Talk:Xeriscaping

Improvements

Hi everyone I've been looking into expanding this article and revising some of the Denver Water principles. I wanted to add a new section turf grass areas because from what I've been reading it seems to be one of the more controversial aspects of xeriscaping. I also wanted to include more images to illustrate the Denver Water principles as well as find better sources for the advantages and disadvantages section. If you want to look at what I'm working on please visit my sandbox and let me know what you think. It is still a work in progress but I would like to finish it in the next couple of weeks. User.plantaetitanum — Preceding unsigned comment added by Plantaetitanum (talk • contribs) 03:09, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

(Comment)

NPOV? seems to be advertising the idea, rather than just describing it Vroman 05:19 11 Jun 2003 (UTC)

I agree with you. The initial author also admitted it. Could you add another view point perhaps ? User:anthere

Pleased to see Disadvantages section, but looks lawn-biased - as if lawns are the only alternative. The Advantages section doesn't point out that xeriscaped yards aren't so green (which would be true, but arbitrarily biased in favor of non-green yards). Yes, cactus bites back, but so do rosebushes or raspberry patches. And if a xeriscaped yard is less useful for sports, less useful than what, vacant lots or streets? It's not all cactus patch. alynnwells — Preceding undated comment added 04:33, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Xeriscaping is not Zero-scaping

I'm removing the following:

Xeriscaping is not the same as natural landscaping or "zero-scaping" (in which the landscape consists mostly of concrete, stones or gravel, with perhaps a cactus or two thrown in), and can look quite lush and colorful.

since it is not true what says about natural landscaping (please read the article in wikipedia), and i couldn't find much information about what zero-scaping is, but what it is not (and it is not xeriscaping). also the quality of the writting is not proper for an enciclopedia. --Cacuija (my talk) 01:53, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Speaking of which, I clicked onto this discussion page specifically because I wanted to know why there was no mention of "zero"-scape. Xeriscape may officially come from "xeros," but it's obviously an overt double-entendre to "zero." I can't fathom any other explanation.--Mrcolj 19 May 2007

A quick check showed me that Xeriscaping probably is derived from the word Xeric: xe·ric/ˈzi(ə)rik/ Adjective:(of an environment or habitat) Containing little moisture; very dry. In fact the word "xeric" in an article on Adenium obesum links to this page but there is no information relating to the term on the page. Im new to wiki but i'll try and find some information to define what "an xeric watering scheme" (on the Adenium obesum page) actually *is* 218.186.99.13 (talk) 04:13, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Paradigm shift

The main perceived disadvantage of xeriscaping is the paradigm shift required to accept anti-landscaping as landscaping. Simply put, it's ugly to most people. Ignoring that in an article is like writing an article on tofu's perceived disadvantages and refusing to admit it's not really just as tasty as beef. My wife is from Phoenix, and is more or less positive about having an xeriscape yard. I'm from San Francisco, and still would rather waste water than have my kids playing ball in a rock garden... Another important "disadvantage" is that local plants attract local wild animals. --69.254.185.26 14:46, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Wild animals? That's terrible! No way should Man have to deal with nature, when they move into an area that used to be completely natural. Man should be allowed to waste as much water as he wants (even if it hurts everybody else) Peoplesunionpro (talk) 23:51, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Having an "Advantages" section but no "Disadvantages" section undermines this article's credibility. Another disadvantage is the heating effect of huge areas of rocks. 209.217.155.166 (talk) 13:03, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Huge areas of rocks aren't an aspect of xeriscape. Someone had mixed "zeroscaping" in here, which basically is (for example) using a lot of rock and no plants (hence the "zero" part -- zero to work with, it's just a way to cover the ground). There CAN be rocks in xeriscaping, eg rock gardens, but they have plants growing in them. Much xeriscaping doesn't use rocks at all. Don't use them if you don't want them. Wild animals also aren't a clear disadvantage, because many people want to attract them -- and xeriscape doesn't imply using native plants (though, as with rock gardens, they CAN be and are often used by choice in xeriscape). Plenty of non-native and animal resistant strains of plants work well in xeriscape gardens. Madamecp (talk) 14:08, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Sorry guys, but "huge areas of rocks" and "anti-landscaping" are not accurate characterizations of xeriscape -- those phrases describe what has been slangishly called "zero-scaping," the definition of which was foolishly removed from this article. Xeriscaping is anything but ugly, although it admittedly does not make a good baseball field. Paul (talk) 15:55, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Xeriscape Trademark?

