I'm backing the "mexican" look - cacti etc (bit of it around last summer)

Yep me too?????????

I think a lot of it come sdown to the fact that most nursaries only carry a very small selection of native plants (Callistemon, grevillea, banksia, lomandra - that's about it). I think if they had a better selection, maybe some of the more obscure natives, then people would embrace them more. How many native gardens do you see in your neighbourhood? I think ours is the only one near us.

I do not understand what you mean Waz.

We are after all, a multicultural country. Whether or not it happens to have a Balinese or Mediterranean style does not matter as you can still use these terms and use native Australian plants. More and more Cottage Gardens use Native Plants.

What do you mean by "OUR culture"? When we endeavour to define our culture we cannot help but acknowlege our history. The history of gardening is fascinating and goes back thousands of years.

I enjoy my own native Garden but also appreciate the incredible diversity of styles we have here.

That Mediterranean garden in the last Gardening Australia that a lovely old Italian family had in Keilor, just out of Melbourne, made me very envious of the Olives, Grapes, etc. and vegetables that they had growing.

What is Australian??

I think one of the reasons many Australians think they don't like native plants is because we are the only people who see them growing in their natural habitat. We see them in the bush, often growing in a handful of soil and with only rainwater to sustain them. They get pruned by birds and animals, chewed by insects, and shaped by the wind. I actually think they look quite beautiful, but can understand that many people don't have the imagination to see these often straggly plants as garden specimens.

The other reason so many opt for an exotic garden is because the nursery industry, as well as TV programs and magazines, simply make it easier. Walk into any non-native nursey, at any time of the year, and the first thing you'll see is a huge array of "potted colour" with rarely a native included.

I think price can also determine which plants some people choose. Native plants (other than tube stock) are often more expensive than exotics. If someone doesn't care where a plant comes from, they'll probably choose the cheapest. I think the nursery industry finds itself in a difficult situation, i.e., until their customers demand more native plants they won't stock them, but until people are shown native plants at their best, they won't ask for them.

As for copying other garden styles. I think we need to be working towards the establishment of an Australian style garden. After all, the term "English Garden", refers only to a style of garden, not the provevance of the plants. Infact, the very essence of an English garden is the pleasing mixture of plants from other parts of the world. Believe me, if we were to suggest to our gardening friends in England that they should limit their choice of plants to their own natives, most of them would be horrified. This is because they don't have as many plants to choose from as we do and, it goes against their traditional style of gardening.

We are much luckier here to have many more native plants. I believe it is possible to create an Australian style garden with a mixture of native plants and some structures or ornaments (not cutsie faced cartoon types), that suggest we are in Australia and not pretending to be holidaying in another part of the world. I sometimes think if I see another Balinese garden I'll be sick. I'm sure they look wonderful in Bali, but not here.

It's up to people like us to spread the word about our plants. One way is to create Australian gardens which leave no doubt as to where we live. I have an exotic garden and a native garden. If I'd known five years ago what I know now, (that native plants really are beautiful), I would have all native plants. If I can change, then I'm optimistic that others can too. Let's give it a go.

I do not have a particular 'style' of garden, nor am I a slave to fashion. I grow an eclectic mix of natives and exotics. The one thing I try to avoid is growing problem plants that become garden escapees.
Gardens all over the world are traditionally made up of a mix of natives and exotics, why should we have to be different?
Do you think that Americans for example should not grow Australian plants, because they are not native to America?
I really think there is room for a mixture of plants.
Cheers,
Dee.

"What is Australian??"

thats what I was thinking, how do you define an australian garden? does it have to be 100% native? mediteranean gardens were created out of need for food and an appreciation of the climate. I get a lot of inspiration from that because Im in a mediteranean climate zone. I like the mixed up cottage style, but I use plants that are more suited to where I live, some are native, some are exotic, some are edible, but I like to think my garden will eventually be what I see as an "Australian cottage garden"

My own view is: grow what works in your area. The point has been made that both exotics and 'non-local' natives can really put a dent in surrounding bushland if they get loose and have the characteristics required to thrive in the local climate.

