In message , BAC
writes

"Kay" wrote in message
...
In article , BAC
writes


If that is your philosophy, then, presumably, you are also careful not to
grow in your garden any alien or hybrid plants (including most clovers)
which might escape into the wild, hence risking 'damaging' the diversity
of
the countryside?


You seem to be saying that, unless one embraces a totally 'green'
lifestyle, one should encourage a total disregard for the environment.

I certainly did not say that, nor did I imply it. You said that gardens and
nature were interlinked and implied that gardeners should not act in a
manner which put at risk the 'diversity of our countryside'. I was enquiring
whether your belief that use of fertilisers and pesticides for recreational
purposes could not be justified, for that reason, also extended to the
growing of non-native plants for recreational purposes.

Although you did not directly answer my question, I assume from your
response the answer is no, it doesn't.

I also assume from your response that you feel entitled to exercise your own
judgement as to what is and what is not reasonable for you to forego in the
name of preservation of 'the environment', and that you might resent your
decision in the matter being criticised by people who draw their own line on
the subject in a different place. Rightly so, IMO.


I think he actually wants to dictate where everyone's line is drawn. As
far as I am concerned, the only studies I have ever seen on the subject
of excess nutrients in waterways have laid the blame firmly at the door
of agriculture. If someone can produce evidence to the contrary or scale
the level of damage due to *excess* use in domestic gardening I may
change my position. Until then I will continue to use modest amounts of
fertiliser and weedkillers on the area of grass in front of my house to
maintain it as I like it.

Incidentally, I can't imagine anyone wanting to use pesticides on a
lawn.
--
hugh
Reply to address is valid at the time of posting