New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Bees Have a Goldilocks Lawn Mow Schedule

Lawns mowed every two weeks hosted more bees than lawns mowed every three weeks. Jason G. Goldman reports. 

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Add up every golf course, athletic field, industrial park, and yard in the U.S. and you have an area nearly the size of Florida. Upon first glance, all that lawn might seem a biological wasteland—a monoculture of grass

But while natural areas in the U.S. continue to decrease thanks to urbanization, urban green spaces—including lawns—could become more important reservoirs of biodiversity. 

"What happens if we mow our lawns less? Do we get more lawn flowers? And if we get more lawn flowers, can we get more bees?"


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


U.S. Forest Service ecologist Susannah B. Lerman.

She and her colleagues devised an experiment to see if front lawns could in theory provide decent habitat for bees – and if so, how to do it. So they recruited 16 homeowners from a Massachusetts suburb and monitored for flowers and bees throughout the summer for two years. Each of the homeowners agreed not to use any kind of pesticide or herbicide. And none had cultivated any sort of pollinator or vegetable garden that could skew the results. Some of the lawns were mowed weekly, some every other week, and others were mowed every three weeks.

"When we mowed the lawns less, we got more flowers, roughly two and a half times more. But it was those that we mowed every two weeks that had the most bees."

No surprise, flowers were most abundant on the lawns mowed least often. But why do bees like a bit more frequent mowing? Lerman thinks that's because most of the bees she found were tiny native sweat bees, roughly the size of a grain of rice. Critters that small could find it difficult to navigate through the taller grasses.

In all the researchers found 111 types of bees over the course of the study. That represents a quarter of all bee species known to occur in Massachusetts. 

"When you get down on your hands and knees, there's a lot going on in these lawns."

So not only do lawns hold more biodiversity than it might seem, but it turns out that one way to manage them for wildlife is to be lazy—but not too lazy.

"A lot of people have been telling me that they feel vindicated now. That they have a realize to tell their neighbors why they're not mowing, it's for the bees…By mowing your lawns every two weeks or so, you're letting these flowers grow and bloom and they seem to be having a positive impact for bees."

—Jason G. Goldman 

 [The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

[Susanna B. Lerman et al., To mow or to mow less: Lawn mowing frequency affects bee abundance and diversity in suburban yards]

Jason G. Goldman is a science journalist based in Los Angeles. He has written about animal behavior, wildlife biology, conservation, and ecology for Scientific American, Los Angeles magazine, the Washington Post, the Guardian, the BBC, Conservation magazine, and elsewhere. He contributes to Scientific American's "60-Second Science" podcast, and is co-editor of Science Blogging: The Essential Guide (Yale University Press). He enjoys sharing his wildlife knowledge on television and on the radio, and often speaks to the public about wildlife and science communication.

More by Jason G. Goldman

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe