The Plant Messiah

When I heard that Kew's 'Plant Messiah', Carlos Magdalena, had just brought out his first book I was intrigued. Carlos is a 'Botanical Horticulturist' at Kew, known best for his work bringing critically endangered plants back from the edge of extinction, and his nickname of 'The Plant Messiah' was bestowed on him by none other than legendary naturalist Sir David Attenborough, so a book seemed quite promising...

I've read many things written by people involved heavily in conservation and materials tend to fall into two camps; 'the world is going to die and this is why it's your fault' or 'this is a tree, and trees make the lovely air'. With what I would say is a tolerable understanding of the troubles facing our planet in times to come, and how plants contribute to our world, I really didn't want to read yet another book along these lines.

I was more than a little surprised by this book; part autobiography, part account of real work carried out by the author, this is what the world of plant conservation has needed for some time- a good natured insight into the world of plant conservation that is gripping and thought provoking.

Magdalena's style of writing and his interesting stories of his work in far flung places (as well as 'back at base' behind the scenes at Kew) makes this book a bit of a page turner. Personally I devoured it over the course of two days, and it's currently on loan to a friend who is finding it similarly gripping. The language is straightforward; there's no attempt to force in technical language to make the author look clever, but neither is there an assumption that the reader can't understand technical detail if explained coherently. In fact, the book starts with a brief glossary so all readers get the opportunity to brush up on a few terms before starting the book if they so wish!

This is one of the very few books I own that has moved me to review it; whatever your level of technical expertise this book is fascinating and will renew your interest in safeguarding plant species for the future.

My Life With Plants, a review

Old wisdom says that you should never meet your heroes, but I've met my gardening hero three times now and it's done me no harm! If you had to write a list of 'great heroes of gardening' then the late and very great Christopher Lloyd would certainly be on the list, as would the very influential Beth Chatto, but I would hope that most lists would included Roy Lancaster.

For me, Roy Lancaster is the very epitome of what a plantsman (or indeed plantswoman) should be; friendly, warm, enthusiastic, knowledgeable, informative. There are those who think that plantsmanship is about men in corduroy trousers or women in floral dresses and big hats professing that a plant merrily living its life in a border should be ripped out in favour of some obscure plant (nearly always something the 'plantsperson' grows themselves), while gaggles of 'lesser gardeners' frantically try to make notes and capture this great 'wisdom'. In truth I find this to be an abhorrent definition of plantsmanship, and I would dearly like to see these 'ships in full sail' barred from gardens nationwide. For me 'plantsmanship' isn't about collecting rare and obscure plants to try and show off to other gardeners and make them feel inferior, plantsmanship is about understanding plants, their diversity and their needs, to make the best selections. You can be a plantsperson using Photinia 'Red Robin' or Potentilla fruticosa 'Abbotswood' (a favourite of mine)- it's not the obscurity of the plant that makes a scheme work, it's the suitability of the plant for the purpose.

Anyone who has heard Roy Lancaster give lectures, been with him on garden tours or come across him in the media will know that he has an infectious way of getting everyone interested in plants; it was Ian Hodgson (former editor of the RHS magazine 'The Garden') who once said “he could make the most nondescript, green looking plant the most interesting thing on the planet just by the very words and passion he conveys”. This is what I believe plantspeople should be like, not bogged down in pointless hierarchies and one-upmanship!

Roy has written several books over the years, ranging from fairly easy going general books about trees and shrubs right through to 'My Travels In China', an impressive and possibly sometimes daunting book about, not surprisingly, his travels in China and the plants he saw there. Roy was also a critical part of the creation of arguably the most influential reference books for serious gardeners, 'The Hillier Manual of Trees and Shrubs', the latest edition of which (with Roy Lancaster and John Hillier as consultant editors) describes over 13,000 woody plants without any pictures whatsoever! It's very easy to enjoy the fruits of Roy's research yourself- every gardener should own a copy of The Hillier Manual!

Roy's latest book is very much the odd one out in that it focuses very much on him. 'My Life With Plants' is a very enjoyable and fascinating autobiography which takes us on the journey of his life, from his early days in his native Bolton to his national service in Malaya and up to recent times, and talks with great fondness of the people who influenced him and got him into the world of plants. Of course there are plants mentioned on nearly every page, plus birds and other wildlife found along the way, so even here the reader is being fired up with enthusiasm for plants!

The style of the book is very light and easy, and you quickly finding your mind reading the words with a Bolton accent! Some stories will be familiar to anyone who has been to Roy's lectures while others are probably less well known. I found the chapter on Roy's garden particularly interesting; I've long wondered what his garden is like but don't really have the connections to wangle a visit, so reading about it was the next best thing. Finding out that Roy's garden is around 1/3 of an acre but contains around 1,000 species further cemented one of my beliefs of plantsmanship and that is that you don't need to have a huge space to have an excellent collection of plants!

There are parts of the book that I suspect have been edited back pretty hard, particularly stories of plants he's seen in the days since leaving the Hillier Arboretum, but I daresay those stories would make up another book on their own. In fact I really hope they do make another book on their own; while 'Travels in China' is an astonishing in-depth story of Roys various trips to that seemingly never ending botanical paradise it would also be nice to have a book more centred around Roy's more recent experiences in gardens and wild places around the world, trips where he has had first hand experience of some of the most remarkable plants in the world? Either way, this book is sure to delight fans of arguably Britain's most enthusiastic plantsman!

Michael Wickenden

Today I was saddened to hear that Michael Wickenden, plantsman, explorer and owner of Cally Gardens in Scotland, has passed away.

Although I've never met Michael in person the Cally Gardens catalogue has been a highlight of my gardening year for some time now; every autumn (then latterly spring) the catalogue stuffed with rare and interesting plants from around the world dropped through my letter box, and was always the first piece of post to be opened. The biggest challenge with the Cally Catalogue has always been whittling down the desirable list to things I can afford and grow...!

Impatiens rothii- huge tuber from Cally!

 

From what I've heard so far, Michael died doing what he loved, travelling, exploring and collecting seed of interesting new plants to introduce to his nursery. At this point I gather that there is an intention to continue the nursery at Cally Gardens, a fitting tribute to the work of a real plantsman.

(Unfortunately I can't find my picture of Rheum 'Cally Giant', a whopper of a species. Well worth looking for online, and if you're into big leaves you'll need to grow it!)

Coombe Sculpture Garden; a review

I'm sure I'm not the only one who travels great distances to see gardens yet always manages to miss a garden on my doorstep. I've been aware of the existence of Coombe Sculpture Garden in Bradstone, Devon, for several years thanks to conversations with other gardeners and occasionally driving past signs pointing up one of Devon's charming country lanes, but it was only this year that I finally took the plunge and visited.
Nestled in a secluded valley, Coombe House would be idyllic without a garden. Here lush, burgeoning hedgerows create a patchwork of fields on rolling Devon hills, and almost secret country lanes take you to beautiful sleepy hamlets with beautiful houses. This is a place off the beaten track, and is all the better for it.

Nonetheless there is a garden here, a superb garden. While so many of us dream of our country paradise, creating a garden that sits well in its landscape can be surprisingly difficult. With a careful guiding hand, the owners of Coombe Sculpture Garden have created a garden that is entirely comfortable with itself; there's no pretence here. All too often people who open their garden feel the need to show off and try to make their garden as high-end and aspirational as possible, but here the garden just feels right; this garden is unapologetically what it is. It's hard to put this mysterious feeling into words- you'll have to visit to see what I mean.

