you--we're not tearing out our hair or spiking our blood pressure or making demands) have plenty of small stuff that we don't sweat. And I'm pretty certain that those who claim to have learned not to react to little things have something (some small thing) they find irritating as hell.

Thanks for all of the ideas. I will look into the cord winders, cable ties, etc. Jeannine, the computer is on the left side. You can see the monitor if you look closely - just a sliver as it is a side view. All of the "stuff" is to the left of that. Ideefixe, yes I did plant the flag. I have made several changes since this pic. I bought a new desk lamp ("antique" apothecary), put a different lamp behind the desk, filled in the credenza, bought a tropical palm for the area between the credenza and the window. Right now it might be the baskets to start. That would be pretty easy. DS just bought a house and tonight I am going to help him strip 100 years of paint off the woodwork - so not much time this weekend -- but I do want to get all of these cords tucked away.