Hello you all..An interesting little discussion happening here..'wigandia' is my wee creation..All I can say IS..Garden yer latitude with attitude..ignore the 'style council' (including my 'look') I am not long back from an extensive lecture tour of the west coast of North America (the so called mediterranean parts) Many of the younger garden types are looking at this more sustainable equation.. a wee excerpt from my talk notes "We, of Australia (and perhaps the west coast of North America) in this 21st century, in cultural and social terms, have embraced this Âalien land. Our identity is stamped on almost all facets of the ÂArts with the possible exception of Âornamental gardeningÂ. Few inroads have been made into the climatic/cultural sensibilities of our garden making Âunder the sunÂ. The lust for the unsustainable Âlook seems ingrained. How odd for seemingly modern and proud nations, of high Âindependent aspirations and competitiveness. In recent times the realization that we must consider the impact of overuse of natural resources for not only local existence but global existence has spurred a move towards a more sustainable approach, My garden ÂWIGANDIA and others are playing prominent roles in the Âpseudo ecological garden stakes. I have long believed that the somewhat Âslavish adherence toÂhosepipe culture has rendered us rather impervious to the true opportunities our climate presents. Some of us have Âtuned to the notion Ânative plants are best, a simplistic but positive step forward!" and "Many of us live in a climate far removed from the source of the majority of our most frequently used plants. Whilst many of these plants grow reasonably well in our rather diverse climatic range, many do not. Traditional irrigation habits have allowed a broad range of Northern Hemisphere woodland plants to be cultivated. These plants often require copious amounts of water during our long hot and dry summers that can extend into autumn and sometimes beyond! The disturbingly complex issue of water shortages and conservation will in the coming years alter our lifestyles. Garden culture as we know it could well be relegated to the archives filed under nice folly but hemi spherically bizarre! The opportunity to strive towards a garden culture that is of our climate offers endless possibilities. Let us look to our own social and cultural values in the creation of a garden that reflects who we are and more importantly where we live!" Nothing more and nothing less!! Best Billy William Martin. Gongoozler. +61 3 5592 5349 Email: williammartin@wigandia.com Web: http://www.wigandia.com "The plant never lapses into mere arid functionalism; it fashions and shapes according to logic and suitability, and with its primeval force compels everything to attain the highest artistic form." Karl Blossfeldt (1865-1932)

Why take the risk? Macbirch, I understand exactly what you're saying. Planting natives does sometimes/often seem like a risk because we just don't have the collective knowledge about natives as we do exotics. About 2 years ago, I wanted to plant a hedge along the boundary between my native garden and my neighbour's property. I really liked the idea of using waratahs, but at that stage I'd never tried to grow one, and, since you don't see them around that much, thought they must be difficult. I decided not to take the risk and planted callistemons instead, at least they where natives. Anyway, I've since had great success growing 2 waratahs (even moved one), so I've decided to take out the callistemons, which aren't getting enough sun anyway, and replace them with waratahs. My point is that if I'd had the confidence in the first place, and got some decent advice from my local nursery, I wouldn't be now, 2 years down the track, going to all the work and expense of replacing the callistemons with what is afterall, a plant indigenous to the Blue Mountains! You'd think there'd be a waratah nursery here wouldn't you? No, I have to drive 40 minutes just to get to a native nusery, and that looks like it could close down any time soon. Waz, young people like you are the key. I hope you never grow exotics, never learn about them or decide you like them. Oh, and I hope you and Artie continue to be outspoken about people like me who grow roses. If I build another house and start a garden from scratch, things will be different.

>>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.

Answer....that depends. :-) I see that most water softener salt is, simply, sodium chloride. Some is potassium chloride. Some are other salts. We'll assume yours will indeed be sodium chloride. It's cheap and effective. ETA: 103 mg/L easily translates to 103 PPM. Which is a fair clip, actually. /ETA If rarely irrigated and flushed through by ample rainwater, practically nothing is the result. So if, like me, you're in the habit of irrigating once or twice a year, absolute maximum, then don't worry about it. Even sodium-sensitive plants won't notice that. If you happen to live in a semi-arid or arid area and irrigate all the time, irrigate in smaller amounts that never wash the sodium below the root zone, and never receive ample enough rainfall to leach the sodium out of the soil, you'll eventually end up with a dead, sodic soil that won't grow much except sodium-tolerant marsh grasses. And then, not even those. But maybe you can manage a few things that tolerate areas like the Dead Sea. From the description, "not regularly" means your impact is towards the former. I'd be less inclined to worry about it, but would make sure to apply more water less often during dry summers to avoid sodium buildup. Pro tip: Turn off your water softener when you're irrigating the lawn and simply let the hard water hit the lawn. The lawn really doesn't care about that and would much rather have the calcium than sodium anyway. Also, it's far cheaper in terms of your water softener salt. You can certainly turn on the softener temporarily if you need to use the water yourself, but why pay to soften hundreds of gallons that hits the lawn and doesn't do any good?