RHS Debate

Gardens First

Aging Misery — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 22:37:34 GMT

Almost two years ago the new Director General of the RHS, in open consultation, refused to consider the sale & lease back of its headquarters in Vincent Sq London for a potential sum in excess of £60million. Now the Society announces that it is to make up to 80 full time equivalents redundant in order to save 10% off its wage bill across 720 nationwide employees.

No doubt the 5 employees earning in excess of £100,000 (inc benefits) have nothing to fear but what of the gardeners at Wisley, Hyde Hall et al whom rarely earn much more than the minimum the Society deems they can live on.

The DG’s reason given for not selling off her crown - the central London HQ- ‘’We are a prestigious organisation and need a prestigious head office’’.

Perhaps it is time for the RHS to give up its kaleidoscopic corporate experiment into charitable horticulture, media and education perhaps returning to its niche as a learned Society – with some great gardens to boot!

fire and water

HarryOnNorthDowns — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 19:07:31 GMT

Is there a correlation between Australians building houses in fire-hazardous forest and Britain building houses on flood-plains?

Has gardening ever been core to Britishness?

admin — Tue, 04 Oct 2005 18:44:30 GMT

Do you see gardening as core to our national identity? Do you see gardening as a quintessential British pastime? Or do you think that this view of the Nation is based on a Victorian heyday that has little to do with Britain today?

paved front gardens

flowergirl — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 09:39:53 GMT

I'm currently doing a project on the loss of front gardens and the enviromental impact it has, does anyone know where i can get more information?

Loss of front gardens

stevew — Tue, 21 Feb 2006 21:56:11 GMT

Wondered what people think about the constant reports in gardening media about the effects of diminishing front gardens as in being replaced by paved or tarmac areas for off street parking, and also the effects of water run off

tidyness is taking over

gatita — Fri, 28 Oct 2005 12:24:41 GMT

I get fed up with gardening programmes that show everything all pristine and new. Novice gardeners soon get to think that they are rubbish at it because they have dead leaves and seedheads about, and some of their plants die. Stuff seeds everywhere and the bindweed has to be battled. Welcome to gardening as it really is. Only ''Gardeners World'' even attempts to show this, and even they don't show how many hours work a week go into keeping Berryfields smart. New gardeners should be encouraged to see it as an adventure, not as an exercise in producing a perfect picture. Lets have a live monthly gardening programme that follows a new garden with a new gardener who has 2-3 hours a week to spare and no helpers. Make people see that everyone has problems, and nobody would REALLY want a garden designed by Diarmud Gavin if they had to mow the fiddly lawns themselves twice a week

Peat and its sustainability

williamelfyn — Wed, 02 Nov 2005 11:47:50 GMT

I am always disappointed and irritated with Peter Seabrooks'' attitude towards peat and this arose yet again during the discussion on ''Gardening as a threat to the natural world''. To quote ''Peter Seabrook condemned the moves against using peat, singling out the National Trust, and insisting ''peat is a perfect renewable source''. No one really seems to point out the faults in his arguments. Peat bogs are, yes, just as Peter suggests in a recent article in the ''Garden'' a very simple ecosystem, but he misses the point that it is one of the most fragile. For a peat bog to ''recover'' if that is the right word, it will take 1000's of years and with the phenomenon of global warming, where peat bogs need cool, wet oceanic atlantic climates, it is highly unlikely that they will ever reform as nature intended. Sustainable? they are certainly not and I don't know where Peter gets this idea from. Is Peter's commerial involvement in peat companies something to do with his most unfortunate attitude towards peat? William Elfyn

Gardening in low regard

admin — Tue, 04 Oct 2005 18:59:13 GMT

Do you think that the state of our public spaces reflects the fact that gardening is no longer core to us as a nation? Has modern garden design and ''make over'' TV with the associated decking, patios and outdoor rooms ripped the plants out of the heart of the garden? Is the [i] green and pleasant land [/i] that used to be our gardens deteriorating as a result of our our ''time poor'' lifestyle? Or do you see a resurgence of gardening as people want to reconnect with the land and grow their own fruit and vegetables or enjoy the creativity that gardening can afford?

What constitutes ''gardening''

sunflower — Wed, 05 Oct 2005 11:08:56 GMT

One thing I have been wondering about is what is meant by 'gardening'. Does it matter if you tend 2 plants or 200? I think plenty of people are intimidated by the prospect of managing a large garden or one that contains a lot of plants, but most of the people I know enjoy tending a few plants and sitting outside. Certainly in the UK most houses are designed with a small garden of sorts, which doesn't happen so often on the Continent.

Have your say

admin — Tue, 04 Oct 2005 19:00:46 GMT

Private Passion or National Indifference: Is gardening still core to the British way of life? The results are in from the The Garden debate event held on 4 October at the Royal Geographical Society - Gardening IS still core to the British way of life. It was however, a close vote with 161 voting for the motion and 134 voting against. But the debate isn't over, we'd like to know what you think about this statement and the questions you think it poses!