In article , Sacha
writes
in article , David
at David @chapelllllhouse.demon.co.uk wrote on
21/9/03 5:32 pm:
In article 3f6d7958.0@entanet, Lyndon Thomas lindenthomas@glowbroadba
nd.net writes
As i have stated in previous threads there is nothing wrong with a leylandii
hedge as long as it is properly maintained.
This rarely hapens, as they are planted to grow a quick barrier, this
happens in just a few years and then reality strikes home when this
wonderful barrier has to be trimmed, the sides nearly always get cut because
it encroches on the garden, the top is seldom cut as this is hard work.The
result a hedge ??? 30,40, or 50ft. tall that becomes a very big problem to
all living close to it. AND I SPEAK FROM EXPERIANCE.
You're talking rubbish, its rare that Leylandii grow out of control,
most are controlled one way or another, its the few that give the whole
a bad name and I also speak from experience.
This is not true. If it were, there wouldn't be even the glimmering of a
beginning to control their use. Of course leylandii are problem plants in
urban and suburban use.
Leylandii are not hedging plants, they are forest trees.
But so are beech. And yet they are recommended for hedges - I think you
maybe have recommended them yourself ;-)
All too often,
people use them as 'weapons' against neighbours or people who are not
gardeners or who become too infirm to garden, lose control of them
completely. They can grow to 100' or more, unchecked. Of *course* they
shouldn't be used as hedging plants in suburban circumstances. However,
neatly you trim yours, how do you know that your successor in your house
will do the same?
All that applies equally to other forest trees used as hedges - the only
difference is that leylandii grow more quickly. And you cannot take
account of what your successor may do, any more than you can prevent him
from playing loud music all through the night!
They take nutrients from the soil and return nothing;
They are like other hedges in that respect.
they take light and
are an unrelenting slab of boring nothingness, day in, day out.
That is a matter of opinion.
The day I
cut down mine which were about 12' high, was the day my garden gained light,
air and about 8' in width. Of course, it was also the day I realised that I
had to rebuild and re-rail a wall and its railings, which had been pushed
out of shape by the god-awful leylandii which the previous owners of my then
house had planted.
The only wall problem I am having is with a bay tree!
There are many ways in which bloody-minded neighbours can make
themselves objectionable. Over-reaction to the well publicised
complaints of those whose b-m n's choose leylandii as a weapon threatens
to deprive other a much needed privacy screen in cases where it's not
doing any harm to anyone. I'm quite happy for there to be legislation to
enable a reasonable compromise between one person's desire for privacy
and another's desire for a sunny garden, but hysterical one-size-fits-
all rulings on the lines of 'no leylandii' or 'no hedges over 6 ft' does
a lot of us no favours at all. We can't all live in the country or in
leafy suburbs - some of us can afford the house we want only if we put
up with a less desirable location - next to a warehouse, for example.
--
Kay Easton
Edward's earthworm page:
http://www.scarboro.demon.co.uk/edward/index.htm