I did toy with the idea of having my entire backyard planted out in the 'wet tropics' fashion many of us lust after, but the reality is that I need plants which give me the 'look' without needing as much water - I now find myself looking at several exotics which will do the job with minimal impact on our depleted water supplies. Overall, it will come in at about 60% natives (the majority of the established plants are exotics, and they give me my canopy), but less than 10% will be truly indigeneous to CQ. Until someone gives me a permit to take the ute to Blackdown and fill it with different species, I'm afraid thats reality.

1. robert I am trying to point out that although we are young nation of many cultures we do not embrace the mix of our culture.I am in fact aboriginal australian but I believe that we need to embrace all of what make australia unique no focus on trends Like balinese
2. I dont think mexican will be the next big thing it was corrupted by the medditerrean phase
3.I have the only native garden in my suburb (it is really good cause I'll win the best native garden comp)but I do have some exotics in my backyard I believe that you should grow what ever you can as long as it has a benefit to it
4.I would love to take my ute out and fill with my local scrub too
5.almost all the bushland left around syd is infested with an exotic of some kind and is killing off native species
6. who cares what americans do in america
7. GOD BLESS AUSTRALIA

The couple who had the vision to retain a very large native fig and a backyard full of granite boulders get my award for an Australian garden. Not easily replicated for the reno crowd to televise:)

Artie, you might be interested in the list of dry r/f spp that are being grown for the Mt Etna revegetation effort? The Graptophyllum excelsum had a few flowers when a group of us was up there a month ago. Tho the Rocky council voted it in as shrub emblem, I can't say I've noticed significant public use made of it. Maybe our guru doesn't care for it.
Rose

Thanks Rose. Now that I have the ground clearance (I have just purchased a Ford Courier ute), I plan to get out to a lot of the 'rougher' parts of CQ. All I know about Mt Etna is that its famous for miners being stopped by bats - a rare win for the environment, IMO.

I thought the Bauhinia was our floral emblem in Rocky ?

Even the Courier won't get past the gate to Mt Etna without a safety officer Artie :) But one of the contract nurseries is in Barmoya Road, off bitumen.
Interesting to hear someone who fought for Mt Etna conceding that if the mining hadn't occurred we wouldn't know about the fossils that are subject to digs this year. There is a link on the Queensland Museum site.
Yes...native bauhina Lypsiphyllum hookerii is the tree emblem.
Rose

>I am trying to point out that although we are young nation of many cultures we do not embrace the mix of our culture

I beg to differ - I think that the 'Australian' gardening style is just exactly that - a mix of our cultures.

The tropical /native /indigenous debate is never going to end, basically because there are no right or wrong answers. Different cultures have a lot to share with one another, including gardening styles.

Assimilation didn't work in the first 200 years of white settlement in Australia, so why would (should) it work now?

A good start to developing an Australian garden style is to first adapt Australian native or indigenous plants to the existing garden styles - which can easily be done if you know how to prune and care for the plants.

The first step to an Australian style has been the bush garden I suppose where the plants are left to grow naturally and fend for themselves.

I can see no reason why you can't take the next step from the bush garden where you actively prune and shape the plants to prevent the untidy habits that many develop in the wild. However you would still retain the random distribution of plants and also prune the shrubs into shapes that have the illusion of looking natural, i.e. no spheres and cubes etc.

Another important step might be trying to create gardenish representations of natural plant communities rather than just throwing together a whole lot of unrelated Aus native plants. E.G. Plains Grassy Woodland, Stony Knoll Grassland, Escaprment Shrubland etc. Even better if the representation bares a some relationship with the surrounding natural landscape.