The garden only runs to 1.5 acres in all, but this doesn't feel like a small garden; the layout and planting has a similar quality to Knoll Garden in Dorset which also manages to trick you into thinking you're in a garden much bigger than its four acres. You will find a small orchard, a mill pond, a stream, several ornamental ponds, borders, interesting plants, and of course sculptures. I'm reluctant to go into too much detail about the garden itself for fear of spoiling the surprise!

This is overwhelmingly a private garden, although the owners are justifiably proud of it and are pleased to welcome people to the garden during its all-too-short opening season in summer. Would I recommend this garden? Yes and no; my reluctance to heartily recommend this piece of heaven is simply because I love that it's still a bit of a treasured secret in the gardening world. If you just happen to find yourself here then you're in for a treat.

Coombe Sculpture Garden is at Bradstone, a tiny hamlet between Launceston and Milton Abbot on the Devon/Cornwall border. It has very limited opening times, being open for just a few weekends during the summer. Be sure to enjoy a light lunch or delicious piece of cake while you're there!

My favourite rose

It's strange to think that I've actually been working in horticulture for a good 15 years now! Anyway...

Over the years I've seen a lot of roses. I've seen them at flower shows, I've seen them in gardens, I've seen them in nurseries... I've potted them, I've planted them, I've pruned them, and I've taken pictures of them.

I'm really not all that fussed on roses.

There, I said it! I'm not a big fan of roses. I don't go all gooey at the latest introduction, I don't feel a sentimental attachment to an old fashioned rose, I get neither attracted to nor repulsed by a hybrid-T. I'll grow them, I'll care for them, I'll even evaluate them for my customers, but I am in no way a big fan of roses. I do grow a few but these are species roses grown as shrubs with flowers rather than being held in high praise because they're roses!

There is one rose that I will always hold in high praise though; one rose that I make sure I sniff whenever I see one in flower.

Yes, it's Rosa rugosa! Now I know that to sensible gardeners this species is a bit of a thug, but when have I ever been sensible? For me the thuggish thick stems of Rosa rugosa are the perfect structures to hold large, tissue-paper like blooms in pink or white. Add to this that Rosa rugosa is tough, vigorous and free-flowering (when big), and you've got a winner. Large bright orange hips in autumn are just the icing on the cake.

Why I do what I do

People pick careers for many reasons; job security, money, interest, challenge, opportunity to make a difference.... I'm a gardener, and I get enormous amounts of happiness from the work I do.

But Ben, you might ask, what about all the cold and wet days, don't they get you down? Cold and wet days are a physical and mental challenge, an endurance test I suppose, but they are an important part of my personal well-being; think about it this way, if every day was hot and sunny you would simply take hot and sunny weather for granted. By enduring the discomfort of cold and wet days you quickly learn to appreciate the warm and sunny days!

The other thing that contributes massively to my happiness is that every day I see something AMAZING! Yes, 99% of the planet don't share my wonder at the natural world but that's their problem, not mine. To see beauty in the buds on a bare stem, to enjoy the high drama of mist rolling in, or maybe just the sound of birds chirping away while you work... these are the things that make life rich.

Take this flower bud; this is Rhododendron sinogrande, one of the large-leaved tree species. It's a magnificent shrub/tree for a special spot in the gardens of the more discerning gardeners, and it takes several years to get to flowering size. Once it starts to flower the trusses appear each year and are eagerly anticipated; even though the flowering season isn't very long the period of excitement and eager anticipation as the buds swell lasts for several weeks before a single flower opens.

 

This is why I really love what I do! Every garden I visit has something happening, something to anticipate. I get in my van each morning wondering what I'll see during the day that will make life better.

Out with the old, in with the new

After 10 years of abuse, neglect, rain, mud, strong horticultural disinfectants, opening packaging, fires (well, two bonfires specifically) and plant sap I decided it's time my Felco No. 2s enjoyed an honourable retirement! While my new secateurs might be shiny and sharp they lack the character of my old ones...

 

That New Year Blog Post...

With constant news of war, famine, flooding, greed, corruption, abuse and scandal being drip-fed to us all day every day the need for gardening has never been so great.

Happy New Year.

Book Review: The RHS Encyclopaedia Of Conifers

It's easy to imagine some raised eyebrows when the RHS considered publishing an encyclopaedia of conifers; conifers have been out of fashion in the UK since the 1980s, so it would stand that any book about them, let alone a two volume set, wouldn't have the potential to be a best seller. Thankfully the RHS, along with Kingsblue Publishing, saw the importance of giving this unloved but diverse group its due, and the result is spectacular.

The RHS Encyclopaedia Of Conifers is a two volume set, 1506 pages in total, covering all 615 currently recognised conifer species and describing an impressive 8,000 cultivars. The set is lavishly illustrated with over 5,000 pictures, many of which were taken specifically for this encyclopaedia. Given the widely held view that conifers are “all the same” you could be forgiven for expecting page after page of nearly identical pictures or nearly identical plants, but you would be wrong; the pictures have been chosen and arranged in such a way that each page shows the diversity of cultivars, and even where the cultivars of a species can be fairly similar (as with some species of Abies, Picea and Pinus) the pictures may highlight a different characteristic such as needle shape or cone. This is hard to explain, so let me give you an example: within Abies koreana ('Korean Fir') there are a group named for the silvering of their needles, but rather than show photographs of each cultivar with its silver needles the publisher has chosen to focus on the habit of the illustrated cultivars while showing in a few spectacular images what the effect of the colouring is. This certainly cuts down on repetition in the pictures, as does the careful choice of cultivars illustrated at all. Some of the full page pictures used to punctuate these books are breathtaking!

Just one image of so many

The descriptions are concise but not without charm; each described cultivar is briefly covered, explaining habit, colouring (where necessary), origins and distinguishing features, but [crucially] also giving an expected height and spread in 10 years. Conifer growth rates can vary wildly according to climate, and my dwarf conifers grow much more quickly here in mild Cornwall than they do in drier and colder areas, but an idea of the height and spread is still very useful. So far I've not come across any ultimate heights and spreads in the cultivars, but such details are given in the descriptions of the individual species. Many of the ultimate heights given in horticultural books are nothing more than educated guesswork so the growth after 10 years is of more use to a gardener than a guessed figure, especially given that many dwarf conifers (take for example the tiny cultivars of Abies koreana) originate from much faster and larger growing trees, while some other cultivars (such as Chamaecyparis lawsoniana 'Little Spire') can grow considerably larger than expected! The species are covered in more depth than the cultivars, but descriptions stay away from being overly botanical. Species are described concisely, but also some interesting information is given about their habitats and preferences, their use as timber crops, and in some cases their relevance to local culture.

The RHS Encyclopaedia Of Conifers has been a labour of love for its authors, Aris Auders and Derek Spicer. I don't know much about Mr Auders, except that he was considered a leading expert on conifers and sadly passed away before this encyclopaedia was published. I have had the pleasure of meeting Derek Spicer on several occasions (he owns a conifer wholesale nursery, Kilworth Conifers, here in the UK), and I can personally vouch for his love of conifers; his enthusiasm for them, despite their fall from fashion, comes across in conversation. Derek has introduced several cultivars into cultivation, including the awesome Podocarpus 'Kilworth Cream', a beautifully variegated shrubby Podocarpus with a nice bushy habit (I would strongly recommend gardeners get to grips with Podocarpus, many are useful shrubs for colour and shape).

