I am very interested in doing a trade with you. I do have quite a few heucheras , but have never traded them before so am unsure of how you divide them to do so.

Yeah, I had a suspicion it was a scam so made a post just in case. Thanks for confirming everyone. Not a very smart person to have provided us with the apartment shipping address just to get some freebies. To stoop so low is a pitty. I would have gladly given them for free if asked nicely. The person will create new accounts, but that name, address, and city is on my do not associate list...hehehe. Sad to see these sort of things happen here but it's just one insignificant bad apple. In the future I will check the age, posts, and contributions of the person before trading with him/her. Now back to the business of trading and growing great plants or experimenting with new ones. Cheers!

LantanaTX, I think you should go ahead and rescue the plants you want. There is almost no chance that they will be valued or saved by the owner of the lot. I appreciate the fact that some members of this forum have had plants stolen from their future building lots, but keep in mind that there are very very few people who would notice or care - one in a million might be too high an estimate of our numbers. If land will be developed by a land developer or will become commercial property then most likely the entire lot will be cleared, and you can feel safe rescuing any plant you find. If the lots will be developed individually or by a developer who is saving some of the woods (if there are woods there now) then you might think twice about taking ALL of the plants near the edges of the lot (I'd still take some). Most people build their home somewhere near the center of the lot, and if they save woodlands will save some near the edges, near the back, or on steep hills or near a creek, for example. With a little imagination you can probably guess where the house will go, and take any plants that will be under or within 50 feet of the house. It is a rare property owner indeed who will rescue wildflowers from beneath the building site. If you think the plants might be spared by the developer (on a steep hill, for example) then take only some and leave some behind, but don't be surprised to find that even steep hill will be cleared and sodded. Keep in mind that for most species of plants you won't need to take all of the plant. Many wildflowers spread vegetatively to form clumps, or tend to appear from seed in clumps. Taking a few individuals or dividing a clump will allow you to take some and leave some behind. Other species can be started from seed. In many cases I find it is easier to transplant a small start from a large clump of wildflowers rather than try to move the whole clump. Other plants are best from seed. Indian Grass, for example could be divided, leaving most of the plants where they are, or you could collect seed. My bottom line is that it is very unlikely that any of the plants will survive the development of the property unless you remove them. If I could find some time to rescue some plants, then I would go ahead and do it and, rather than feel guilty about trespassing, I'd feel good for having saved something that would have been destroyed. Unlike April, I guess I am not the "ask permission" type. I wouldn't worry too much about finding endangered plants, since they are by definition quite rare, but keep in mind they do carry special legal protection.

Australia is not a continent where succulents have diversified greatly, compared to Africa and the Americas. We have a few representatives of a few succulent families, e.g. Aizoaceae: Carpobrotus - 4 native species, only slightly different from some of the S African and S American species; Sarcozona - 2 species, genus endemic, rather similar to Carpobrotus; Disphyma - 1 species, also in NZ and S Africa. There are other slightly less succulent native species in genera like Tetragonia (6 native), Gunniopsis (endemic, 14 spp.), Trianthema (11 native). Portulacaeae: Many spp. of Calandrinia, now treated by some botanists as genus Parakeelya. These are quite succulent and have colourful flowers but are mostly annual and so seem to be disowned by succulent fanciers. Also 1 native Anacampseros sp. Euphorbiaceae: a few Euphorbia spp. with succulent stems, e.g. E. plumerioides (also in Asia), E. stevenii, E. tannensis. Asclepiadaceae: Sarcostemma - 3 native spp., true stem-succulents with twining or scrambling stems. But why not Hoya (7 native) and Dischidia (4 native)? - they have quite succulent leaves. Chenopodiaceae: now here are a lot of succulent species, in genera such as Maireana, Sclerolaena, Enchylaena, Sarcocornia, Halosarcia, Tecticornia, Sclerostegia, Pachycornia, Suaeda, Salsola. But they tend to be either leaf succulents with dry twiggy stems, or saltmarsh plants and have no appeal to succulent fanciers. Rubiaceae: why aren't the ant plants Myrmecodia (3 native) and Hydnophytum (1 native) regarded as succulents? They look pretty succulent to me. And finally, there are a whole lot of plants in various families that have large perennial tubers. If we went by the current fashion of growing these exposed to the air, we could add quite a few Australian 'succulents'. Like a Dahlia is a succulent? And then there are the monocots - Doryanthes? Bulbine? Borya? Xanthorrhoea even? (no less succulent than some Agave or Yucca spp.) What is a succulent?