Quote:
Originally Posted by rbel[_2_]
The advantage of the slash and burn approach is that you can then
start with a fresh canvas allowing more freedom to execute your own
design and not have take into account the stumps and remains of trees
and shrubs that have been allowed to grow out of control for many
years. I agree that it is inevitable that it will look a mess
following the destructive stage but we know that a couple of years
later we would have had a more pleasing garden if we had gone down
this route.
--
rbel
|
The issue is that OP has not done his slash and burn effectively. He had a lot of brambles, and those need properly killing if they are not to repeatedly grow back. He doesn't even know if the garden is badly affected by bindweed, etc, as he didn't wait and see.
When I inherited my garden, there were some completely useless shrubberies full of selfseeded overgrown shrubs. There was no need to wait to see that those needed completely digging out, it was obvious from what they contained. One has been turned into our vegetable patch. But in other parts of the garden there were many useful plants and trees which have been saved and kept. I cut down some overcrowded conifers, and it became apparent that they all had the same number of rings - someone had planted a load of cheap conifers precisely 13 years before I moved in, without giving them space to grow, and done very little beyond mow the lawn since, not even weeding out the self seeded shrubs, which had become huge, also the completely overgrown hedges.