hort.net Seasonal photo, (c) 2006 Christopher P. Lindsey, All Rights Reserved: do not copy
articles | gallery of plants | blog | tech blog | plant profiles | patents | mailing lists | top stories | links | shorturl service | tom clothier's archive0
Gallery of Plants
Tech Blog
Plant Profiles
Mailing Lists
    Search ALL lists
    Search help
    Subscription info
Top Stories
sHORTurl service
Tom Clothier's Archive
 Top Stories
New Trillium species discovered

Disease could hit Britain's trees hard

Ten of the best snowdrop cultivars

Plant protein database helps identify plant gene functions

Dendroclimatologists record history through trees

Potato beetle could be thwarted through gene manipulation

Hawaii expands coffee farm quarantine

Study explains flower petal loss

RSS story archive

Re: ponds/fish

Donna, I would not say they are less attractive, just different.  In a 
watergarden the fish are an addition, whereas in the Koi pond, the fish ARE the 
attraction....and well deserved.
zone 9
Texas Gulf Coast 
In a message dated 1/28/2004 8:57:08 PM Central Standard Time, 
gardenchat-owner@hort.net writes:

I agree, koi ponds are much more work and less attractive. My 2" koi
grew to be 4ft in 5 years and multiplied worse than rabbits. I wish my
pond was not so deep.


Support hort.net -- join the hort.net fund drive!

Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index

 © 1995-2017 Mallorn Computing, Inc.All Rights Reserved.
Our Privacy Statement