I, too, have a few bulbs that did not bloom over winter, as they should have. I'm hoping that by next spring, they will decide to flower, but I'm leaving it up to them... I won't put them through a dormancy, forced, that is. I'll allow them their own schedule.

We've had weird weather, too... and after the bugs devoured my Sprekelia seed pods, I'm very hesitant to allow any of my bulbs to summer out of doors... there's no telling what bugs and critters might do to them if I place them at their mercy. So, I'm hopeful of a nice spring blooming, and in the meantime, I'll have this fall's purchases to enjoy!

I agree with you: I pretty much leave bulbs to their own schedule. I find that usually gives me at least some bloom all year, a nice bonus. The ones that bother me are those I bought several years ago that have never bloomed - I am not sure why they would refuse to bloom at all. Bulbs may skip a year, but at least they usually bloom at some point.

Outdoor growing has its problems all right. Right now, the fawns are running around, tasting new things and learning what they like best. There are more baby raccoons than I have seen in years - delightful to watch, and terribly destructive when they roll around pots for sport. And the little squirrels are bouncing off walls, knocking over everything in their paths. Fun time of year, but definitely time to safeguard plants and pots.

My thought is that perhaps some of the bulbs are too young to bloom... maybe sold a bit on the young side... I don't really know. Or, perhaps something in the way of care given is disturbing them just enough that they are refusing to bloom... but you have a greenhouse, so they should be more than happy!

On the other hand, perhaps the care given is too good, and the plant feels no need to produce seed, which is why they bloom in the first place... being a long-lived plant, maybe it feels that it can take its sweet time in reproducing.

I'm just thinking out loud, really... I haven't a clue as to why bulbs should refuse to flower if they are old enough. If mine don't put out blooms this next spring, I'll force a dormancy on them, and see if that kick-starts the process.

I would really love to place my bulbs out in the gardens to gather up that wonderful sunshine, but I am so worried about insects and other creatures destroying the plants... the Sprekelia Incident, as I'm calling it, has taught me a valuable lesson... I'm thinking artificial lighting is the way to go. Sometimes, it's necessary to fool Mother Nature!

Some of our creatures - no matter how destructive, they really are special this time of year:

{{gwi:419983}}

Wow! What a great shot! Nature is very special, indeed! We have the same things here, although the deer tend to steer clear of the house and out buildings... I'm guessing the dogs sort of keep them at bay. I have seen some out in the pasture at dusk... they pass through with fawns in tow, stopping to nibble and play... the herds in this area are over a dozen strong at times... beautiful to watch.

Thanks for sharing that! It's a wonderful photo!

The goofiest shot I have is below. It is blurred for good reason - I came walking out with a camera, looking through the lens to photograph the doe and her fawns, and did not realize one of the little ones was at the base of the doorsteps. Both of us jumped!

{{gwi:419985}}

Wow, so environmental friendly! We don't have wild animals near people 'habitats' in our country so seeing nature so close is wonderful to us!

Thanks for sharing.

Xuan

I'd love to get such photos up close, or through a good camera lens... it's a cute photo!

It's wonderful to see nature up close... unfortunately, the reason we have so many animals in "people habitats" is that we're encroaching on their space... we humans come along and build homes and communities, and take over the areas that the animals have been moving through since the dawn of time... deer travel on a pretty constant basis, making the rounds of a large area considered by them as their "territory". It's such a shame... we're ruining so much of the natural habitat...

Every time I see a news story about a person attacked by a wild animal, I have to wonder how and why that person got so close to that animal... just recently, in the news, a story about a guy who lost his arm to alligators, and authorities killed 25 or so of the beasts just to find the arm... and it was beyond repairing anyway... what a waste... it wasn't the alligators' fault, it was man's fault. We have no business swimming where alligators live. Common sense tells me that if there's the slightest possibility that alligators will share my swimming hole, it's time to find an enclosed pool to swim in! I guess some people are just lacking common sense...

Having deer in our backyards isn't that dangerous, and they are beautiful creatures to behold! I just hope they retain a certain amount of fear toward us... it would be too easy to "hunt" them otherwise, and it would be a shame for those little ones to be slain before they had a chance to reach adulthood. Beautiful or not, they are still wild animals!

You know, I do agree with you in many instances. But I also feel we people have a right to exist. Oregon is very low density and for the most part, there is not as much of a problem as there is in other areas. And wild animals tend to be pretty good survivors. The deer, for instance, have a wide range and when hunting season comes around, they scoot. We are in the city, and discharging weapons is prohibited, but still, they are gone for some time.

