Hi my name is bill,

I have a lot of horsetail weeds in my veg plot and I have given up trying to
get rid of them as everything i do seems not to work.

A friend said that he had read an article in a magazine which said that
horsetail can be made into liquid plant food.

Could anyone tellme how to do this? Also is it ok to compost these weeds?

Thanks for your help in this matter.

Regards

Bill.

The message
from "William Anderson" contains these words:

I have a lot of horsetail weeds in my veg plot and I have given up trying to
get rid of them as everything i do seems not to work.

A friend said that he had read an article in a magazine which said that
horsetail can be made into liquid plant food.

Could anyone tellme how to do this? Also is it ok to compost these weeds?

Thanks for your help in this matter.

Hello Bill, just cut them and sling them into a bin of water as they
appear. when the water really pongs, it's ready to use.

Use directly on vegetables which are likely to be used soon afterwards
is not recommended.

Marestails are used for extracting gold from soil which contains small
quantities of gold salts. The foliage is dried and burnt, and the ash
refined to extract very small but commercially viable quantities of
gold.

So, if you live in an area where gold has been found................

It's your round.

If not, make a solution of glyphosate and washing-up liquid, beat the
foliage to bruise it, then apply the glyphosate.

Repeat for several years. Marestail roots can go down seven feet or more.

--
Frère Jaques
They knocked the Bell down and erected a charade of pops.

In article ,
Malcolm Ogilvie wrote:

I've said it before, and I've no doubt I will have to keep on saying it
(!), the correct name for the garden pest is 'horsetail' (Equisetum sp.)
as the poster used. "Marestail" (Hippuris vulgaris) is a completely
different and, as far as the gardener is concerned, benign plant. Its
use instead of 'horsetail' should, in my view, be discouraged!

As I have said before, and seem to need to repeat, this is nonsense.
The English language is defined by use, and not by self-appointed
arbiters. In any case, you are wrong:

OED: Marestail

The aquatic flowering plant Hippuris vulgaris, ...; formerly called
female horsetail. Also: any of several horsetails (genus Equisetum),
which Hippuris vulgaris superficially resembles.

If you want to be botanically precise, then use the proper botanical
name - which is the Latin. Most people on this group have no trouble
with that concept.

That reminds me - what's the Latin name for a bluebell? And where is
it that you claim to live? :-)


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

The message
from Malcolm Ogilvie contains these words:

I've said it before, and I've no doubt I will have to keep on saying it
(!), the correct name for the garden pest is 'horsetail' (Equisetum sp.)
as the poster used. "Marestail" (Hippuris vulgaris) is a completely
different and, as far as the gardener is concerned, benign plant. Its
use instead of 'horsetail' should, in my view, be discouraged!

So 'tisn't! I was 'corrected' some time ago after calling them
horsetails for yonks. Looked up 'horsetail' in The Concise British Flora
and it wasn't there.

Nor is it still, but I notice now that there are no ferns in it either.

Thank you for re-correcting me.

--
Frère Jaques
They knocked the Bell down and erected a charade of pops.

The message
from (Nick Maclaren) contains these words:

That reminds me - what's the Latin name for a bluebell? And where is
it that you claim to live? :-)

Campanula rotundifolia.

--
Mac the NiFe
'Gin a body meet a body'

In article ,
Malcolm Ogilvie wrote:

As I have said before, and seem to need to repeat, this is nonsense.
The English language is defined by use, and not by self-appointed
arbiters.

That is a point of view, but when it comes to both the scientific and
vernacular names of wild plants in the UK and Ireland, there is an
accepted standard nomenclature. These are as included by Clive Stace in
his 'The New Flora of the British Isles'. Both his scientific and
vernacular names have been adopted by the Botanical Society of the
British Isles.

Tough. The international language is Latin, and all respectable
scientific botanists use that when referring to precise species. And
the English names you refer to have never been accepted by 99% of the
English speakers who talk about plants.

What is good enough for Stace is certainly good enough for me and I see
no harm at all in trying to reduce the use of Mare's-tail (Hippuris)
when people actually mean Equisetum or Horsetail. That's all I was doing
and all I said about it was that I felt the use of Mare's-tail should be
discouraged.

So you feel that the name bluebell for Campanula rotundifolia should
be discouraged? Shame on you!

In any case, you are wrong:

OED: Marestail

The aquatic flowering plant Hippuris vulgaris, ...; formerly called
female horsetail. Also: any of several horsetails (genus Equisetum),
which Hippuris vulgaris superficially resembles.

As a botanist, I follow the standard work on UK and Irish botany when it
comes to plant names not what a dictionary compiled by a non-botanist
happens to say.

The mind boggles! I remember you stating that Stace had claimed that
yew was a conifer, based on a belief that his chapter "headings" were
synonymns. And they included categories as different as the the
gymnosperms and the pine family, if I recall. I do not claim to be a
professional, or even skilled, botanist - but I know better than THAT!

