On 26/10/04 19:51, in article , "Mike Lyle"
wrote:

Sacha wrote:
On 26/10/04 17:00, in article
,
"Kay" wrote:

In article , Sacha
writes

The fuss is because many such hedges are *not* managed properly
and
the one the OP is talking about is a case in point. It was
allowed
to get much too tall and still is, from their point of view, I
should think. While *you* are managing your hedge, all is well
but
what if you sell the house? Will the next owner be as
conscientious, have the time, care as much?

Oh, for heaven's sake! I'm willing to take responsibility for what
I
do in my garden while it is my garden, but I do not see that I
have
responsibility to manage it a way that would ensure a future owner
could not annoy the neighbours.

But it is leylandii with which this problem of neglect so often
arises and then so *fast* and that is why the subject arises on
here
rather a lot. And it is why people like me who loathe and detest
the
things and have 'suffered' from them, take the view we do. You
have
a different one and you're welcome to it. Any badly managed hedge
is
a potential blot but it's leylandii that seem to outstrip all other
complaints.

After all, this argument also applies to beech hedges - *you* may
manage your beech hedge, but a future owner may not and, after
all,
beech are forest trees. If you follow this argument, then the only
allowable hedges are those from shrubs which will never reach more
than 6 ft.

Perhaps that would be a good idea in places where others can suffer
from a neighbour's lack of consideration.

And surely, given that a garden is a bequest to posterity, one
shouldn't encourage ill-informed people to use Leylandii when there
are so many alternatives. Geoffrey Smith says he couldn't garden
without it (because he's high up in Yorkshire and needed rapid
shelter); but he doesn't live on an eight-houses-per-acre
development: AFAIK, his garden is next to farmland, which is a horse
of a different kettle. If you know what you're doing, it's ok: I've
even used them as specimen trees (yeah, yeah: even my mother thought
I was crazy) because that garden needed height and evergreen in a
hurry and I was skint.

We do owe some duty to our neighbours, and to our successors. I've
gardened on the northern side of one of these things: the neighbours
were absolutely charming, and the effect on their side was undeniably
beautiful. The house was exactly what we needed at the time. Trap.

Mike.


Anyone who plants trees - and leylandii are trees, not hedging plants -
should be aware as many are, thank god, that you plant trees for the
following generations.
Leylandii as windbreaks or screens on unobstructed sites are useful. As
hedges in small gardens they're a potential menace. I don't *think* I've
heard of anyone writing in here or anywhere for that matter, to complain of
an out of control beech hedge they've 'inherited'. But leylandii? The
queries over its management on this group are continuous and for good and
obvious reasons. Every time I drive past a house in this neighbourhood I'm
made aware of this. For years this was a well-maintained hedge which acted
both as a privacy screen and as a windbreak. The man of the house is now
very ill and the hedge is going untrimmed.........
--
Sacha
www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
(remove the weeds to email me)