"John Morgan" wrote in
message ...
Nick Maclaren wrote in message
...

In article ,
"Franz Heymann" writes:

| The truth is that you cannot garden at all without
creating a totally
| artificial ecology.

No, that is false, on many grounds.

almost all gardening does not create a TOTALLY artificial
ecology, but a slightly perturbed one - a.k.a. "living
with nature".

Well said, Nick. A major aspect of gardens, apart from
vegetable plots, is to bring nature close to our door. The
more natural looking the garden, the more it gets admired.

That is loose talk. {:-((

Where in *nature* would you expect to find plants from Africa, The
Americas, Asia and Europe juxtaposed in the same patch of ground?
Where in nature would you expect to find campanulas or geraniums
thriving in the absence of an unselected environment of weedy plants?

[snip]

Franz

"John Morgan" wrote in
message ...
Nick Maclaren wrote in message
...

In article ,
"Franz Heymann" writes:

| The truth is that you cannot garden at all without
creating a totally
| artificial ecology.

No, that is false, on many grounds.

almost all gardening does not create a TOTALLY artificial
ecology, but a slightly perturbed one - a.k.a. "living
with nature".

Well said, Nick. A major aspect of gardens, apart from
vegetable plots, is to bring nature close to our door. The
more natural looking the garden, the more it gets admired.

That is loose talk. {:-((

Where in *nature* would you expect to find plants from Africa, The
Americas, Asia and Europe juxtaposed in the same patch of ground?
Where in nature would you expect to find campanulas or geraniums
thriving in the absence of an unselected environment of weedy plants?

[snip]

Franz

In article , Douglas
writes

At one of the houses I lived in the little blighters used to swarm all over
the kitchen cupboards.
I tried everything but no luck. They would come and go at random. Something
to do with the season or the climate or an ant 'race' (culture)
development?. In the jungle I have seen Marching Ants but you get to hell
out of it, - but quick.
Doug.

When camping - and occasionally in a house - I've found that a line of
neat washing up liquid makes an effective barrier. Presumably, you need
a) a hard surface to put it on; b) no other points of entry; c) to renew
it fairly often.

--
regards andyw

In article , Yakman
writes
I only wanted to find a way to rid my small garden of thousands of ants, but
i seemed to have started a war in this newsgroup.

Very Sorry

I wouldn't worry. There's always a war going on somewhere in this
newsgroup ;-)
--
Kay
"Do not insult the crocodile until you have crossed the river"

Franz Heymann wrote in
message ...

"John Morgan"
wrote in
message ...
. The more natural looking the garden, the
more it gets admired.

That is loose talk. {:-((

Where in *nature* would you expect to find plants from
Africa, The Americas, Asia and Europe juxtaposed in
the same patch of ground?
Where in nature would you expect to find campanulas or
geraniums thriving in the absence of an unselected
environment of weedy plants?

My use of the word natural is colloquial, with it's meaning
somewhat divorced from its root. Here one is supposed to
understand that nature has existences at more than one level
in our consciousness and the overall appearance of a garden,
as with raw nature, transcends the individual items creating
it. Gardens that capture this essence and even improve it
would be regarded as having a natural beauty whatever the
component plants are. I believe this means they should look
as though they just happened and no man's hand is apparent.

As the Japanese have shown, the number of components can be
much lower than would make up many vistas in nature, yet
their gardens, aesthetically-speaking, often still seem
'natural'. Gravel and a chain link fence is too minimalist
for my taste, but I see many gardens that consist of just
that. But I never see many passers-by standing to gawp at
such a spectacle, though ;-))

Franz Heymann wrote in
message ...

"John Morgan"
wrote in
message ...
. The more natural looking the garden, the
more it gets admired.

That is loose talk. {:-((

Where in *nature* would you expect to find plants from
Africa, The Americas, Asia and Europe juxtaposed in
the same patch of ground?
Where in nature would you expect to find campanulas or
geraniums thriving in the absence of an unselected
environment of weedy plants?

My use of the word natural is colloquial, with it's meaning
somewhat divorced from its root. Here one is supposed to
understand that nature has existences at more than one level
in our consciousness and the overall appearance of a garden,
as with raw nature, transcends the individual items creating
it. Gardens that capture this essence and even improve it
would be regarded as having a natural beauty whatever the
component plants are. I believe this means they should look
as though they just happened and no man's hand is apparent.

As the Japanese have shown, the number of components can be
much lower than would make up many vistas in nature, yet
their gardens, aesthetically-speaking, often still seem
'natural'. Gravel and a chain link fence is too minimalist
for my taste, but I see many gardens that consist of just
that. But I never see many passers-by standing to gawp at
such a spectacle, though ;-))

"John Morgan" wrote in
message ...

Franz Heymann wrote in
message ...

"John Morgan"
wrote in
message ...
. The more natural looking the garden, the
more it gets admired.

That is loose talk. {:-((

Where in *nature* would you expect to find plants from
Africa, The Americas, Asia and Europe juxtaposed in
the same patch of ground?
Where in nature would you expect to find campanulas or
geraniums thriving in the absence of an unselected
environment of weedy plants?

My use of the word natural is colloquial, with it's meaning
somewhat divorced from its root. Here one is supposed to
understand that nature has existences at more than one level
in our consciousness and the overall appearance of a garden,
as with raw nature, transcends the individual items creating
it. Gardens that capture this essence and even improve it
would be regarded as having a natural beauty whatever the
component plants are. I believe this means they should look
as though they just happened and no man's hand is apparent.

As the Japanese have shown, the number of components can be
much lower than would make up many vistas in nature, yet
their gardens, aesthetically-speaking, often still seem
'natural'. Gravel and a chain link fence is too minimalist
for my taste, but I see many gardens that consist of just
that. But I never see many passers-by standing to gawp at
such a spectacle, though ;-))

What you have described has little to do with "natural", and a lot
with "gardenesque". The latter term meaning whatever it is that is
currently in fashion in the gardening scene.

Franz

Tooooooooooooooooo! Hogg LOL

--
Thanks Keith,England,UK.
"Chris Hogg" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 25 Jul 2004 19:11:32 +0100, "kenty ;-\)"
wrote:

The problem with this newsgroup is there are two many opinionated people
who
are of no help to anyone you don't get any bite back with
rec.gardens.orchids although most users are from the USA.

Which two are those then? LOL


--
Chris

E-mail: christopher[dot]hogg[at]virgin[dot]net

--
Thanks Keith,England,UK.
"kenty ;-)" wrote in message
...
Tooooooooooooooooo! Hogg LOL

--
Thanks Keith,England,UK.
"Chris Hogg" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 25 Jul 2004 19:11:32 +0100, "kenty ;-)"
wrote:

The problem with this newsgroup is there are two many opinionated
people
who
are of no help to anyone you don't get any bite back with
rec.gardens.orchids although most users are from the USA.

Which two are those then? LOL


--
Chris

E-mail: christopher[dot]hogg[at]virgin[dot]net