Greg, I think you've nailed it. Whilst I reserve the right to mix natives and exotics in my garden, the 'natural plant communities' ideal is a superb concept. There are very few truly naturalistic settings in the gardens I've seen on GA or in the magazines, and Don Burke makes the point that many people wouldnt want such a garden because it looks 'too much like the bush'. Sadly, this short-sighted view of what a garden should be is so typical of what I think many of us have become - completely divorced from the beauty of our own country.

The one proviso I'd put on such a garden is that you need at least an acre to make any of the 'open' styles really work, IMO, and I just cant see it happening in the urban courtyard garden. Grevillea and banksia, for example, look great in a courtyard, but it will always lack that 'open vista' which I consider an integral part of the bush. Good design gives the illusion of depth, but you can only do so much - I'm happy to see someone prove me wrong :)

Whilst I am on this subject, I have just had several established natives lopped, purely because they were the wrong plant in the wrong place. The mulch will be most welcome on my new beds, but it has left some sizeable gaps in the garden - Backhousia Citriodora and a selection of lillipillies will do a much better job than the Eucalypts and Melaleuca which the previous owner seems to have planted in his sleep ....

A Native garden doesn't have to be an image of bushland - most Australians just don't have the room for this style anyway. I think if we take ideas from the exotic garden but use Australian natives, we will be able to showcase the natives so much better. The trouble with most indiginous plants is that they are very large - especially if you live in a once forested area. I am working on themes for my native garden, but it is the plant for the aspect which will give the best result, whether that plant be from WA, NSW, VIC etc. In the end, each plant (I hope) will look like it belongs in that garden bed, but will also serve the purpose of provide points of interest whicg draw people closer to the garden, rather than viewing from a distance.

You may sing of the Shamrock, the Thistle and Rose
Or the three in a bunch if you will:
But I know of a country that gathered all those,
And I love the great land where the Waratah grows,
And the Wattle-bough blooms on the hill.
Henry Lawson.
I wish I had known more about Australian plants when I started out on my career of garden designing. This would have enlarged my choice of plants and I would have been less inclined to give my gardens rather an English flavour.
Edna Walling.

Re-label everything as an exotic from a far off land and people will fall over themselves to get some lol.....

Why did/do people plant exotics because its what their parents/grandparents grew, so it's a part of those individuals culture. Also lots of those plants are useful plus taste good too.

People also plant natives with good intentions totally unaware that although it's a native, for their area it is actually an exotic weed. Why can nurseries/supermarkets sell weeds btw?? I don't get it, keep any exotic fauna your hung and dried but plants seem to be ignored?..Oh well *shrugs*

Wazcrazy the only way to change attitudes is by example if your garden or some plants look appealing to others they will copy you. Spread the word + plants around your area, local schools perhap??

Thank you kbranksome for reminding me of Henry Lawson's beautiful poem, Waratah and Wattle. I've just found a copy and read it through. I will now head out to work in my native garden, loving the waratahs, wattles and all the other plants, just that little bit more.

This debate will always be with us. There IS an Australian culture in our gardens. Most folk who have a backyard hate gardening. Thats why we have so many lawns and tacky borders. The Australian gardening style is to minimise any work that has to be done so we can grab the TV remote, lay back on the couch and get fat watching some other sucker do it on a lifestyle program. Thats Aussie gardening culture!!

However there is a minority that do like to turn the odd sod or commune with nature. They are either motivated by aesthetics (ie. love pretty flowers etc.) or their love for the natural world. I reckon anyone who gets off their bottoms and and has the patience to encourage plants to grow is okay by me. Even if they are not native plants.

Some garden styles annoy me but I would be a mean so and so if I thought they deserved castigation for not growing stuff that the Thought Police felt they should. Diversity is healthy. We need lots more recruits for growing stuff. Turning the sod is healthy! They should not be intimidated but encouraged.

Observe the other forums and you will see just how obsessive, judgmental and dour we native plant gardeners can get about "politically correct" gardening. While it can be justified at times, it can get a bit tedious. Mind you the rose growers can get very prickly.