Although there are multiple on-line references to "xeriscape" being a registered trademark of the Denver Water Board, it does not come up as a result in a search of registered trademarks (http://www.uspto.gov/main/trademarks.htm). This article says that it is NOT a registered trademark but the USAToday article it cites (Elizabeth Caldwell (2007-07-15). "With xeriscaping, grass needn't always be greener". USA Today. http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/2007-07-15-xeriscaping_N.htm.) says that it IS a registered trademark. The Denver Water Board website (http://www.denverwater.org/) says this: "The word "Xeriscape," was coined by the Denver Water Department in 1981 to help make water conserving landscaping an easily recognized concept." --Tajour (talk) 00:09, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Combined last 'Brambleclawx' and 'Ann100' edits. The "Denver 7" list sounds like advice in phrasing and use of "you" etc.- not wiki-encyclopedia tone yet, but good info by those editors.--Cheers----Look2See1 t a l k → 06:30, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Xeriscaping. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.mesaaz.gov/conservation/convert.az
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.mastergardenersmecklenburg.org/xeriscape-an-introduction.
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080724182223/http://www.backtonatives.org/NativeLandscapes.htm to http://www.backtonatives.org/NativeLandscapes.htm
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20071107202335/http://csbe.org/water_conserving_landscapes/index.html to http://www.csbe.org/water_conserving_landscapes/index.html
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20020414093103/http://aggie-horticulture.tamu.edu:80/extension/xeriscape/xeriscape.html to http://aggie-horticulture.tamu.edu/extension/xeriscape/xeriscape.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:40, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Etymology

recent edits claim Latin origin for both xero- and -scape; the citation for this has been an article at topsimplegarden.com, a site with many sensical and grammatical errors suggestive of machine translation

based on cited, more-authoritative sources, the entity that coined the term specifically references the Greek origin of xero-, though Latin did borrow the term; because it is spelled "xeri-", i suspect the coiners had in mind the term xeric, which is derived from Greek but has been in use in English since the early 20th century; see also Wordwizard discusion, Xero- or Xeri-?

further, -scape in xeriscape is not Latin, it is derived from landscape; the term scape, from Latin scapus, is a different, unrelated word --Garbanzito (talk) 19:58, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Needs to have a section on biohazards / biorisk.

although the specific purpose of this method compared to others, might deserve only a page in differentiation , when someone IS, differentiating, between it and another method,..

SOMEtimes, ppl will simply be looking it up, and not comparing multiple methods, or studying it upon direction/reference from someone else, and not even aware TO, compare it with other methods, etc...

and perhaps MISS, things like biohazard and risks of introduced species, or risks of otherwise isolated/contained plantations, spreading in the general surrounding environment / island,.. or worse.

im not anti- , xeriscaping, but it would not be able to be when BADLY managed, when BADLY set up, really all that safe, especially if someone were so neglectful that they chose an air-borne reproductive method species, etc.

Although that might seem so ludicrous to someone used to risks in terms of introduced species, ppl familiar with the subject matter, etc...

it might not, to schoolchildren, 1st time garden makers, ppl who've never even done volunteering in any field of plant encouragement/planting, etc.

so GENERAL information, about it would be appropriate.

no doubt it falls under existing law in terms of, bio- risks ...

... so where is the detail on precautions / steps in selection of species that will not... species that do not.... etc ?!!

it would have to be a part of process for setting up a xeriscaped garden, or they would not be legal.

REW Vurrath (talk) 21:31, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

General discussion on rock-only landscapes, anti-gardening, zeroscaping

I think there's need to find a specification for some anti-gardening phenomenons, which have also given Xeriscaping a bad name. I could not yet find a proper English term for it, but "Zeroscaping" looks like a candidate. The meaning should be mainly the removal of gardens, and replacement by rock materials, with few or no plants, following the intention to suppress plant growth for a tidy look. This may be poor implementation of Xeriscaping, or mistaking it for garden removal ("Zeroscaping", if not only mispronounced, or actual desert landscaping). But this kind of anti-gardening also occurs in humid regions, not suitable for xeriscaping. These "anti-gardens" are often created in front yards, in order to have a tidy looking area with low maintenance, while backyards and secluded garden spaces still have plant life. As a differentiation, these anti-gardens are not used space, such as paths, parking lots, driveways or places to store something. They often have no fixed hardscape, like pavement or asphalt, but loose rock material dumped on landscape fabric, to suppress plant growth.

It would be nice to have some links to other sources on this topic, maybe to separate it from Xeriscaping in the future.

There's an article in the German wikipedia, Schottergarten, literally "crushed rock garden", which describes this kind of anti-gardening as it occurs mainly in German speaking countries.