There can be no doubt that this work will remain unbeaten for many years to come. The sheer scale of the work, as well as the care taken to produce an encyclopaedia of such immense quality, makes this the definitive work for anyone who needs a broad understanding of conifer species and cultivars. My only criticism of this work is that it would be nice to have some pictures of the really rare and obscure genera that appear, if only for the sake of completion. Even a good picture of a pressed specimen in a botanical collection would be interesting, but at least by giving obscure taxa such as Retrophyllum a decent write-up anyone interested in learning more can go online for more information. This is a very minor fault with an otherwise perfect encyclopaedia.

Sadly I don't think the publication of the RHS Encyclopaedia Of Conifers has made, or will ever make, a difference to how ordinary gardeners perceive conifers. To change perception will need a radical overhaul of how gardeners value plants, and while herbaceous plants and growing food remain dominant trends the poor conifer is shunned. It's a shame really; to shun conifers is to ignore an enormous family of plants purely based on their methods of reproduction. Nonetheless this is where we are for now, and conifers will remain the interest of a minority of more experienced gardeners. For those gardeners, the RHS Encyclopaedia Of Conifers is a must-have book, and in addition to being a reference source it will also bring hours of pleasure just flicking through the pages. Will there be a second edition? Probably not.

Your nursery needs YOU!

This is an appeal on behalf of your local plant nursery...

A combination of recent bad weather and unforeseeable economic pressures have left small nurseries suddenly rather quiet. The stock is there, the bare rooted plant season is well under way, and the mild (if wet) weather recently has extended the autumn planting weather well into December. Despite so many reasons to buy plants, nurseries across the UK (and I've heard also around Europe) are missing trade.

There are many reasons for this; often wet and windy weather puts people off doing any gardening, stories of terrorism and war in the news generally lead to slower sales generally (presumably fear of what is to come makes people think twice about spending?), and the run-up to Christmas tends to favour shops rather than nurseries.

So why should we care? Businesses always have peaks and troughs in their incomes, so this is just another trough? I think there is a big concern because this has been a difficult year, with unpredictable weather and concern about how Government cutbacks will affect us all meaning that we reconsider our spending, and to end on a low note does not bode well for smaller businesses. January is nearly always a quiet month, and if February is cold then often this can add extra strain onto a small business's finances. If November and December remain this quiet then many (most?) small nurseries will face at least a third of the financial year unable to meet their costs. This could very easily be the end for some.

So yes, why should we care? Your local nursery is where you often find the better advice, the more interesting plants and the better prices and value for money. These are the places that focus of producing and selling plants, and are a very important part of our enjoyment of gardening. Would you really want to rely on your local garden centre for all of your plants, or have to send off to a nursery somewhere else in the UK or Europe every time you want to grow something different? I enjoy trips to my local garden centre for sundries etc., but my local nursery is where I find the better and more interesting range of plants!

What can be done?

1. Don't delay your planned purchases. Yes, family might put pressure on you to go here, there and everywhere in the run-up to Christmas, but try to make some time to visit your nursery.
2. Send plants as gifts! If you know a friend or family member well then you could choose a plant as a Christmas present. Do they have a tree in mind? What about a perennial for their border? Have they been coveting something in your garden?
3. If you can't give them a plant, or you're not sure what they might like, why not send vouchers? There is a downside to this; the National Garden Gift Vouchers can be redeemed in hundreds of garden centres and nurseries across the UK, so you might have to stipulate that you would appreciate the recipient spending their voucher(s) in an independent nursery. Also the nursery has to pay to redeem the vouchers...
4. Does your friend or family member have a good nursery locally to them? Why not contact the nursery and see if they would allow a credit note? You pay them X amount and then tell the recipient that they have an amount to spend at that nursery... Although a little more complicated, and not all nurseries will be able to do this, it would at least mean all of the money goes to that nursery.
5. Be sure to raise the profile of your local nursery with gardening friends! It's the easiest thing to do... you get talking about gardening and just mention that your local nursery has the new season's fruit or bare rooted plants in stock. You might fancy a trip out yourself so you could make a day out of it with your friend(s)! My local nursery, Endsleigh Gardens Nursery in Devon, has new stocks of fruit, trees, roses and bare rooted hedging in stock now, and your local nursery is likely to be the same. Now is a great time to buy roses so they establish well in spring, and most come with pictures on their labels so you don't have to shop entirely by the description.

Although the nursery trade has been tough for several years it would seem that this autumn and winter is proving particularly tough for small independents. If they go, just imagine the world of homogenised garden centres, all selling the same plants at the same prices, that would be left. What gets planted in your garden will be decided by people in boardrooms, and over time gardens will all become clones of each other. All that's needed to stop this is a conscious decision to support independent nurseries, and not leave them fighting for their existence this winter.

Best of all your efforts are rewarded with plants!

Ever decreasing circles

As popular gardening becomes more and more limited in its outlook it's rare to come across anyone daring to go against the flow. Gardening is directed by its fashions, with knowledge and practice of horticultural disciplines giving way to image-rich celebrities, heavily filtered 'vintage' Instagram nostalgia and pithy comments about vegetables and bees. Gardening is no longer about people making their own choices; gardeners are pushed and pulled by marketing campaigns and media stories into thinking that the only way to garden is to buy this product or that, and that anything that doesn't make out that it single-handedly saves the world is of no value.

It's a wonder that some plants manage to hold on against this relentless current. Modern gardening culture teaches us that ponds are dangerous to kids who are certain to drown in them (except for wildlife ponds of course, which must be surrounded by long grass and strictly wild plants but are otherwise OK), that native plants are always better for wildlife than non-native (even though there's increasing evidence that this isn't true), and that any plant that grows quickly is a thug that will destroy your whole garden.

You just don't see Euphorbia 'Fens Ruby' any more

With this blogger/media/retail constriction the diversity of our gardens is sure to suffer. Similarly our ability to express ourselves as anything other than lovers of dreamy 'naturalistic' Oudolf-inspired borders, rolling wildlife meadows or organic food factories is being eroded. Although it's not openly said, it's not really 'allowed' to be different any more. Those who pioneered or found their horticultural home in formerly popular trends like the hardy exotics movement or the whole 'prairie/grasses' thing risk being labelled unfairly as being unfashionable, despite the fact that these gardeners have continued to develop their style even though their own discipline is no longer de rigueur.

For the hardcore enthusiasts being fashionable isn't important, the issue really comes when new gardeners are pushed into particular styles of gardening because they aren't allowed by the garden influencers to be different. Open any of the glossy garden magazines and you will see the same formula time and time again; big [expensive] house with a garden filled with drifts of fashionable perennials, a few from a shortlist of popular/commonly found shrubs, and decorative pieces from their pet sculptor. It's not that these gardens aren't nice, they just become rather repetitive. Editors would argue that they are simply giving people what they want, while in truth they're helping to strangle the ingenuity and individuality out of horticulture. Whole areas of horticulture are sidelined not because they are unpopular per se, but because they never see the light of day. The result? Gardeners are being denied inspiration to make their own way in the world because they aren't being exposed to new and different ideas.