I fully acknowledge there are important issues that should be debated but in order to get more gardeners growing native plants, we need to be less intimidating. I am convinced that the only way to get recruits to native plant culture is to be affirmative not hostile. I started out gardening by growing Fucshias, and Roses etc., now I have two and a half acres of 98% natives. I have also been seduced into bush regen etc.

Very well put Robert.
The thing that annoys me most about the TV gardening programs is the ego trips some of the presenters seem to be on.
And as far as real Australian plants go, they get extremely poor exposure on these programs.
I hold no resentment towards what people plant in their own gardens, I love the bush and I love to bring a little to my back yard by planting Australian native plants. As I sit here writing this post the native birds outside are having a ball.
Cheers.

When you work full time as a bush regenerator you realise what a great disaster exotics have been to our native fauna and flora communities and all because people demand the freedom of choice to plant whatever they like. I have probably upset our resident sage Robert but I don't see my neighbours rose and azalea gardens infested with Acacia pubescens which once occurred widely around here but is all but extinct now.

Why are exotics so important that we must drive out almost every indigenous plant from our landscape to include them?

Also, just for the record planting exotics reduces biodiversity!

Formica

Interesting thread. I do tend to feel that we don't use our native species enough in Oz. One gets the feeling that they are not considered as 'classy' as the exotics. On investigation (we have a local native plant nursery which won't even sell southern stuff if they don't think it will grow well up here) there are so many lovely shrubs and trees to use, even for the 'Balinese' and other styles of gardens. I no longer buy gardening magazines as they have absolutely nothing for someone who lives in the tropics, in a dry area, who wants a dry style of NATIVE garden. When you mention tropics they automatically feed back this Bali style ad nauseum.
Cheers
Judy

Some 'natives' were once exotics..
I thought Id state this!!
Im serious.
From Kris

OK Kris, your serious when you claim that some natives were once exotics.
You may care to open our minds and eyes and give an example.
Cheers
Jim

Formica I am not at all upset. Why would I be?

I am not going to repeat what I have already said above in this debate, but I just feel that we need to get folk off their bums and back into appreciating the joys of gardening first. Just like Peter Cundall. Then we can persuade them of the benefits of natives. Serious gardeners are in the distinct minority of householders.

I have already said my two and a half acre garden is 98% natives!! I too do Bush regen. Why do gardeners prefer to dwell on our differences rather than our similarities? What a pity George Orwell didn't write a horticultural version of 'Animal Farm' or even '1984'.

By the way Formica I am sure we will see plants like Azaleas less and less as they are surface rooting and suffer terribly in drought. I have also often observed some exotics benefiting local Fauna. Since we have got rid of all our Lantana, the population of Wrens and other small birds has dropped alarmimgly. I am waiting impatiently for my Bursaria to grow to get them back again hopefully! (No! No! in case you get the wrong idea, I am NOT saying we should keep Lantana)

Provided we "weed out" any potentially invasive exotics, I reckon we should be OK.

Jim, I know that this topic of conversation has the potential to trigger some 'personality bombs' so I thought that I would say this.
An example would be entire families of plants that have originated in tropical regions of the world-diversified and spread to neighbouring countries and thus adapted as they went. The tropical genus of plants Calamus are a prime example. We have 1 species in NENSW and there are many dozens in Borneo and South East Asia, thus these critters didnt evolve in Australia and thus have entered during time of land bridges formed during glacial periods.
I just wanted to state that there are 'Australian species' which originated outside of Australia and have got here, by themselves. Usually ecological barriers such as dry arid spaces stop them from colonising everywhere, but many find a way.
The Wet Tropics rainforests have many many species which have colonised these forests via the Cape York Peninsula.
Initially these species go berserk until one of natures creatures finds a use for them. i.e. an Insect finds a way to attack the flower or eat the food reserves in the developing embryo of the seeds and as a result its numbers fall.
Re: Lantana, this species as with ANY exotic species has an ecological value HOWEVER in the interim its presence and spread throughout the landscape could result in the extinction (outcompeted) of other species.
Same went for the Dingo v Thylacine.
If the community/habitat has sufficient resources then species competition is reduced, however when a habitat is depleted and 1 exotic plant dominates the niche breath doesnt allow for another option for the looser in the battle for resources and thus the looser becomes absent from the system.
Weedy landscapes are a habitat, its probably actually better (to an extent) if there were more weeds competing against each other so that 1 species didnt dominate- this would therefore create more niche diversity for species specialisation (avoidance strategies).

