Jump to content
  • Welcome to Celiac.com!

    You have found your celiac tribe! Join us and ask questions in our forum, share your story, and connect with others.




  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A1):



    Celiac.com Sponsor (A1-M):


  • Get Celiac.com Updates:
    Support Our Content
    eNewsletter
    Donate

Homeowners Association


SGWhiskers

Recommended Posts

SGWhiskers Collaborator

Our subdivision is trying to restore a prairie area. As of tonight, I am on a committee to help with the decision making process for how to restore the area in an ecologically sound way. The area is a common trail area about 3 acres away from my house. One proposal I heard someone suggest was to put rye down. We tabled the discussion until another meeting. From past experience, I've learned that there are two categories of plants that can be called rye. The Rye that is a cover crop/grain is what causes celiac problems. The rye that is mixed in with turf grass is in a different botanical group and isn't made into food and does not cause problems.

So the question is: If they are talking about using the cover crop rye that causes celiac problems, am I within my rights as a homeowner to request that they refrain, or is that pushing my own personal agenda? I know, if I don't eat it, I'm fine. I would just rather not be walking through a trail of poison or avoiding the area we are restoring. The rye would be grown for 1-3 years as we restore. Hubby thinks that me asking for no rye planting is like a nasal allergy sufferer asking for grass instead of wildflowers.

My concerns are that

a)I don't want to take advantage of my position on the committee to push my own adgenda.

b)I don't want to be a whimp if it is fair to ask them to look at other, and probably more expensive options.

c) I know this rye plan is ecologically sound, at least on the surface, and that the likely alternative is repeated application of herbicides which I detest.

If it helps, I am a 1/25th owner of the commons area in question.


Celiac.com Sponsor (A8):
Celiac.com Sponsor (A8):



Celiac.com Sponsor (A8-M):



Jestgar Rising Star

They would never plant a crop, since that wouldn't be restoring anything to a native state. Consider it your job to make sure they choose the right grasses. :)

Open Original Shared Link

Open Original Shared Link

kareng Grand Master

I don't know where you live. Here in the midwest there are places you can get info to restore native prairie grasses - tall grass or short. Rye grass or the crop wouldn't be natural. It sounds like they are just planting the rye grass next to the trail so you have something that can me kept mowed down and free of poison ivy. That is just regular grass. I don't know if that is the right choice for that application. If they just want something green until the native stuff grows in, yard grass might not be a good choice. It will take the native plants' water, cover the seeds from the sun even in the winter and other things.

Takala Enthusiast

I do hiking. If I had the choice of walking along a path framed by planted turf grass including rye, or natural vegetation to my area, I'd pick the turf grass EVERY time.

You should see the "natural" vegetation we get in some parts of Northern CA along the American River trails- poison oak, thorny wild raspberries, and the introduced star thistle, plus foxtails and other weed seedheads that can work their way into your dog's paws and ears, besides your socks. If my spouse has the dog's leash, I have to constantly remind him to KEEP THE DOG OUT ON THE PATH OUT OF THE GRASS. At our place we also have an area that gets stinging nettle every spring that has to be cut down. There is also this really sappy, sticky, smelly stuff in the fall which blooms on unirrigated pasture, which I am not sure of what the botanical name is, but it not only makes me welt up, some of the horses are allergic to it.

As long as you aren't grazing on the seedheads you won't be affected.

kareng Grand Master

I do hiking. If I had the choice of walking along a path framed by planted turf grass including rye, or natural vegetation to my area, I'd pick the turf grass EVERY time.

You should see the "natural" vegetation we get in some parts of Northern CA along the American River trails- poison oak, thorny wild raspberries, and the introduced star thistle, plus foxtails and other weed seedheads that can work their way into your dog's paws and ears, besides your socks. If my spouse has the dog's leash, I have to constantly remind him to KEEP THE DOG OUT ON THE PATH OUT OF THE GRASS. At our place we also have an area that gets stinging nettle every spring that has to be cut down. There is also this really sappy, sticky, smelly stuff in the fall which blooms on unirrigated pasture, which I am not sure of what the botanical name is, but it not only makes me welt up, some of the horses are allergic to it.

As long as you aren't grazing on the seedheads you won't be affected.

Years ago, I lived on the American River. I swear the foxtails are alien creatures not seeds! They wiggle their way into everything.

We have a Nature Ct for grade school kids. We have some paved paths ( wheelchairs). And some mulched. We just have regular grass about 1 foot on each side of the paths in the Tall Grass Prairie area. Partially to protect the plants from kids swing clipboards and pushing each other! :)

SGWhiskers Collaborator

Back to the main question about whether it is fair of me to request that Rye not be planted due to my "allergies." What do you guys think?

