... I guess it was put in to annoy, in which it has been successful

Basically its was an argument that ecological concerns have turned the garden into a place of guilt. She says "we are exhorted to plant only natives (which strictly interpreted, would give us a choice of maybe 50 plants, mostly prickly)"

Firstly the exhortation has been to plant more native plants, rather than only native plants, and now the advice is merely to avoid too many double flowers. Secondly, "choice of 50 plants mostly prickly" gives a misleading view of the British flora of over 3000 species.

From the RHS report into Urban Gardens: gardens "contribute from 22–27 percent of the total urban area in many cities, and can represent nearly half of urban green space. Domestic gardens contain approximately
25 percent of the total non-forest and woodland trees and can contribute as much as 86 percent of the total urban tree stock."

So is it really unreasonable to ask us to be aware of this, and to have a mind on wildlife while we garden?

On 29/03/2014 11:43, kay wrote:

... I guess it was put in to annoy, in which it has been successful

Basically its was an argument that ecological concerns have turned the
garden into a place of guilt. She says "we are exhorted to plant only
natives (which strictly interpreted, would give us a choice of maybe 50
plants, mostly prickly)"

Firstly the exhortation has been to plant more native plants, rather
than only native plants, and now the advice is merely to avoid too many
double flowers. Secondly, "choice of 50 plants mostly prickly" gives a
misleading view of the British flora of over 3000 species.

From the RHS report into Urban Gardens: gardens "contribute from 22–27
percent of the total urban area in many cities, and can represent nearly
half of urban green space. Domestic gardens contain approximately
25 percent of the total non-forest and woodland trees and can contribute
as much as 86 percent of the total urban tree stock."

So is it really unreasonable to ask us to be aware of this, and to have
a mind on wildlife while we garden?

The real answer is not to worry about the garden at all, and just build
more motorways. Their verges are accepted to be havens for native
plants and wildlife. If we doubled or trebled the motorway system, we
could solve this problem in a relatively short time.

Of course, all the new embankments for HS2 will also contribute to
solving the native plant shortage.

And if Heathrow and Gatwick have extra runways, maybe instead of grass
run-off areas they could consider seeding those with native plants, too.

See, lot's of opportunities!

--

Jeff

"Jeff Layman" wrote
kay wrote:

... I guess it was put in to annoy, in which it has been successful

Basically its was an argument that ecological concerns have turned the
garden into a place of guilt. She says "we are exhorted to plant only
natives (which strictly interpreted, would give us a choice of maybe 50
plants, mostly prickly)"

Firstly the exhortation has been to plant more native plants, rather
than only native plants, and now the advice is merely to avoid too many
double flowers. Secondly, "choice of 50 plants mostly prickly" gives a
misleading view of the British flora of over 3000 species.

From the RHS report into Urban Gardens: gardens "contribute from 22–27
percent of the total urban area in many cities, and can represent nearly
half of urban green space. Domestic gardens contain approximately
25 percent of the total non-forest and woodland trees and can contribute
as much as 86 percent of the total urban tree stock."

So is it really unreasonable to ask us to be aware of this, and to have
a mind on wildlife while we garden?

The real answer is not to worry about the garden at all, and just build
more motorways. Their verges are accepted to be havens for native plants
and wildlife. If we doubled or trebled the motorway system, we could solve
this problem in a relatively short time.

Of course, all the new embankments for HS2 will also contribute to solving
the native plant shortage.

And if Heathrow and Gatwick have extra runways, maybe instead of grass
run-off areas they could consider seeding those with native plants, too.

See, lot's of opportunities!


I suspect you wrote that a bit tongue in cheek but it is noticeable that the
Red Kites and the Buzzards are both spreading along the motorway network as
are the wild orchids.
--
Regards. Bob Hobden.
Posted to this Newsgroup from the W of London, UK

On 30/03/2014 15:57, Martin wrote:
In the 1960s there used to be sheep eating the grass at Schiphol Airport.

Followed not long after by smoking it in coffee shops.

--
regards
andy

On 30/03/14 15:57, Martin wrote:
On Sun, 30 Mar 2014 12:36:26 +0100, "Bob Hobden" wrote:
I suspect you wrote that a bit tongue in cheek but it is noticeable that the
Red Kites and the Buzzards are both spreading along the motorway network as
are the wild orchids.

I often see buzzards perched on motorway lights, but I'm not
sure that red kites are following motorways. The received wisdom
around here (Bristol and south Cotswolds) is that red kites
are spreading from the Chilterns to the north Cotswolds and
then southwards.


In the 1960s there used to be sheep eating the grass at Schiphol Airport.

Recently I've seen sheep on two runways, and cows on another.
Yes, they ought to be removed before operations begin, but
folklore has it that occasionally they aren't - with "amusingly"
gruesome results.

The last native red kite used to hang around a few miles from where I live. Now they have taken over the village, even pinching the dogs bones left on the lawns. Occasionally they can be seen feeding on road kill. The motorway could be useful for that.