I will always agree that some species require judicious removal, however I also realise that they will always be a component of the landscape and thus they should be utilised to their full potential (as a resource).

Exotic species within the landscape cant be viewed as equal to one another- they are simply alien genetic codes and all have a weekness.. it all temporal ....something will always find a way to eat it...its just a matter of when...

From Kris

Cheers Kris for your well explained response to my request.
Yes one could say that some Western Australian plants have more in common with South Africa than Eastern Australia.
Jim

Wow and wow
I loved reading all these msg I agree with everything you guys say Its really good that more than the usaul suspects
have decided to write on this topic
I am absolutely blow away by the amount of discussion on this subject
one point thought when people talk about having a native garden we automatically think of the dry scerypholl or wet
forests not the diverse areas that we have
I prefer a heathland garden with callistemon,banksia,leptosperum,eucalypt,and heaps of xanthhorea.
it works well for a small cortyard type garden
thanks again for the great and intellegent msg

>>Also, just for the record planting exotics reduces biodiversity!

Planting exotics also increases biodiveristy. How many third world countries have populations of their native plants under severe pressure from deforestation, overgrazing etc. By propagating and disseminating them in our gardens we have the opportunity to preserve their future when they might be lost forever in the wild (if we are not completely stopped by CITES and import regs). I know that doesn't apply to every situation, and many exotics escape and become pests. But there are also good reasons FOR growing some exotics.... maybe not a lot of the ones that are popular.

Some major pests in my part of the world (I am near Seattle, Washington, USA not Western aus) are english ivy, japanese knotweed, blackberries, Scotch broom and exotic grasses (of which the latter two are only pesky because of too much forest clearing). But it is only a very small minority of exotics that are grown here, that seed themselves or become invasive. Many Australian plants have been grown up here and none of them has been at all invasive, not even the eucalypts that one finds all over California.

I know that it is different in other parts of the world.... in particular California comes to mind as a place that has had worse damage from the introduction of exotics, in a similar way as parts of Australia. I agree that thousands of Azaleas in a hot dry climate is not appropriate (well just plain stupid really), just like we grow many Asian plants that require summer water which does not fall naturally here. I think plants should always be selected that don't require a lot of water which will become an increasingly precious resource around the world, it is just intuitive (at least I hope so). Native plants are great but ironically in this part of the world, many of our native plants are used inappropriately because they prefer moist forest understorey and people plant them in the blasting hot sun in urban situations.

biodiversity isnt the best measure of ecosystem health. It doesnt distinguish whether one species is increasing or another is diminishing from the system. A series of surveys over a long period will answer this.

Ian_WA, the species at risk in the wild should be preserved within the general locality in which they are endangered as the genotypes and the associated genetic variability is suited to that region- moving an exotic species to Australia for preservation reasons not only creates a possible pest problem for Australia, but also creates inbreeding and decreases the integrity of the species i.e. threatens what you set out to achieve.
They will adapt to Australian conditions and eventually be genetically distant from the country of origin-decreasing the sensibility of reintroduction.

I dont know!

Kris

A real hornets nest this one.