As for the other animals, some do well around people (my husband puts out a few nuts for "8 o'clock Charlie", a squirrel that shows up promptly at eight every morning for its treat). But as a rule, unless they are hurt, I do not physically interact with any of the our wild ones. Common sense should tell many really should be left alone - I am thinking of the alligators you mention, or the black bears and cougars and even the raccoons we have around here.

I agree... we have the right to exist, too... it's just such a shame that it has to be at the expense of such wonderful natural habitat and its inhabitants... those of us that understand how to co-exist with other creatures aren't the problem... it's those that lack common sense! Feeding a hungry little squirrel in your backyard is not the same as leaving your car in Yellowstone Park to feed a bear!

More and more stories appear on those reality/home video shows... stupid people doing stupid things, and ending up hurt... or worse! Corner any wild animal, or even a few domesticated ones, and the worst scenario is the usual result... but people don't think before they do things...

Ever see those video clips where people climb the fences in zoos, and usually get mauled by whatever animal is behind the fence? Or, video of people feeding the bears or other wild animals in a park, and they get attacked? Or, the video clip where the animal control officer approaches large protection dogs on their home turf with nothing more than a neck noose? Doh! Stupid people who deserve exactly what they get, in my opinion!

What bothers me even more is people who make pets out of non-domesticated animals that are larger and have more strength than they do... like large cats or bears or apes... and then they end up with limbs torn off... again, doh!

I love nature and animals as much as anyone... but I know that it's important for most animals to retain their fear of humans for their own survival. Man can be cruel and unthinking... even with domesticated animals, there must be mutual respect... I know what my dogs are capable of, and that's why they're treated well, trained, and contained responsibly!

I think it's perfectly possible to co-exist with the surrounding nature... as long as we give it the respect it deserves.

Oh My Goodness, Wilde, the photos of the Doe and her fawns and the single fawn is exceptional. How did you get so close?? I grew up in Michigan, and as a teen we lived outside the county in an area that used to be apple orchards. We would have deer and Pheasants looking in our windows in the morning, that is when they weren't devouring my dad's veggie and fruit gardens! Where we live is at the back side of the international airport security acreage. A few miles back. Luckily the runways run perpendicular to our neighborhood, so we get minimal jet noise. The beautiful thing is the security land, a couple miles out from the airport is home to wild life. So we get to see occasional deer (Florida deer are much smaller than UP NORTH) wild hogs and even an occasional endangered Florida panther (they are the blond small ones-not the black panthers. We also get incredible wildlife birds that enjoy the sanctuary of the protected area from the airport to our neighborhood. Thanks for sharing your dear deers!! I enjoyed them very much!

Thanks, Cindee. Although I do not encourage the deer (as a rule, I only interact with them if they are hurt), I make it a point to always let them know when I am in the garden, so they are pretty tame around me.

I have yet to figure out if they will eat amaryllis, by the way. I left out some pots for a few weeks last year and they did not bother them. But they sometimes eat certain plants only when they cannot find their favorites, so that does not mean much. Also, they will eat flowers of some plants and not bother the leaves. I suppose I should buy some cheap bulbs and leave them out when they bloom.

I've been trying to get decent photos of the Hummingbirds in our gardens, but they move so fast... and they flit away every time I move the slightest bit... how do you get the great shots, Wildebloem?! What kind of camera do you use?

The deer here don't get close enough to the house and gardens to nibble the flowers, and they never seem to eat anything but the pasture grass as they're roaming through... I suppose that's a good thing... I would really be disappointed if they destroyed anything in the gardens. I'm not sure if bulbs are on a deer's menu...

We do have rabbits that come to our "salad bar" every once in a while... they snip off the occasional Daylily stem and just leave the flower on the ground. At least, I think it's rabbits... it could also be squirrels or shrews... all in all, though, we haven't been bothered by animals eating the flower gardens... and the veggie beds are behind a fence, so nothing eats anything there... I believe it to be the dogs' scent and the barn cats that keeps everything away.

I use an Elan II, have done for many years. I use a 28-200 lens for my "normal" lens and a 90 mm/f2.8 macro 1:1 for close-ups (my favorite). I got this camera years ago when I finally abused my ancient FTb one too many times - I mean, the thing was practically round from being dropped so often.

The 28-200 is not a super distance lens, but it does help extend the normal range well enough for me. And it does not distort as much as do longer lenses.

The macro, what can I say - I love the thing. I have always loved close-ups and this one allows me to see things I never otherwise notice or focus on details. When I was considering buying the lens, the shop let me take it for a test run and the christmas cactus close-up below is one of the first shots I got in the greenhouse. I told Bruce he was off the hook for a christmas gift. Funny aside: he argued and argued he did not want to wrap it, he wanted to see more and he did NOT want to wait until christmas.
{{gwi:419986}}

And lookie: this is a close-up of one of my roses, Lagerfeld:
{{gwi:419987}}

I have intended to switch to digital for years now - even bought one and returned it when my (former) computer would not take it. Of course the computer blew and had to be replaced as soon as I returned the camera, but I never have bothered again. I really should though - so much simpler really. Any suggestions for digitals? I would like one with a screen that swivels so I can hold the camera at different angles (or above my head) and still see what is in focus, but they do not seem all that common.