How often do you see carnivorous plants in garden magazines?

As coincidence has it while I was writing this post Anne Wareham published a blog post written by Noel Kingsbury about le Jardin de Berchigranges in France. This quote from Noel illustrates exactly what I'm getting at: “The trouble with most garden-making is that most people care too much about what others think, as they try to impress, or to emulate, or to, and ohmygod I hate this, make an English garden. Why do people in France, in Germany or the USA endlessly try to make English ****** gardens? I’m sick of them. They all end up the same – as a pastel pastiche, while their owners obliviously live the cliché, almost wallowing in their inability to do anything actually creative.”

As a nation of gardeners it seems few gardeners actually relish doing any gardening. 'Gardening' has become something of a dirty word; while so many gardeners enjoy gardens it seems that the whole act of gardening has become something to avoid. There are exceptions, notably with those who grow their own food, but on the whole gardening has gone through a period of labour saving gadgets and techniques and has now ended up as 'labour avoidance'. You can, for a price, buy a robot lawnmower that will mow your lawn for you, and the plants available to most gardeners have been chosen for performance with as little maintenance as it's possible to get away with. No wonder then that formerly common skills like pruning are becoming rare! The modern world makes more demands on us than at any time in the past, yet we're only able to be so busy because we don't spend our time on 'chores' like gardening; ironic then that so many people claim that gardening is restful, relaxing and spiritual rewarding...

Conifers are about as unfashionable as you can get...!

I will fight for anyone's right to enjoy their gardening style, regardless of whether or not I'm 'into it'. Whatever you do, from growing wildflowers or fruit, topiary and carefully tended lawns, lush jungles or herbaceous borders, you should be proud of what you do in your garden. If you go against the flow then credit to you for keeping the less fashionable horticultural disciplines alive. Whether you're into bonsai trees, show Chrysanthemums, carnivorous plants, conifers, alpines, giant vegetables, Fuchsias, ornamental aquatics or anything else that never seems to make it into the public eye, you can at least enjoy what you do. I do, however, share your frustration that the things you love are never shared with the wider gardening community.

You can read the full review of le Jardin de Berchigranges here: http://thinkingardens.co.uk/reviews/berchigranges-garden-reviewed-by-noel-kingsbury/

Saving Horticulture

As certainly as spring follows winter, the question of how to recruit more (preferably young) people into horticulture is certain to appear in horticultural discussions. Horticulture is widely believed to be facing a 'people crisis', and there seems to be no clear idea about what we should do about it. No wonder then that some choose to ignore the issue until it goes away....

When you see fresh-faced horticulture students leaving college to make their way in the industry it's hard to imagine there could be a problem; yes, there aren't as many courses on offer as there used to be, and are there any solely horticultural colleges left in the UK? Nonetheless there are people leaving school, or changing professions, and heading into horticulture. So what's the problem? It would seem that people are retiring as quickly as new recruits are being trained... but is that entirely true, and is it the whole story?

I think it's actually more accurate to say that horticulture is facing a skills shortage more than strictly speaking a shortage of people. You don't have to go far to find businesses finding it hard to recruit people with the necessary skills to do a job; yes, there are plenty of people around with general horticultural qualifications, but there are also enough jobs around needing people with particular expertise. Skills are learned by doing, and so it stands that someone fresh out of horticultural college won't have as many skills as someone who has been working in horticulture for years. The obvious thing is to offer training 'on the job', but with so many skilled practitioners leaving the industry there simply isn't the time to train the next generation. This is where we have a problem.

See the subtle change there? In the space of a paragraph I've gone from referring to people retiring to 'leaving the industry'.

As much as we need to recruit new people into the industry, we also need to retain skilled horticultural experts. There is a subtle shift as skilled horts get tempted away by better conditions/pay in other industries, or get pushed by the somewhat troubled state of the industry, and this expertise is not being replaced. Decades worth of knowledge and expertise can be lost with each person leaving horticulture; what do we do?

To coax skilled people to stay in this industry horticulture has to clean up its act. We need to act on some poisonous cultures that exist in some (many?) nurseries, garden centres, gardens and other horticultural businesses. We need to stamp out sexism; in horticulture there is gender equality in that both men and women can freely encounter sexism. Sexism is making men do all the 'grunt work' because women automatically deserve the nicer jobs (whatever these may be), or telling a woman that she can't use machinery because that's 'man's work'. Sexism is paying competent women less than incompetent men. Sexism is implying that either men or women are naturally more competent at horticulture than their gender opposites; it's not true, and it's a culture that must be stamped out in the places where it's allowed to be the norm. Sadly also homophobia can be engrained in a company's workforce; other industries have cleaned up their act significantly, and horticulture needs to follow suit.

Conditions also need to be addressed. There is a degree of 'rough and tumble' in horticulture, but there are businesses that go too far by exposing staff to pesticides (I once worked for a company where teams of staff worked in the greenhouses while a pesticide team in full PPE sprayed the plants they were working on!), not providing Personal Protective Equipment or otherwise taking measures to protect safety and well-being, or working staff into the ground (which usually leaves businesses with high attrition rates as those that can leave do!). Yes, we all get cold in winter, and we get really hot in summer, but there has to be a line drawn somewhere.

Pay is a perennial favourite for those looking for reasons why people leave or don't join the industry. It is possible to earn enough money to live in this industry (I live alone and get by). If you're single and live alone you are unlikely to be able to afford expensive holidays and luxury items, but if they aren't important to you then you can get by comfortably. If there's someone else to share the bills then that's brilliant, but even then don't expect to be booking a fortnight's cruise on a horticultural wage. Through 15 years in horticultural retail I was aware that administration staff were often on better wages than the horticultural staff (but then the horticultural staff often earn more than casual staff); people are paid in line with the expectations of their industry, but horticulture is usually fairly low. The temptation to jump into another, better paid, industry does occur from time to time in most horticultural workers!

There is also a question of image. Horticulture is its own worst enemy here! It allows itself to be seen as unskilled, the kind of work that anyone could do if they weren't contributing to society in a more important way. Amateur gardeners who join horticulture so they can earn as they pursue their hobby often get a rude awakening; horticulture is often bloody hard work! My frustration is that I think horticulture focusses too much on a 'nice' and 'relaxed' image. For anyone who wants to succeed in life, and anyone who actually relishes a challenge, the sheer 'nicety' of the image is off-putting. Where are the challenges? Where is the career progression? Can you succeed if you're competent, or will the good jobs just go to people who are 'nice'? The number of times people have said to me “oh you're a nurseryman (or more recently, gardener), that must be so relaxing/calming/spiritually uplifting”! Excuse me? EXCUSE ME?! Potting hundreds of plants as fast as you can isn't relaxing, and neither is mowing a lawn in the rain! Horticulture is challenging, and those who succeed are the ones who enjoy a mighty fine challenge. There is a therapeutic side to horticulture, as can be seen by the various projects for people with disabilities or learning difficulties, but believe me when I say that while I have found professional horticulture to be interesting, enlightening, challenging and fun, I've never found it to be therapeutic; I would say that if you're enjoying professional horticulture as therapy then you might need to get a shift on and work faster before someone notices you're not breaking a sweat!

