"The Devil's Advocate" wrote in message ...
I think Neil Jones email was altered before it was posted to make it sound
more scientific

Cerumen wrote:
"Rusty Hinge" wrote in message
...
Yet the story has spread. It has appeared in at least two
_Government_
press releases and as even been copied by the BBC.

But who believes Government press releases, especially about weeds
of mass destruction?

Or even about the mass destruction of weeds? Anyway somebody leaves a
horse run free and it breaks into my land and eats the ragwort or
indeed nibbles on the Yew, foxgloves, belladonna or any other toxic
plants and trees they get what they deserve?

I doubt if anybody's actually considering the effect on stray
livestock: all good fun, but we shouldn't let the wisecracks distract
us from the issue. The issue is how far we let these plants spread to
land where they may be less welcome than, perhaps, on our own.

Keeping the population of ragwort within bounds seems reasonable to
me: yew, foxglove, etc aren't distributed by the wind, and are
conspicuously not typical grassland plants; no ragwort is, as far as I
know, an endangered species -- somebody mentioned how common they are
on some roadside verges, for example; so if you live close to grazing
land it's elementary good neighbourliness to pull it up when you find
it on your patch. That way it's more likely to be the farmer's fault
than yours if she has a problem later on: one less thing to worry
about.

It was suggested that the ragworts didn't colonise well-stocked
grassland, but I'm afraid they do, round here at any rate. How else do
they appear in lawns?

The cinnabar moth won't be preserved by half a dozen plants in some
gardener's back hedge anyhow.

Mike.