Gosh! Those are CLOSE-UPS! Very nice, Wildebloem! You seem to get wonderful results with the camera you have... I don't know that I'd want to mess with what works, and have to learn an entirely new camera! Although, digital is nice.

We've been digital for years... and I really did love the 35mm I used to have... but when you're married to Mr. Technology, you get upgraded at semi-regular intervals! Actually, the camera I use is probably considered old by today's standards... we've had it for about 7 years! It's just a Polaroid PDC 2300, nothing fancy... and I think it takes wonderful photos! The only fixing I do is resizing, cropping, and sharpening every once in a while, in Adobe Photoshop, and I'd do that regardless of the camera, for ease of uploading.

I do like how simple it is to use, and how easy it is to empty the memory card... our printer has a slot, and in just a few seconds, the pictures are in a file on my desktop, ready for whatever I want to do with them.

Since I'm not that up on technology, I wouldn't know which camera to recommend... a friend of ours has the digital version of a Cannon OE1, and he just shot a wedding with professional results... Larry says, that if you don't want to spend a lot, a Polaroid is probably the way to go... otherwise, take a look at the new Cannons.

Thanks for the suggestion, will give that a try.

One of the reasons I haven't been to eager to switch over is that I like having the pictures printed for me. I now get CDs with the prints, so I can just transfer what I want to the computer. I do not really try to manipulate the pictures, but I can see where that could be lots of fun. I found I am allergic to darkroom chemicals, so I can no longer do the work myself, but when I did, it really was exciting.

I am not afraid of learning something new, but I AM rather impatient. When I bought the first computer, I really only wanted a word processor. They were about the same price though, and of course everyone I asked suggested I "get with the program", so I gave in. I bought a computer, but did not even know how to turn it on, so I bought one of those books that shows everything in screens to learn to use it and gave myself two weeks to accomplish that. I figured Europeans should be used to new and foreign languages, so it should not be too much of an obstacle. It worked. I should be able to do the same with a digital camera. I think...

I am not one who likes reading manuals, and since technology advances so quickly, I just ask Larry how to use the things I need to use... I still have no idea how to make my cell phone or ipod do all the things they can do! I just answer the cell phone when it rings, and listen to whatever music my son puts in my ipod! LOL!

When computer technology was young, I was on top of it all... I even used to build websites and do all that... but it all moves at such a fast pace, and what was new yesterday is old by tomorrow! I've gotten so behind in learning about it all!

I never learned to develop my own film, but I think that would be exciting... to manually manipulate photos into artwork! I will say that digital images can be changed and manipulated in any way you could imagine, as long as you have a decent program... Adobe Photoshop is probably the best, although a lot of artists used to prefer CorelDraw... I prefer Photoshop because it's easy to use, and everything is fairly self-explanatory. Plus, you can get add-ons and filters that really do some cool things!

Also, you can buy photo paper and glossy, fancy stuff to print out your digital images, if you like... so you're not limited at all! And with programs like Microsoft Publisher and others, you can create all sorts of photographic items, like iron-ons for shirts, cards, labels, banners... you name it!

It all depends on what you're willing to spend for a decent camera, what extras you need, and what you're planning to do with it all! Me, I just like snapping pictures of my gardens and flowers, my dogs, and my grandbabies! It wouldn't be worth it to me to spend a lot on a camera that I'd never learn all the functions on! LOL!

I am with you: I mostly just like taking the pictures.

As for cameras: I once watched photographer Francesco Scavullo discuss his work. Someone mentioned that with his cameras, it would be easy to do well. So he used a plain old Polaroid to produce a great shot. That taught me a lot about cameras.

I don't think you necessarily need an expensive camera to get the best shots... I think that if you have an eye for what makes a good composition, or subject matter... and if you know a little about what lighting is best to capture your subject matter in... I think you can get professional results with a cheap camera!

Just because a person spends a small fortune on camera equipment, that doesn't make him or her a professional photographer! I used to get some pretty nice shots with an old Kodak 110 I used to have!

Some of my favorite photos have been black and white images I got using a 35mm... I can't remember what kind of camera it was, but it took wonderful shots without all the fancy lenses, flashes and other gizmos!

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, so what is art to some may not be anything special to someone else... unless you make your living taking photographs, I can't see spending an exorbitant amount on a digital camera!