The new generation bring their own challenges. Sad to say that my limited experience with horticultural apprentices has been at best mixed. All bright people, but lacking any personal discipline and desire to succeed. Of course there will be diamonds in the future workforce, but there does seem to be a problem with young people not wanting to work for their money, coming in with interesting ideas that they are somehow above menial tasks, and often a profound difficulty in paying attention to the extent needed in horticulture. I wish this had only been my experience, but sadly I hear the same thing time and time again from others in the trade. Too many young people in horticulture expect to be entertained constantly, and this causes friction when they find out that about 90% of horticulture is about repetition (say, weeding each pot in a batch) or recurring cycles (such as potting each year). As I say, some people in this new generation will be absolute diamonds and will go far in this industry; many of today's recruits will probably drift away from the industry in the not-too-distant future. It's sad, but I'm afraid I think it's what will happen.

So what do we do? My suggestions are outlined here:

• Shake up the industry as it is, removing less desirable elements that may linger in some businesses.
• Work towards making horticulture a more appealing industry; work to increase wages for skilled and committed employees, and offer career progression rather than allowing the 'next in line' culture that's been around for decades to continue.
• Show horticulture to be what it really is, a challenging and rewarding industry that's perfect for people with a wide range of skills and interests. To succeed in horticulture isn't about being 'nice', it's about working hard to build your skills and experience, and the rewards for that are worth having.

So there we have it; in a nutshell these are, I think, some fairly key issues affecting the industry. There are others, and some may disagree with my prioritising of these issues in particular, but I am increasingly of the opinion that it is absolutely vital to keep existing skills in horticulture. Once the attrition rate of skilled labour has been addressed the industry will be in a much stronger position to recruit and then retain skilled people in the future.

Stuck in a rut

Once every three months a copy of The Alpine Gardener drops through my door. This is the quarterly publication of the Alpine Garden Society, a society of gardeners who are particularly interested in alpine plants, woodlanders (things like Trilliums etc.) and an interesting selection of other bits and pieces that come under the group's remit. This is most definitely a more specialised gardening society, with no interest in fruits and vegetables, trees and shrubs, or designer gardens. The society hosts dozens of shows across the UK (to which everyone is welcome). At shows there are benches full of the many interesting plants on which the society is focussed, ranging from fairly common through to extremely rare, as well as plants for sale, cakes, books, seeds... you get the picture.

The other society I'm a member of it the RHS, the Royal Horticultural Society (if you're outside the UK). The RHS is a much broader spectrum organisation, with interests in every area of horticulture. The RHS performs trials on different genera and gives best performers an Award of Garden Merit (AGM), holds big flower shows, spends bucketloads of money teaching young children to grow food, has four RHS gardens, publishes a monthly magazine....

A few months ago I began to realise that I've become a little bored with the RHS. I've been a member for over 10 years, but I've come to the conclusion that I'm just not RHS material any more. Yes, I do get to visit the garden at Rosemoor free of charge (but how many times can you visit before you get too familiar with even such a lovely garden?), but the magazine feels bland and uninspiring and I haven't been to an RHS show in years. When the magazine drops through the door I open it, flop out all the advertising stuff and flick through in case there's an article that interests me. I read Roy Lancaster's articles, and sometimes something unusual like Matthew Pottage's fantastic attempt at getting gardeners to suppress their horticultural racism and look with fresh eyes at conifers, but on the whole I'm done with the magazine and pass it on to my friend after about 30 minutes of reading. It's not that the pictures aren't good, or that the magazine is in any way badly written, it's just so terribly familiar and, I've come to believe, basic.

This isn't a post about being a horticultural smartarse; this is a post about learning. Gardening is a learning process. Simple. You buy your seeds, sow them, grow the seedlings on, plant them out, enjoy them, and you learn from your successes and failures. You also learn new things from TV and radio, from magazines and from other gardeners. Gardening is a process of constant learning, and even the most experienced gardeners are still learning lots of new things. This is where I've become increasingly at odds with it all; I'm starting to feel that horticulture is stagnating. I know that the garden year is a cycle, and that this cycle repeats itself each year, but there is a wealth of knowledge out there that is untouched by the horticultural mainstream.

Nobody seems to want to break out of the mainstream. Every year Monty Don sows his sweet peas in the same way and at pretty much the same time, and magazine regurgitate the same tips and advice, only with slightly different wording and a few new articles dropped in to persuade people not to just reread last year's edition (good tip though!). There's a formula and those who generate media content are happy to follow it, tweaking it as they go. What happens though when you, as a gardener, want to break away from the mainstream and build on your knowledge, when you don't want to be an amateur gardener any more?

There are specialist plant societies around for various parts of horticulture, and even the RHS has The Plantsman magazine for those who want more depth on the plants themselves (although you pay £29 on top of your RHS membership or pay £37 if you're not a member), and there are groups like the RHS Rhododendron, Camellia and Magnolia group you can join (again for an additional fee, and I can't work out if it's £20 a year to be member and an additional £25 if you want to receive bulletins... and I presume that the society is completely separate from the RHS membership). What we are decidedly lacking is a broad spectrum gardening organisation for gardeners who have outgrown the usual mainstream content, something that goes into more detail for those who already have the basics covered.

As I say, this isn't about about being a smartarse know-it-all gardener... this is about progress. At the moment there's a yawning gap between the basic end of gardening and the specialised end, and bridging that gap is, I believe, key to helping gardeners gain more skills and knowledge. There is a thirst for knowledge in horticulture, and trapping gardeners in a perpetual state of amateur isn't helping anyone anywhere, not least the gardeners themselves.

So what do we do? Is it time the RHS launched an RHS+ membership (maybe sending the quarterly editions of The Plantsman out instead of The Garden), or do we need a new broad spectrum garden society for those with enquiring minds?

What do you think?

Heritage Apples

Lovely sweet apple!

I was brought up on heritage; National Trust properties, steam rallies, museums, old buildings... since I was very young I have respected old things and I've long held the belief that it's generally a 'good thing' for us to preserve all that is good about our heritage. In the last few years I've come to reassess my beliefs; is a 30 year old car a classic or a rustbucket? Is a big old cottage in the country really all that good if it's damp and the roof's falling off?! Do we really need 'Sounds Of The '60s' on Radio 2 every Saturday morning?!

It's good to challenge your ideas. Occasionally weighing up your arguments keeps you fresh and makes sure that you're wholly convinced by what you're arguing for. Sadly though there are plenty of people around who won't question whether it's time to let go of certain things. The National Trust takes on more and more property to preserve for future generations, while across the UK villages try to raise vast amounts of money to stop underused churches from falling down!

Heritage fruit is an area that seems immune from criticism. Through the incredible work of a few hardcore apple enthusiasts many old varieties have been saved from extinction and are now being grown in collections around the UK. Time was when most areas had their own local varieties, but the traditional apple areas in the South West were particularly rich. Over the years many of these varieties have disappeared due to lack of propagation, old age, housing on old orchards/gardens, lack of interest... what's missing from this list? Some trees will have been rubbish!

How can an apple tree not be good? Some old varieties are less than reliable, fruiting every two seasons rather than every year, only netting half a crop before we've even got to the fruits. Fruits can be insipid, bland and pithy, and can quite often be very small. Trees are often more prone to scab and canker, and some varieties can need an absolutely perfect season to get anything meaningful from them. Modern varieties have been bred to provide more reliable fruiting (each year!), to provide consistent size and flavour. Maybe they don't have the character of the old apples, but they more than make up for it with performance and disease resistance!

