Space is also finite in the average garden...time to talk to the neighbours too if we want to be more organised. I never said that advice was the end of it all but a good principle to keep in mind.
One of the interesting points Ken Thompson ('No Nettles Required') makes is that the differences between gardens is probably more important than busting your hump to offer different habitats in your own garden, and it happens by chance. For instance your garden may be mainly vegetables etc, your neighbour's is mainly just grass with a few matt forming weeds like daisies, the next neighbour has a really big pond, the next neighbour has some fruit trees, and the next house is a rental HMO that just has a mass of nettles and bramble. Any of the gardens in isolation would be lacking or this or that, but as a whole, they form a nice mosaic habitat.
"What is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbour".
When my Mum was first diagnosed with cancer, her oncologist told her to try to only eat foods that her grandmother would have eaten. There are people who interpret that to mean a diet like that of England in the 19th Century - i.e. pretty poor - but of course that's not what he meant. He meant to avoid highly processed or industrially produced foods. It wasn't a prohibition on eating mangos, just because her grandmother probably never knew such a thing existed. Personally, I think the same applies to this debate. If you grow plants that are not heavily hybridised to the point where the flowers are sterile or so distorted in form that animals can't access the food they provide, then it's all good. The fact that your average English bumblebee's great great great great great great ........... great grandad wouldn't have met a particular plant that at that time only grew in South Africa doesn't make it less useful or tasty to the bumblebee. As long as it IS the plant - or close to the plant - that was growing in SA. There are botanical reasons not to grow species from outside our native ecosystem to do with invasive plants and other imbalances and we do need to be very careful about unintended consequences like JKW. And I completely accept the point about needing native plants AS WELL in our gardens to provide creatures with a full life cycle habitat. But I also think a blanket 'if it didn't grow here 3000 years ago then I don't want it in my garden' is arbitrary and nonsensical from a biodiversity perspective. Who knows whether there used to be bananas growing wild in Devon when the dinosaurs were about? How far back is the line drawn?
Gardening on the edge of Exmoor, in Devon
“It's still magic even if you know how it's done.”
I think the key thing to remember is anything is better than nothing. If somebody has a slab covered yard with a couple of pots on then they are not offering anything to wildlife, but its their garden and their choice. The reality is most of us on here will have a range of plants that offer varying degrees of benefit to wildlife.
There is currently a lot of awareness of providing plants for pollinators thanks to TV, mags, garden centres etc, which is great. But to get a message like that across it needs to be quite simple and media friendly, so lots of people just think of offering necter for bees and butteflies. (How many even know that domesticated honeybees do more harm than good to our wild bee populations) Whilst that is great, they are just the poster children really. Its all the flies, beetles, moths that are just as important, and as @Fire rightly points out, many of these depend on specific native plants for their life cycle.
Lots of people would love to help wildlife more than they do, but if they don't know how to do more then how can they? Nobody is saying everybody should rip out their lovely flowers and replace them with nettles, so I dont understand why people get so defensive whenever native planting is mentioned. If people want to help more than they currently do, then good on them, and adding more native planting is undoubtedly one of the ways they can
I'm interested in the point you make about honeybees. We keep hives of honeybees in our garden, and so we notice which flowers and trees they visit for pollen and nectar. We also have many types of solitary and bumble bees, and have noticed that they often tend to forage on different plants. I think they have different proboscis lengths, and so can access some plants but not all.
By the way, I'm not sure you can call honeybees domesticated. Ours certainly have a mind of their own and keep us guessing .... but that's part of the fun.
Bee x
Gardener and beekeeper in beautiful Scottish Borders
A single bee creates just one twelfth of a teaspoon of honey in her lifetime
I only discovered this when watching The Wild Gardener on BBC2 last year (currently on iPlayter and well worth a watch), there was very knowledgeable expert on there who pointed it out. Its basically a competition thing, it varies dependent on number of beehives and also location, basically more bees than flowers available, so less food for all. Not a problem in times of plenty, but when food is scarcer then wild bees suffer.
