Letters submitted by BDN readers are verified by BDN Opinion Page staff. Send your letters to [email protected]
It’s the constant refrain. The CDC says it. Cooperative Extensions all over say it. The neighbor says it when you don’t mow. Long grass equals ticks. However, the research that has been done in recent years on the effect of decreased lawn mowing on tick prevalence is clear to me — there is no relationship between grass length and tick presence.
One study looked at the effect of various lawn heights on tick populations in Massachusetts and found no ticks in any of the lawns, despite the grass length (Lerman and D’Amico, 2019). Another study that looked at mowed versus unmowed paths in a forest actually found an increase in nymphal tick populations in the mowed paths (Lee et al., 2023). The latter study also found that other studies citing increased mowing as resulting in reduced tick populations were referring to mowing woody understory vegetation (i.e. brambles, bushes, etc), not grass.
I can attest to the results from the aforementioned studies myself, as I have let my lawn grow long several times over the past several years, both in the country and in the city, and have only found a tick on me when I went to my brush pile to grab some firewood. So, can we call this myth done and stop crying “tick” every time people choose to let their lawns grow? It would be worthwhile to do so since there is plenty of evidence showing the benefits of less intensive mowing for biodiversity, air pollution, and more.
Rachel Smith
Orono