Thank you for the information about the prairie grasses. That along with native wildflowers is the long range plan, however the soil was aggressively disturbed due to two reckless homeowners. Now we are left with a big restoration project starting at the wrong time of the year. Rye (the covercrop) helps to keep us from having to spray the area again with herbicide while we wait for the right time to plant the native grasses and wildflowers. If they are talking perenial rye turf grass, that I'll fight for other reasons. We don't live in a traditional subdivision and it would be inconsistent with the nature preserve setting. I'm fairly well educated about natives and the basics of a restoration project. I'm working with 3 other homeowners and at least 2 professionals to create a long term plan which will make sure the right type of plants regrow in this area instead of thistles, buckthorn, and ragweed.

So, are my "allergies" reason to insist on another cover crop (if needed), or is that pushing my problems on others?

Thank you

Jestgar Rising Star

I don't think your allergies are relevant. If they want to restore the area they shouldn't plant anything that isn't native for any reason. Find some other, native, protective plant to put it while you wait for the perfect time.


Celiac.com Sponsor (A8):
Celiac.com Sponsor (A8):



Celiac.com Sponsor (A8-M):



kareng Grand Master

I don't think your allergies are relevant. If they want to restore the area they shouldn't plant anything that isn't native for any reason. Find some other, native, protective plant to put it while you wait for the perfect time.

I agree with Jess. I thought that was what I was saying. They shouldn't plant the crop Rye, how would that make sense? I thought maybe you were planting the rye grass you use in yards just to fill in until the other stuff grows in the spring. That is not the same as rye that people eat.

If you are worried about allergies, you should pave it over because someone will have a problem with the pollen from the native plants and flowers. At least with our "allergy" we have to eat it, a little pollen in the air isn't the part we react to.

SGWhiskers Collaborator

OK, that makes sense. Thanks for all you advice.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A19):



  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      131,684
    • Most Online (within 30 mins)
      7,748

    Betty Siebert
    Newest Member
    Betty Siebert
    Joined

  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A20):


  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      121.4k
    • Total Posts
      1m

  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A22):




  • Who's Online (See full list)


  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A21):



  • Upcoming Events

  • Posts

    • Scott Adams
      I'd go with a vodka tonic, but that's just me😉
    • Rejoicephd
      That and my nutritionist also said that drinking cider is one of the worst drink choices for me, given that I have candida overgrowth.  She said the combination of the alcohol and sugar would be very likely to worsen my candida problem.  She suggested that if I drink, I go for clear vodka, either neat or with a splash of cranberry.   So in summary, I am giving ciders a rest.  Whether it's a gluten risk or sugars and yeast overgrowth, its just not worth it.
    • Inkie
      Thank you for the information ill will definitely bring it into practice .
    • Scott Adams
      While plain, pure tea leaves (black, green, or white) are naturally gluten-free, the issue often lies not with the tea itself but with other ingredients or processing. Many flavored teas use barley malt or other gluten-containing grains as a flavoring agent, which would be clearly listed on the ingredient label. Cross-contamination is another possibility, either in the facility where the tea is processed or, surprisingly, from the tea bag material itself—some tea bags are sealed with a wheat-based glue. Furthermore, it's important to consider that your reaction could be to other substances in tea, such as high levels of tannins, which can be hard on the stomach, or to natural histamines or other compounds that can cause a non-celiac immune response. The best way to investigate is to carefully read labels for hidden ingredients, try switching to a certified gluten-free tea brand that uses whole leaf or pyramid-style bags, and see if the reaction persists.
    • Scott Adams
      This is a challenging and confusing situation. The combination of a positive EMA—which is a highly specific marker rarely yielding false positives—alongside strongly elevated TTG on two separate occasions, years apart, is profoundly suggestive of celiac disease, even in the absence of biopsy damage. This pattern strongly aligns with what is known as "potential celiac disease," where the immune system is clearly activated, but intestinal damage has not yet become visible under the microscope. Your concern about the long-term risk of continued gluten consumption is valid, especially given your family's experience with the consequences of delayed diagnosis. Since your daughter is now at an age where her buy-in is essential for a gluten-free lifestyle, obtaining a definitive answer is crucial for her long-term adherence and health. Given that she is asymptomatic yet serologically positive, a third biopsy now, after a proper 12-week challenge, offers the best chance to capture any microscopic damage that may have developed, providing the concrete evidence needed to justify the dietary change. This isn't about wanting her to have celiac; it's about wanting to prevent the insidious damage that can occur while waiting for symptoms to appear, and ultimately giving her the unambiguous "why" she needs to accept and commit to the necessary treatment. This article might be helpful. It breaks down each type of test, and what a positive results means in terms of the probability that you might have celiac disease. One test that always needs to be done is the IgA Levels/Deficiency Test (often called "Total IGA") because some people are naturally IGA deficient, and if this is the case, then certain blood tests for celiac disease might be false-negative, and other types of tests need to be done to make an accurate diagnosis. The article includes the "Mayo Clinic Protocol," which is the best overall protocol for results to be ~98% accurate.    
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

NOTICE: This site places This site places cookies on your device (Cookie settings). on your device. Continued use is acceptance of our Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.