I say 'modern varieties' because actually some of the apples popular today aren't exactly new; 'Bramley's Seedling' is a popular cooker from 1856! Why has 'Bramley's Seedling' remained so popular? Because it fruits well/reliably and is pretty disease resistant. While modern tastes tend to lean towards dessert apples, 'Bramley's Seedling' has stood the test of time simply because it's reliable and needs no improvement. Will modern varieties still be popular in more than 100 years?

Apple 'Pendragon'

The quality of the fruit is pretty well the whole point of growing any apple variety. While texture tends to be down to the variety, taste can vary wildly from season to season, as well as from location to location (assuming the same variety). Trees grown on vigorous rootstocks but on poor soils tend to have better flavour, while those grown on small rootstocks in good soil can be a bit lacking. Without doubt the freshness of the apple has an enormous effect on the flavour, and this is where I have issue with those who blindly believe that heritage apples are inherently better than modern varieties.

Let's take for example, two lovely shiny apples. One is a commercial variety from a supermarket, while the other one is a heritage variety straight from the tree. In a blind taste test you would probably end up choosing the heritage variety. Why? Because it's fresher! Once any apple is picked it starts to lose its flavour. A supermarket apple will have been picked days or even over a week earlier, all the time its sugars breaking down, while the one fresh from the tree will be full of sugars and flavour. The supermarket fruit will have to be in exceptional condition to be anywhere near as sweet and juicy as the fresh fruit (and this applies to everything- try raspberries from your own canes as opposed to supermarket pre-frozen ones). Now let's turn this scenario around, and take a fresh modern apple from its tree and compare it with a heritage apple that's been stored... I doubt anyone would want to go for the heritage one- freshness is key! I remember, when I still worked for my former employer, a customer coming up to me to complain about his apple tree (a 'Fiesta' if memory serves); he'd bought this thing and by the time he and his family had eaten their fill of apples, used them in apple sauces and pies, juiced some and frozen some, he was sick to death of them!

Labelled 'Spartan' but isn't!

Popular heritage apples tend to be the more reliable varieties with fruits that store well; most people couldn't eat the entire crop of an apple tree when it ripens! Fruits that store well are those with more solid flesh and more stable sugars, but these are a minority in the heritage varieties; many stopped being grown simply because they didn't store well, and were in sharp decline way before more modern varieties came onto the market.

I'm not saying that these heritage varieties don't have a place in modern gardening. With names like 'Pig's Nose', 'Cornish Gilliflower' and 'Catshead' who wouldn't be sucked in by their interesting and romantic names? All I would say with heritage apple varieties is that you should grow them because you want to grow heritage apple varieties; if you just want a nice big crop of apples each year then go for something more modern. If you have a large space and want to have an orchard filled with old varieties then go right ahead, and I hope you enjoy the fruits of your endeavour.

If you want to know more about apples and their varieties you might enjoy this website: http://www.orangepippin.com/

Another anniversary

Many of you will know the events of last year, a year that changed my career... Many would probably say (quite rightly) that I should just let things go, but I do find the anniversaries of key events to be a good time to take stock of where I am.

On August the 5th 2014 my former employers called a meeting. It was to be a big meeting; the whole business closed early so that all members of staff could be spoken to about 'the direction of the business'. Although colleagues called my cynical I knew it was going to be big news and it was going to be bad news, and I was right.

The company knew best. They had consulted with the best minds of British gardening (although didn't name names) and had had their beliefs confirmed; British gardening is "dead on its feet" and it is simply not viable to grow plants and sell them. Gardeners aren't interested in plants any more, and as such there is no point in the nursery (as a business) focusing on plants.

To hear that so many jobs were going was terrible, knowing from day one that mine was assured (no production, no production staff!) was galling, and the fact that all bar one of the job losses was in horticulture showed absolute contempt for horticulture! During the following weeks and months we all had to go through a horrendously drawn out legal process, but soon enough all of my predictions of who they were targeting came true.

A year on from that meeting and life is awesome. I'm building up my own business, still working for another nursery, and I'm back to being positive about my career. My former manager called me "boring" and had contempt for everything I did, but now my world is filled with people who appreciate my knowledge and skills. I wake up each morning knowing that I will spend my day doing what I love, without having to be immersed in what I've now realised was an unhealthy social atmosphere. I spend my time growing plants, selling plants, planting plants, caring for plants, photographing plants... As Confucius said "Choose a job you love, and you will never have to work a day in your life"!

I do miss a few things; the nursery had an extraordinary range of plants, with a huge collection of Camellias and Fuchsias as well as lots of trees, shrubs and perennials. This diversity kept me on my feet and meant that there was always something new coming into season. I also worked with a lot of really good people, most of whom we victims of the 'cull' and are now also out making their way in the world. There were also lots of polytunnels to work in when it was raining! Not a day goes by when I'm not glad to be away though...

In the end I'm confident that I will be proved right; as that business has focused its efforts more and more on its cafe and giftware its core of loyal customers have gone to other nurseries and garden centres. Barely a week goes by when I don't hear at least something about bad service (one of my gardening customers was aggressively sold a dead plant!) or something to do with the place. Good nurseries are sadly thin on the ground, whereas cafes aren't; thankfully their loss has been the gain of a lot of smaller nurseries and garden centres in Devon and Cornwall, and these businesses are reaping benefits.

Anyway I would like to thank again everyone who's given me kind words during the last year. It hasn't been plain sailing all the way, but I know that what seemed only a year ago to be a disaster has become a great triumph. Thank you all! 

Four things eco-gardeners don't want you to know

If you dare to mention 'chemicals' on the internet you will very quickly attract a load of people who claim that everything is dangerous and kills bees (it's always the bees, never any other insect...). Speaking with these people it's all to often the case that they are well meaning individuals who prefer to follow their hearts than science, and while some are well informed about the issues surrounding the use of chemicals in the garden, others come up with some rather crazy and unorthodox 'facts' that others then take as being total truth.

It seems we've lost our ability to question; we can't question studies without bias any more. The prevailing attitude amongst a decent wedge of gardeners is that all research carried out that doesn't support the anti-chemical viewpoint is wrong, while research that does support the anti-chemical viewpoint is automatically right. People blame multinational companies for using very selective information, yet then choose to ignore studies that go against their viewpoint....

I'm not an organic gardener, and neither am I pro-chemical. For me a chemical is a tool that should be used with the same care and consideration as any other tool. In the same way that you wouldn't use a strimmer to deadhead your roses, neither is it necessary to dose a plant with insecticide every time you see an aphid. Unfortunately it seems that few others seem to think like me. Here, nonetheless, are four things the eco-gardeners don't want you to know:

Research done on chemicals such as neonicotinoids and glyphosate are aimed at agricultural usage; if you spray a neonicotinoid onto a few aphid colonies in your garden it's incredibly unlikely that you will cause any damage to bees unless you spray an open flower. Farmers spray vast areas of crops with chemicals regardless of whether or not there might be beneficial insects around. Spot treatment of isolated colonies of pests presents a minuscule risk, and it gets even better; if bees aren't foraging on a specific plant then the risk is even further reduced, so spraying a patch of weeds that aren't in flower with glyphosate, or insects on a plant that isn't in flower, simply does not pose any meaningful danger.