Im certainly not saying you shouldn't be keeping your bees by the way, just pointing out that the whole 'perfect for pollinators' initiative has to simplify a very complicated issue to make it digestible. Its brilliant that so many people have got that message now though, and I think the whole pollinators element has much more awareness these days, but maybe the next message needs to be about adding a few more native plants for the caterpillars, larvae and less glamorous members of the insect world. There are so many lovely native plants out there which offer a wealth of benefits for all sorts of life, and Im sure huge amounts of people would welcome some into their gardens if only they knew the difference they can make.
(European honeybees are a domesticated breed and have been since Egyptian times btw!)
It is basically arguing that, unlike some farmed animals, mankind has not altered the Eurpoean honeybee - apis mellifera - whatsoever. They are exactly as they were before the Egyptians started to keep them. They can manage fine in the wild in a tree hollow or a chimney pot without any intervention by a beekeeper.
It is also suggesting that they are not in competition with "wild" bees. There can be a problem though if too many beehives are kept in an area, but the competition for available forage is between the overpopulated honeybees.
I agree with the point you make about nettles etc for caterpillars. I've got plenty here, and could make a killing potting them up and selling them if they become the next big thing smiley:
Bee x
Gardener and beekeeper in beautiful Scottish Borders
A single bee creates just one twelfth of a teaspoon of honey in her lifetime
Good read @Bee witched, and certainly makes a good case for them not being domesticated.
As to whether they impact wild bees or not, there seems to be strong arguments for either side when you look into it, but in the grand scheme of things I dont think people keeping honey bees is one of the big problems facing insects, and I certainly wouldn't wish to criticise anybody who did. I happily eat honey so have got no grounds to be on a high horse over it. And my guess would be that generally anybody who keeps bees is probably doing plenty of other stuff that helps more than they hinder (if they do in fact hinder at all)
Was just making the point that its a complicated subject as to how to help. I just find it slightly disheartening whenever there is a discussion about how to do more for wildlife that lots of people seem to take it as being preached to, or that they should be ripping up their flowerbeds in favour of nettles. I pull nettles out in my garden, whilst brilliant for wildlife they are far from in short supply around here, so Id rather give the room to some of the much more attractive, and equally beneficial wildflowers and grasses on offer. It is a garden after all, so its got to work for me as well as the wildlife
Someone earlier mentioned a "guilt trip". In answer to the OP - please don't have one of those whatever you do. The space has already been requisitioned as part of your property. There will always be the 'holier than thou' crowd who would pass judgement on whatever you do with it. We only have a relatively short life, and it can be cruelly cut short at any moment. So just do what brings you pleasure.
Clay soil - Cheshire/Derbyshire border. I play with plants and soil and sometimes it's successful
Someone earlier mentioned a "guilt trip". In answer to the OP - please don't have one of those whatever you do. The space has already been requisitioned as part of your property. There will always be the 'holier than thou' crowd who would pass judgement on whatever you do with it. We only have a relatively short life, and it can be cruelly cut short at any moment. So just do what brings you pleasure.
I just find it slightly disheartening whenever there is a discussion about how to do more for wildlife that lots of people seem to take it as being preached to.
Amen. Why start throwing around names and talking about 'guilt'? In the years on the forum I've not once seen a suggestion that people shouldn't grow exotics or enjoy them.
Lots of people grow their own fruit and veg and love it. I don't feel preached at or judged when the conversation gets on to radishes. I don't grow my own, but am delighted that people do. I don't feel threatened by radishes or feel that people who grow them are "holier than thou". Why on earth would I?
Posts
Personally, I think the same applies to this debate. If you grow plants that are not heavily hybridised to the point where the flowers are sterile or so distorted in form that animals can't access the food they provide, then it's all good. The fact that your average English bumblebee's great great great great great great ........... great grandad wouldn't have met a particular plant that at that time only grew in South Africa doesn't make it less useful or tasty to the bumblebee. As long as it IS the plant - or close to the plant - that was growing in SA.