Until I see Philodendrons, Heliconias and Gardenias running rampant in the nearby bush, I am going to continue to plants them alongside my lillipillies, tree ferns and native palms. Cast me into the pit of eternal damnation, but I'll back my well-mulched, sensibly watered patch against my neighbours' acres of thirsty lawn and tragic roesbeds any day.

Chris, you make a very valid point about people thinking, misguidedly or otherwise, that they are preserving a plant by growing it on the other side of the world from it's native habitat.
Some years ago I walked into a nursery in Southern England to be confronted by a large number of Australian Tree Ferns. There was a sign saying the trees were threatened in their native "South Australia" and therefore had to be dug up and shipped to places such as the UK in order to guarantee their survival. When I pointed out to the assistant that none of the ferns had certification to indicate their legal removal from the bush, he just repeated what was written on the sign. I got the impression that they, (the staff), were all rather proud of themselves for "doing the right thing".

>>the species at risk in the wild should be preserved within the general locality in which they are endangered as the genotypes and the associated genetic variability is suited to that region

I agree that it SHOULD be that way.... but having accepted the reality that plants often are not adequately protected in their native habitat (especially in third world countries.... but extinctions may occur even in some first world countries) I think that cultivating threatened plants is a legitimate means of protecting them, whether it's halfway around the world or not. What about the highlands of Peru and Bolivia? What about all those New Caledonian endemics that are still being whacked down and burned indiscriminately by landowners? How about your own Eucalyptus recurva which is known from only four wild plants... a bushfire could come along, the regrowth could be grazed and the plants could be lost. This plant is now being preserved at Currency Creek Arboretum but it could just as well have been lost forever if it had not been brought into cultivation, and something happened to the original plants. Plants are inevitably vulnerable in the wild, often due to human influence but sometimes not... so isn't it better if as many people as possible have them in their gardens?

Wattleblossom... your example is just about foolish people who are trying to make a profit and do not really have a clue what they are talking about, not people responsibly collecting plants to preserve them. It is one thing to harvest trunks of relatively common D. antarctica (and C. australis) from the wild.... this is unnecessary as it is unlikely to go extinct no matter what anyone does. Nothing wrong with growing D. antarctica in England but personally I think it would be better if they were spore raised plants. Now if someone were to collect spore from a very rare species of treefern (rather than harvest a whole plant) and disseminate the plants to help preserve them... is there anything wrong with that? I don't think so. I also think that when possible a variety of genetic material should be used for each species cultivated.

scubamid if you want a native garden for the tropics go to the bush learn the names of the plants that are there and found out if they are for sale in nurseries
im no saying you have to recreate the bush
just bring a little piece onf the bush in your piece of oz

Kris,
Regarding your belief that "Some 'natives' were once exotics". Isn't that just a little debatable?

If only we knew more about the plant species that existed here since the beginning of the breakup of Gondwanaland over a 100 million years ago. Who knows how many different species of Calamus may have been here at one time, between the beginning of continental drift and the coming of the Aborigine.

Quite a few Australian Native plant species found in our Tropical Zone are also found in the Malay archipelago. (I'll bet you know most of this). Do we really know how they got to where they are now?

Is this because Plant species have moved south, north, or just been there all the time? We take it as read now that lots plants from the families of say, Myrtaceae, Proteaceae, Mimosaceae, Fabaceae are found in significant numbers on other lands as a result of the link back to Gondwanaland. If Calamus arrived here originally from the north then how did all our other plants find their present homes; including the remaining Rainforest plants?

This is a great discussion piece.

"Regarding your belief that "Some 'natives' were once exotics". Isn't that just a little debatable?"

Robert, thats why I wrote it! and it is unrefutable!
Aboriginal species were once exotic until the ecology was altered to deal with their presence.

The Malay archipelago, is the border of the Gondwana-Erasian plates, they got there due to their tropical tolerance/requirements- they rafted there from the south.

I havent the time atm, but it does seem from fossil records that Palms evolved in the megathermal belt which has fluctuated in varying degrees from the equator.

Back later!\
Kris