Banning neonicotinoids is great, but does anyone really think that farmers will just shrug their shoulders and stop spraying? No they won't; the next group of chemicals they'll turn to is the pyrethroid group which is much less selective and will kill all bugs. Oh and for anyone who thinks that these chemicals are dreamt up in a lab, both are based on natural plant insecticides.

It is simply not true that a litre of glyphosate sprayed in a garden is as dangerous as 10,000 litres sprayed on a field; the higher the dose and the more sustained the exposure the higher the risks. While we're on doses, there is compelling research that shows levels of glyphosate in bread. Firstly the doses are minuscule and you'd have to eat a lot of bread to be in danger, but fair enough, nobody wants any type of poison in their food. Glyphosate is sprayed directly onto grain shortly before harvest to dry it out, hence the chemical is still present in the grain when it's milled for flour. In your garden you would never spray your vegetables with glyphosate, and spraying weeds elsewhere in the garden will not magically poison your food crops.

It's not enough the say that you feel that chemicals are harmful. To be approved any chemical product must be rigorously scientifically tested, while few organic treatments have ever undergone any meaningful scientific study. Various products are sold as 'plant invigorators' and claims have been made about their control of certain pests but these haven't undergone trials and they aren't licensed. Fair enough, if they don't contain harmful ingredients then who cares? My point here isn't so much about ingredients but impressions; a lot of anti-chemical information around is based on selective understanding of selective studies, along with people's impressions of what is, in their hearts, right and wrong. In the same way that you wouldn't trust a chemical manufacturer to release research that shows their products in a negative light, neither can you truly trust the anti-chemical lobby. The use of chemicals in agriculture creates polarised viewpoints, and it seems that nobody is capable of occupying middle ground. Take for example the point I made above about chemicals in agriculture; the 'green gardening' lobby read research on agricultural practices and then proclaim that because widespread agricultural use of a product may be harmful it is therefore true that small scale use of the same products in gardens is equally harmful. This is simply not true, and yet it's the case that people spout half-truths at every turn. What you do in your own garden is up to you, but creating fear through misinformation isn't acceptable whether you're a vast multinational company or an eco gardener.

So there you have four things that the eco gardeners don't want you to know- I may add to this in the future as things occur to me or crop up. Your garden is your own, and if you fill it with flowers all year round and create a good ecosystem then wildlife (good and bad) will come to you. Most gardens are fairly self-perpetuating and won't need any intervention. I haven't sprayed for pests and diseases in nearly 10 years, not because I'm anti-chemical but because I'm just a good gardener, but if I did need to treat a pest then I would do so by whatever means are necessary. Similarly with glyphosate I will spray on the rare occasions that it's necessary (paths and drives, but most of my work is on borders and lawns where glyphosate isn't the right tool), but by using knowledge and common sense I won't be creating the ecological disaster the green gardeners claim I unleash every time I open the weedkiller bottle. Careful and appropriate small-scale use of chemical isn't the problem, it's massive use by agriculture, but that won't stop this article (and others before it and others still to be written) stirring up those who would prefer to follow their hearts than their brains. Such a shame really; the organic gardening lobby contains some incredibly good scientists and thinkers who could really change the world, but until science and common sense are allowed a voice....

Book Review: Peter Korn's Garden

The 'right plant, right place' mantra has been drummed into keen gardeners for so long that it has become one of the foundations of modern horticulture. We learn the importance of growing plants suitable for our soil and climate fairly early in our horticultural journeys, so the prospect of yet another book along these lines didn't exactly excite me. Even opening the package I was expecting another book telling me yet again what I've been doing for years already.

Peter Korn is a name that is well known in certain areas of horticulture; this Swedish gardener is bold in his style, and has a deep understanding of ecology and the cultivation requirements of a wide range of niche garden plants. To say that Peter Korn gardens with nature is a bit of an understatement; his style is centred around his understanding of the plants he grows and an almost palpable need to recreate the growing conditions that his plants experience in the wild. To do this in the fairly harsh climate of Sweden would seem like an insurmountable challenge to most gardeners, and yet the pictures of Peter Korn's garden show that he has achieved this with style and elegance.

The images in this book are mostly breathtaking! A rocky ridge in Armenia, the dramatic scenery of the Sierra Nevada in the USA, or close-ups of plants in his garden, nearly every page has a jaw-dropping picture. This book is nothing if not lavishly illustrated, but once you've fought the urge to skim through the book and just look at the pictures(!) the text is full of detailed information. Thankfully the author's friendly and open style of writing makes the information easy to digest!

Peter Korn's whole horticultural ethos will be a little unnerving to the 'old guard' of gardening. His beautiful sand beds, wooded areas and open areas seem unorthodox in style but when you consider that these are habitats and not just borders things start to make more sense. You could even say that this is a garden built on common sense, given that Peter Korn's whole raison d'etre is to make his plants so comfortable in their setting that they look after themselves. With dramatic views and beautiful plants any maintenance must be a joy!

But is it a garden? That depends on how you define a garden. If your idea of a garden is clearly defined borders, a neat lawn and a carefully placed statue at one end then this is not a garden that will interest you. If you define a garden as a place where beautiful plants are tended and cultivated to perfection then Peter Korn's garden will appeal to you even if you don't dig up your existing garden to copy his work.

Clear and easy to follow, 'Peter Korn's Garden' is a book that will teach gardeners a lot about ecology and how plants grow in the wild. Although this book focusses heavily on the smaller plants the Peter Korn grows in his garden, any self respecting plant enthusiast will love the rare and interesting species shown, and will easily be able to adapt Peter Korn's mantra to the plants that they themselves are interested in. This is a book written to educate and inspire at the same time, and believe me it's hard to tear yourself away from!

If your idea of gardening begins and ends with heavily-bred roses, Penstemons and peonies then this might not be the book for you, but if you're into more unusual plants and want your horizons broadened then this is a book you are sure to enjoy.

You can buy a copy here in the UK: http://www.blackhalls.co.uk/shop/peter-korns-garden/
Or from Peter Korn himself here: http://peterkornstradgard.se/book.html

Glyphosate

Given my previous post, 'Hate Mail', I appreciate the irony of getting involved with such an emotive issue. The use of glyphosate, and its links with cancer, create polarised opinions. Here is my attempt at being balanced and neutral...

There's been a lot of chatter recently about the decision by the French Government to ban the direct sale of Roundup (and possibly other glyphosate products) in garden centres. This decision, based on studies of farm workers, has been hailed by many as a step in the right direction... but is it?

In small doses glyphosate isn't particularly dangerous compared with other pesticide products. Jet5 is a disinfectant approved for organic use, but get a small drop of it on your skin and your skin will go white and give you a very unpleasant burning sensation for several hours, and if you breathe in a fungicide like Roseclear (or trade versions) you can have breathing difficulties (add this to something like even mild asthma and you're in trouble).

The problems come from overuse; glyphosate is popular because it's a convenient way to kill weeds without resorting to physical methods like digging. Because it's easy for people who can't be bothered to control weeds in other ways it's become the go-to product for gardeners, but gardeners seldom fully appreciate the importance of things like spraying intervals or dose rates (I had a customer who used Clinic Ace (glyphosate) at 10x dilution rate because she didn't want to wait a week for the weeds to die!). If a home gardener doesn't see results quickly then they spray again and again and again until they get the desired effect, but also causing a pollution problem. Trained pesticide handlers know how to use these products while minimising environmental damage, but the public seem unwilling to take advice/training or even to accept that when they reach for any pesticide product they're entering into a legally binding agreement to use the product safely and exactly how the manufacturer tells them to. This, I'm afraid, really should be the number one reason for taking glyphosate off the shelves; not enough gardeners can be trusted to use herbicides or any pesticide properly at home. A dose of herbicide sprayed at the right time will kill troublesome perennial weeds and leave you with easier to manage seedlings to deal with, but you have to use it properly, and not just reach for weedkiller every time you see a weed.