There are botanical reasons not to grow species from outside our native ecosystem to do with invasive plants and other imbalances and we do need to be very careful about unintended consequences like JKW. And I completely accept the point about needing native plants AS WELL in our gardens to provide creatures with a full life cycle habitat. But I also think a blanket 'if it didn't grow here 3000 years ago then I don't want it in my garden' is arbitrary and nonsensical from a biodiversity perspective. Who knows whether there used to be bananas growing wild in Devon when the dinosaurs were about? How far back is the line drawn?
“It's still magic even if you know how it's done.”
There is currently a lot of awareness of providing plants for pollinators thanks to TV, mags, garden centres etc, which is great. But to get a message like that across it needs to be quite simple and media friendly, so lots of people just think of offering necter for bees and butteflies. (How many even know that domesticated honeybees do more harm than good to our wild bee populations) Whilst that is great, they are just the poster children really. Its all the flies, beetles, moths that are just as important, and as @Fire rightly points out, many of these depend on specific native plants for their life cycle.
Lots of people would love to help wildlife more than they do, but if they don't know how to do more then how can they? Nobody is saying everybody should rip out their lovely flowers and replace them with nettles, so I dont understand why people get so defensive whenever native planting is mentioned. If people want to help more than they currently do, then good on them, and adding more native planting is undoubtedly one of the ways they can
I'm interested in the point you make about honeybees.
We keep hives of honeybees in our garden, and so we notice which flowers and trees they visit for pollen and nectar.
We also have many types of solitary and bumble bees, and have noticed that they often tend to forage on different plants.
I think they have different proboscis lengths, and so can access some plants but not all.
By the way, I'm not sure you can call honeybees domesticated. Ours certainly have a mind of their own and keep us guessing .... but that's part of the fun.
Bee x
A single bee creates just one twelfth of a teaspoon of honey in her lifetime
Im certainly not saying you shouldn't be keeping your bees by the way, just pointing out that the whole 'perfect for pollinators' initiative has to simplify a very complicated issue to make it digestible.
Its brilliant that so many people have got that message now though, and I think the whole pollinators element has much more awareness these days, but maybe the next message needs to be about adding a few more native plants for the caterpillars, larvae and less glamorous members of the insect world. There are so many lovely native plants out there which offer a wealth of benefits for all sorts of life, and Im sure huge amounts of people would welcome some into their gardens if only they knew the difference they can make.
(European honeybees are a domesticated breed and have been since Egyptian times btw!)
Interesting article here about the domestication issue.
https://www.buzzaboutbees.net/are-honey-bees-domesticated.html
It is basically arguing that, unlike some farmed animals, mankind has not altered the Eurpoean honeybee - apis mellifera - whatsoever. They are exactly as they were before the Egyptians started to keep them. They can manage fine in the wild in a tree hollow or a chimney pot without any intervention by a beekeeper.
It is also suggesting that they are not in competition with "wild" bees.
There can be a problem though if too many beehives are kept in an area, but the competition for available forage is between the overpopulated honeybees.
I agree with the point you make about nettles etc for caterpillars. I've got plenty here, and could make a killing potting them up and selling them if they become the next big thing smiley:
Bee x
A single bee creates just one twelfth of a teaspoon of honey in her lifetime
As to whether they impact wild bees or not, there seems to be strong arguments for either side when you look into it, but in the grand scheme of things I dont think people keeping honey bees is one of the big problems facing insects, and I certainly wouldn't wish to criticise anybody who did. I happily eat honey so have got no grounds to be on a high horse over it. And my guess would be that generally anybody who keeps bees is probably doing plenty of other stuff that helps more than they hinder (if they do in fact hinder at all)
Was just making the point that its a complicated subject as to how to help. I just find it slightly disheartening whenever there is a discussion about how to do more for wildlife that lots of people seem to take it as being preached to, or that they should be ripping up their flowerbeds in favour of nettles. I pull nettles out in my garden, whilst brilliant for wildlife they are far from in short supply around here, so Id rather give the room to some of the much more attractive, and equally beneficial wildflowers and grasses on offer. It is a garden after all, so its got to work for me as well as the wildlife
I play with plants and soil and sometimes it's successful
And FWIW I agree with you.