In any case, the OED describes how English is used, and makes no
value judgments as to which group of people are more "worthy" than
others to defined words. Quite correctly. Despite the dogma of a
few, it is completely unreasonable for specialists to attempt to
hijack the language. You will not often see me "correcting" people's
loose use of mathematical, statistical or computing terms, unless it
is relevant in context.

If you want to be botanically precise, then use the proper botanical
name - which is the Latin. Most people on this group have no trouble
with that concept.

I think you mean "scientific" not "Latin" as so many of the names are
actually derived from Greek!

No, of course I don't. As every serious botanist knows, the official
languge of botany is Latin. Species and other names can be derived
from any language or none, but are converted into a Latin form.

That reminds me - what's the Latin name for a bluebell? And where is
it that you claim to live? :-)

I don't remember ever making a "claim" to live anywhere. You used to
"claim" to work for the Cambridge University Computing Centre though a
friend in Cambridge expressed some doubt on the matter :-)

Your memory is clearly very short. I suggest that you use Google
to refresh it.

Presumably you have now retired.

No, I haven't. I still work for the University of Cambridge Computing
Service (not Centre), and am not ashamed to admit it, but have had to
change my signature to avoid my colleagues being pestered by idiots.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

In article ,
Malcolm Ogilvie wrote:

It may not be essential, but it is certainly helpful for understanding
if, when gardeners are discussing a plant, they use the same name and
don't, if possible, use the name of a completely different plant!

Which is precisely why we gardeners (amateur and professional) and
botanists (ditto) use the Latin names when we are concerned about
being precise, or when there is likely to be confusion.

As any competent horticulturalist or botanist knows, the arrogant
and offensive[*] attempt of a a UK-based caucus of botanists to
define a standard set of names and insist on their use is both
practically and scientifically nonsense.

That is because the UK is NOT isolated, despite what the Little
Englanders would like to believe, and we gardeners and botanists
are perpetually seeing references to the same species in sources
from many different English-speaking countries (as well as those
in other lanuages).

The internationally agreed set of scientific names for plants is
Botanical Latin - go and look it up, since you don't seem to
believe me. The English names are context-dependent - and, for
the advantages of THAT, go and look up the uses of constructive
ambiguity in linguistics.

Learn to live with it. In what must now be nearly 20 years, I
have seen virtually nobody else on this group ever admit to having
trouble with that distinction.
[*] It is arrogant and offensive because it is based on the premise
that the Great Unwashed British Public are too stupid to learn to
use Latin names, and because it is a change that is being attempted
to be forced on people by a self-elected group who claim that they
have the right to tell everyone else what to do.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

In article ,
Malcolm Ogilvie wrote:

It may not be essential, but it is certainly helpful for understanding
if, when gardeners are discussing a plant, they use the same name and
don't, if possible, use the name of a completely different plant!

Which is precisely why we gardeners (amateur and professional) and
botanists (ditto) use the Latin names when we are concerned about
being precise, or when there is likely to be confusion.

As any competent horticulturalist or botanist knows, the arrogant
and offensive[*] attempt of a a UK-based caucus of botanists to
define a standard set of names and insist on their use is both
practically and scientifically nonsense.

That is because the UK is NOT isolated, despite what the Little
Englanders would like to believe, and we gardeners and botanists
are perpetually seeing references to the same species in sources
from many different English-speaking countries (as well as those
in other lanuages).

The internationally agreed set of scientific names for plants is
Botanical Latin - go and look it up, since you don't seem to
believe me. The English names are context-dependent - and, for
the advantages of THAT, go and look up the uses of constructive
ambiguity in linguistics.

Learn to live with it. In what must now be nearly 20 years, I
have seen virtually nobody else on this group ever admit to having
trouble with that distinction.
[*] It is arrogant and offensive because it is based on the premise
that the Great Unwashed British Public are too stupid to learn to
use Latin names, and because it is a change that is being attempted
to be forced on people by a self-elected group who claim that they
have the right to tell everyone else what to do.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

On 8 Sep 2003 07:58:24 GMT, Nick Maclaren wrote:

As any competent horticulturalist or botanist knows, the arrogant
and offensive[*] attempt of a a UK-based caucus of botanists to
define a standard set of names and insist on their use is both
practically and scientifically nonsense.

Have you ever seen the American attempt at the same thing, a
lovingly printed tome "Standardized Plant Names"? Ca. 1940.


--
Rodger Whitlock
Victoria, British Columbia, Canada

In article , (Rodger Whitlock) writes:
| On 8 Sep 2003 07:58:24 GMT, Nick Maclaren wrote:
|
| As any competent horticulturalist or botanist knows, the arrogant
| and offensive[*] attempt of a a UK-based caucus of botanists to
| define a standard set of names and insist on their use is both
| practically and scientifically nonsense.
|
| Have you ever seen the American attempt at the same thing, a
| lovingly printed tome "Standardized Plant Names"? Ca. 1940.

