Garden size

cloo

We currently live in a garden flat with quite a decent sized garden... we're looking at family houses now, but actually not that many have gardens any bigger than ours now.

We saw one place with a huge garden, closer to the size husband and I both grew up with and it was very attractive, though sadly we just weren't in a good enough position to bid for that house at that moment. My husband loves gardening.. I like it in principle, but the fact is I'm always bored and tired after more than 5 minutes of anything more than watering with a hose!

I do like the idea in our next place of having a garden that is big enough to, say, have a large family party in, but I accept it may not happen, as most places in our area/price range just don't have ones that size.

jonewer

sleepymans wrote: »

I think brambles, nettles, ragwort, Japanese knotweed and many more "bullies" will take over far too quickly. I've lived in rural areas and those that manage the land are often working round the clock.

OK, first of all, Japanese Knotweed spreads vegetatively adjoining properties. Provided there is none in the garden, and none in the neighbour's garden, it shouldnt be a problem.

Secondly, most weeds are only a real problem because we practice a very unnatural form of gardening, often clearing away to bare earth which of course gets overgrown knee-deep with weeds within a fortnight.

If you look at some proper old-growth forest, you will notice there are no nettles or brambles or other horrors lurking in the undergrowth.

There is a method called "forest gardening" where you plant useful, often edible, specimens of plants and just leave them.

See here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forest_gardening

They colonise the land in a natural way and naturally exclude the undesirable horror-stories that only take hold when someone goes in hacking and slashing and hoeing over the soild.

As I said before, no such thing as too much garden

Davesnave

sleepymans wrote: »

I'm not sure I agree that land can just be "left to grow" or "left to wildlife".

Nor me. We live in a hungry world.

Those who want to just 'leave land to nature' might consider supporting their local wildlife trust, or similar. Even apparently 'natural' habitats need management.

I took on a few acres of neglected, but potentially productive land. Sorting it out has proved time-consuming and expensive, but I couldn't live here and do anything else.

I enjoy it, but if it becomes a chore, or if I need to 'put my feet up,' I'll sell it.

So I think that if you're wavering about having a large garden, it's probably not a great idea. Smaller gardens, with their lower demands for maintenance, create less stress, if your time or physical abilities are more limited. They can also be quite an interesting design challenge, as more time and thought can be applied to every square metre. My best-designed garden was less than 40' long and it gave me huge satisfaction.

Davesnave

jonewer wrote: »

If you look at some proper old-growth forest, you will notice there are no nettles or brambles or other horrors lurking in the undergrowth.

Red herring.

I don't disagree entirely with what you say, but it happens I have remnants of old temperate rainforest less than a mile from me here. The reason that the eco-system there works, is because it's evolved, undisturbed, over a very long time.

The lack of nettles etc is down to a lack of light. Instead, there are ferns, ivy and mosses.

Now all that's fine, but I'm not expecting the trees I planted last winter to form a forest like that anytime soon, nor would I want all my land covered in it, even if it did.

geoffky

If you work full time think of the hours you can realistically put in...
I must spend 2/3 hours most days in mine and of lots of occasions more just to keep on top of it all..
A large garden is no fun unless you can put the time in willingly or employ a gardener..

Gwhiz

Annie1960 wrote: »

I'm less interested in a large garden now I've retired.

Agree, it all depends on where you are in life and your priorities.

dominoman

Bigger the better.

In buying my new house the thing I am most excited about is a decent sized garden. 90 foot long, which for London (ish) is good.

Can't wait to put in the vegetable beds, a firepit and some fruit trees.

GolfFoxtrot

When we viewed our current house we thought it had a huge garden (10m by 12m) now we've lived in it for a month we don't think the garden is that big at all. What matters to us though is that it's south west facing so we still get to enjoy some sun after a long day at work.

trailingspouse

Have had big gardens, small gardens, and no garden at all.

Loved the biggest garden - but DS was still at home, and he just loved the ride on mower, so cutting the grass was never an issue. The next biggest garden took a full day to cut with a 'normal' mower - and in 2012 there was so much rain we actually had reeds growing in the grass!!

Current house has a small garden - I can have the grass cut in an hour, and still have time and energy to do the rest of the garden. I can also enjoy sitting in it, without feeling guilty that I should be 'doing' it.

Waterlily24

We've got just over an acre, it was overgrown with brambles and nettles when we bought it 8 years ago. Now we get a lot of comments on how lovely it is BUT it is getting too much for us now as my hubbies legs aren't good but he still potters about in the garden.