In agriculture the reliance on glyphosate is even greater; as well as controlling weeds on ground before crops are planted, glyphosate is sprayed onto certain crops to kill them and dry them out. In many cases these weedkilled crops are destined for us, particularly corn and soy. How crops can be sprayed just before harvesting but somehow supposedly not contain glyphosate is beyond me; there is fairly conclusive evidence that glyphosate is getting into our food via these treated crops. Given how much agriculture relies on glyphosate it's not really a surprise that an EU study found higher than average rates of cancer in farm workers- even if the person spraying the crops is in a top of the range sealed cab and is protected from the product, the minute he or she works with the crop directly the dose rate will go straight up!

Given how massive the use of glyphosate is in agriculture I really doubt that normal horticultural use would generate even remotely similar results to the EU study but, as with so many other things like radiation or smoking, a regular large dose of glyphosate probably will put you at higher risk of cancer. I really doubt that horticultural contractors are particularly at risk because the amounts we use are tiny compared to those used on farms (it stands to reason that someone coming into contact with glyphosate sprayed by the hectare will be at significantly higher risk than someone who sprays a few square metres!), but I think controlling the access that gardeners have to pesticides is probably wise, especially while so many people remain ignorant of the dangers of misuse and their personal responsibility to the environment. 

Contractors aren't beyond reproach; I've been surprised by how many professionals I've seen over the years spraying in windy weather, when rain is forecast (and in one case even when it was raining!); we've had our training and really should all be sticking to it!

In due course there will be alternatives to glyphosate for garden use; citronella oil is available in some cases for weed control (although Canada has banned some citronella products so there may be problems there), and 'hot foam' treatment of weeds looks promising, if currently expensive) for larger areas. In the meantime it looks as though glyphosate will remain the dominant chemical weed control, but whether or not it remains in the public domain only time will tell.

Hate mail

“Ben. Its time someone let you know something important mate. All your stuff on twitter and your site makes you look like a real prick. Great you know all your clever plant names but you need to know that real gardeners don't care. I am sure your a nice guy but you won't make friends here if your not in touch with what real gardeners want. Maybe a bit less of the fancy plant stuff and more real gardening mate.”

Well that's quite an email (via my website) to wake up to! This person seems to misunderstand my remit here online, so let me make myself completely clear;

1. I love plants, rare and unusual as well as most common plants- in fact I can't think of any plant I actually hate! I feature the rare and unusual plants because a) they interest me, b) writing about them helps me to learn about them (by researching them), and c) so many other people write great stuff about more common plants that I would just be repeating what they say.
2. I do use the properly recognised botanical names. Live with it. Google Analytics shows me that my website gets visits from all over the world, even from non-English speaking countries. By using the botanical names I make sure that everyone, from my friend down the road to someone I've never met in South America, Asia or mainland Europe, knows the name of the plant they're looking at.
3. Real gardeners are mostly the ones who want to know about their subject, whether it's finding the label of a plant they like in a garden or finding inspiration from a book, magazine or the internet. Learning is a key part of gardening, whether it's learning tips from your neighbour or taking a horticultural course. Very few gardeners like to grow the same things, year in year out, the same way forever! As I learn new things I share them, and I love to find out new things from other gardeners.
4. I was brought up to regard name-calling as a bad thing, especially with people you don't know. In the last month I've been called a lot of things; arrogant, out of touch, several rude things that I can't repeat... This is the internet; you're not locked into anything, you are free to follow and unfollow anyone who you don't agree with, and to go and find people who see the world the same way you do. There are lots of people who don't share my views on gardening and I'm happy to discuss and debate things, but there's never any need to get abusive!

I do 'Ben's Botanics' for fun; I don't get paid for it, I don't have sponsorship. I set up the website,(then Twitter, Facebook and Pinterest) because I like sharing information and like to show off pictures of plants that I grow of have seen. I also spend a lot of time reading other people's stuff, as well as sharing ideas and inspiration. I'm not selling you anything, I'm just here to meet other like-minded people, and I will continue to run Ben's Botanics to the best standards I can.

I'm going to stay with proper plant names because I find them more inclusive for my non-UK followers, and I will continue to feature plants that interest and excite me.

Sorry if anyone if offended by this.

Chelsea is not the centre of the world!

It's that time of the year again, when the horticultural world turns its attentions to a small patch of London. The Chelsea Flower Show is hailed as the greatest flower show on Earth, and is the highlight of the horticultural year. Anyone who's anyone in gardening will be there, and if you want to call yourself a gardener then you must be there too.

But is this entirely true? Certainly there is a lot of attention on Chelsea, and it's the only time the media really makes much effort to represent gardening. Is it the greatest flower show on Earth? Well it's certainly the most famous. Do you need to be there? No.

People go to Chelsea for different reasons; nurseries go for the prestige of [hopefully] a Chelsea gold medal, designers go because they're being paid to design and build gardens, and a load of wealthy people with no interest in gardening go to get trollied in the hospitality tents at a big social event, one would hope to come home with a coveted 'I got wasted at Chelsea' t-shirt.

Why thousands upon thousands of ordinary gardeners spend quite frankly ridiculous amounts of money (non members day tickets are £99!) to be crammed into a small space with so many other people I simply do not know. I know lots of people who smile and tell me they've been to Chelsea, but when you get past their boasting they've actually seen a fraction of what they wanted to see. Some hardcore Chelsea veterans have learnt to barge their way through the crowds so they see everything, but most seem to just 'soak up the atmosphere' (wander around without being able to see anything).

My advice to gardeners? Avoid the crowds! Think what you could do with the money saved by not buying an all day ticket (yes, you can get cheaper tickets if you only want to be there for an hour or two); you could spend the money on some new plants, and maybe a tree for your garden? Maybe you could put the money into buying a new piece of equipment to make life easier in the garden? Or maybe, just maybe, you could spend that money getting inspiration from one or more of the great gardens looking absolutely fantastic up and down the UK right now?!

I don't mean to belittle the hard work that goes into making Chelsea what it is. Thousands of people are involved in growing plants, setting up displays/gardens and taking it all away. Many nurseries and design teams spend the rest of their year planning (albeit at the back of their minds) what they want to do to create the biggest spectacle and get their coveted gold medal. What you mustn't do is feel inadequate because you're not there. If you want to go and see some extremely expensive gardens built by armies of people and paid for by large corporations then by all means go for it. Failing that, save your money, enjoy your own garden and watch Chelsea on TV!

True gardening neither begins, nor ends, at Chelsea.

If you would like to experience the buzz of a major flower show the I would recommend the other RHS shows, including the Malvern Spring Flower Show, Hampton Court, and Tatton Park. For gardeners in London (and those who are happy to travel to London) there are well regarded flower shows held frequently at the RHS Halls. If you just want to buy plants for your garden then there are hundreds of smaller regional plant fairs across the UK, and there will certainly be one near you!