No, but I have heard of it - perhaps from you when this lunacy
last came up! As far as I recall, (a) American = USA and perhaps
Canada and (b) some of the names were worse than Alpine Bartsia.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

In article , Nick Maclaren
writes
In article ,
Malcolm Ogilvie wrote:

It may not be essential, but it is certainly helpful for understanding
if, when gardeners are discussing a plant, they use the same name and
don't, if possible, use the name of a completely different plant!

As any competent horticulturalist or botanist knows, the arrogant
and offensive[*] attempt of a a UK-based caucus of botanists to
define a standard set of names and insist on their use is both
practically and scientifically nonsense.

With a recommendation like that from you, they are clearly on exactly
the right track. Thanks, Nick.

[*] It is arrogant and offensive because it is based on the premise
that the Great Unwashed British Public are too stupid to learn to
use Latin names

I wonder how many urglers use scientific names, putting those who don't
into your decidedly "offensive" category of "the Great Unwashed British
Public" who are "too stupid" to learn to use them. How charming :-(

--
Malcolm Ogilvie

In article , Nick Maclaren
writes
In article ,
Malcolm Ogilvie wrote:

It may not be essential, but it is certainly helpful for understanding
if, when gardeners are discussing a plant, they use the same name and
don't, if possible, use the name of a completely different plant!

As any competent horticulturalist or botanist knows, the arrogant
and offensive[*] attempt of a a UK-based caucus of botanists to
define a standard set of names and insist on their use is both
practically and scientifically nonsense.

With a recommendation like that from you, they are clearly on exactly
the right track. Thanks, Nick.

[*] It is arrogant and offensive because it is based on the premise
that the Great Unwashed British Public are too stupid to learn to
use Latin names

I wonder how many urglers use scientific names, putting those who don't
into your decidedly "offensive" category of "the Great Unwashed British
Public" who are "too stupid" to learn to use them. How charming :-(

--
Malcolm Ogilvie

In article ,
Malcolm Ogilvie wrote:

[*] It is arrogant and offensive because it is based on the premise
that the Great Unwashed British Public are too stupid to learn to
use Latin names

I wonder how many urglers use scientific names, putting those who don't
into your decidedly "offensive" category of "the Great Unwashed British
Public" who are "too stupid" to learn to use them. How charming :-(

Thank you for misquoting me.

If you were a serious gardener, or even a regular denizen of this
:group, you would know that most people use whatever language they
feel appropriate for the context. That applies to posters, books,
magazines and so on. When the vernacular conveys the right meaning,
we use it. When we need to distinguish between species, we start
to use Latin. Some posters use almost all English names; some use
a mixture. Nobody except you gives a damn when a poster refers to
lichen as moss, when it is clear what is meant.

Stop trying to be so dictatorial. And try posting a few items on
gardening.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

In article ,
Malcolm Ogilvie wrote:

[*] It is arrogant and offensive because it is based on the premise
that the Great Unwashed British Public are too stupid to learn to
use Latin names

I wonder how many urglers use scientific names, putting those who don't
into your decidedly "offensive" category of "the Great Unwashed British
Public" who are "too stupid" to learn to use them. How charming :-(

Thank you for misquoting me.

If you were a serious gardener, or even a regular denizen of this
:group, you would know that most people use whatever language they
feel appropriate for the context. That applies to posters, books,
magazines and so on. When the vernacular conveys the right meaning,
we use it. When we need to distinguish between species, we start
to use Latin. Some posters use almost all English names; some use
a mixture. Nobody except you gives a damn when a poster refers to
lichen as moss, when it is clear what is meant.

Stop trying to be so dictatorial. And try posting a few items on
gardening.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

In article , Nick Maclaren
writes
In article ,
Malcolm Ogilvie wrote:

[*] It is arrogant and offensive because it is based on the premise
that the Great Unwashed British Public are too stupid to learn to
use Latin names

I wonder how many urglers use scientific names, putting those who don't
into your decidedly "offensive" category of "the Great Unwashed British
Public" who are "too stupid" to learn to use them. How charming :-(

Thank you for misquoting me.

I quoted two uncut paragraphs from your post.

If you were a serious gardener, or even a regular denizen of this
:group, you would know that most people use whatever language they
feel appropriate for the context.

Oh dear, insults and ignorance now. I am both a serious gardener and a
regular denizen of this newsgroup. Just as are a great many people who
never ever post here.

Stop trying to be so dictatorial.

That from you!! I like it!

And try posting a few items on
gardening.

I have done and doubtless will again, though not, I suspect, at your
command.


--
Malcolm Ogilvie