German Gardens of Horror (Gärten des Grauens)

This is what is described in the referenced article in the German Wikipedia. The term "Gärten des Grauens", which can either be translated into "Gardens of Horror", or also "Gardens of Graying", has been coined by a social media initiative, which created an image pillory for them, motivated by the loss of living space for wildlife and insects in gardens (see Facebook and Instagram links). There is basically no need for Xeriscaping in Germany. In some dry regions and during drought, most plants can be kept with little irrigation. This anti-gardening fad became popular after 2000 and gained momentum after 2010. Surveys in Switzerland suggest, that it mostly affects the German speaking regions there.

Some examples resemble European modern architecture, and adjacent gardens, of the 1950s. Others mimic Asian garden styles, such as Japanese Kare-San-Sui, but of course not raked daily, but with a polyresin Buddha, or a Yin-Yang made of colored pebbles, instead. Ordered and tidy appearance is a heavy focus, the few plants are mostly topiary; sometimes plastic plants. Decorative stone columns, resembling memorials or tombstones, are sometimes used. Sometimes, it's just the whole area covered with weed fabric and a plain of stone material on top.

The fad comes with some outright repulsive design elements, such as gabions, steel cages filled with rocks, instead of walls or hedges, as well as fences made of steel bar mats, which are otherwise used for security purposes.

"Schottergarten" means "crushed rock garden" (although Google Translate wrongly translates it into "gravel garden"). It refers to the frequent use of sharp-edged, crushed rocks, like railroad track ballast or riprap for river shores, but in fact, this "style" can also be made with rounded gravel or any other mineralic material. Main purpose of the term is a differentiation from classic rock gardens, like alpine rockeries, or gravel gardens covered with appropriate plants - the German words for them are often used in a confusing manner.

BBirke (talk) 12:49, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

thanks for illuminating some aspects of the anti-garden or intentionally-lifeless landscaping movement; i think it relates somewhat to xeriscaping, but it is clearly a distinct topic, particularly since, as you note, it is not necessarily a response to an arid climate nor a desire to conserve water

if a separate article were developed it would be useful to reference from this article; for comparison, in the US we don't seem to have as coherent a "gardens of horror" concept, but the expanse of rock mulch is used fairly often; it is discouraged not only for aesthetic reasons, but because in a hot climate it can cause heat islands; we also sometimes see people using synthetic lawn material, aka "astroturf", which is perhaps even more misguided

i think it's worth mentioning that not all serious gardeners find gabions or wire fences "repulsive" — part of the point of xeriscaping is that it is a flexible practice that doesn't mandate a particular aesthetic

--Garbanzito (talk) 16:27, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

References

Confusion between xeriscaping and natural landscaping

The lead emphasises that Xeriscaping is about conserving water and is completely unrelated to using native plants (even though these may accidentaly coincide):

"Xeriscaping is different from natural landscaping, because the emphasis in xeriscaping is on selection of plants for water conservation, not necessarily selecting native plants".

The rest of the article seems to dismiss this however and mixes the two freely. In the "Biodiversity" section for example, we read this:

"Often times when areas develop there is a loss of forestation, and animal populations dwindle as they are forced to relocate. Implementing native vegetation in green spaces helps improve the insect and wildlife found in the environment as the habitat is reestablished to a degree, offering food and shelter to the wildlife. One application of xeriscaping that drastically improves biodiversity is the implementation of pocket forests."

Nothing in this parapgraph is about saving water, only about using native plants. Perhaps these "pocket forests" save water, but seeing as though the section does not bother with explaining what a "pocket forest" is, it just seems off. A lot further down in the "Lawns and applications section", we finally find out what a pocket forest is:

"Akira Miyawaki is a Japanese botanist that developed the idea of pocket forests which reintroduces indigenous trees and vegetation to developed environments in order to promote strong biodiversity. The method calls for the planting naturally occurring trees and shrubbery densely into small compact areas, that can range from a size of a tennis court to a parking space. These pocket forests increase biodiversity, reduce noise (if placed near streets or noise polluters), improve air quality and soil retention, help with reforestation, and efficiently capture carbon dioxide.[18] In order to promote fast growth and biodiversity the engineered ecosystem requires a layering of vegetation: the ground layer, a shrub layer, and a canopy layer. Due to this compact layering these forests usually are well established within two decades rather than the 70-plus years it takes for naturally occurring forests."

And yeah.. it has nothing to do with saving water and are just used to promote biodiversity. So for starters, I propose to just remove these off-topic bits (perhaps move them to the natural landscaping article). There are also a few small references such as in the lead:

"Xeriscaping produces greenspaces that require low amounts of maintenance and irrigation, and promote biodiversity; however, due to so.."

All in all, untangling these two topics would greatly increase the consistency of the article.--Ribidag (talk) 13:31, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Please go ahead and update if you have reliable sources Chidgk1 (talk) 10:35, 1 January 2024 (UTC)