In article ,
Kay Easton wrote:
In article , Nick Maclaren
writes

That is true, but what I was railing against was the recent,
politically motivated, claims that buying from a nursery for
naturalising is ecologically good

Who has been claiming that?

It is a common claim, obviously by the nurseries that stand to make
money, but I have also seen it in semi-official recommendations.

On this thread, nobody has said it so far in those words, though
someone said something that predicated that statement, and was what
started me off. He said that buying from nurseries was as good as
digging up plants from a forthcoming building site. That is a
fallacy.

and taking plants from the
wild is ecologically harmful. It can be, but the converse is
equally often true.

Generally, you are PRESERVING the UK wild primrose stocks by
using plants taken from the area around you.

Only if you can guarantee to keep them alive! If you take plants from
the wild and let them die, you are doing nothing but harm.

That is not true. You do not have to GUARANTEE to keep them alive,
especially with plants like primroses. The potential gain from a
new location to establish in is so much greater than the loss of a
few plants that you merely have to have a reasonable chance. With
plants like primroses, you should think in terms of populations,
and not individual plants.

The same does not apply to all plants, of course.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.