hi folks, I hope I'm not sticking my foot into a bear trap here but there really is some basis to NOT planting a whole lot of butterfly bushes. First let me say a few things. I have a BF bush, I took cuttings last year and hope to have a few more this year... also I have seen them reseed here in PA but only a few and only when the seeds fell on bare ground (even though on a trip to WA/OR I saw them growing thick along the highways as a weed). So I guess I feel safe growing them here and will most likely always have a few in my garden (and I deadhead for more blooms, not because I'm worried about the seeds). I think the point for not growing too many is based on something that I would guess almost everyone on this forum already knows. When you grow BF bushes you are attracting them to your yard but you are not really giving them a home. In order to give them a home they need host plants to lay their eggs on. Here's something from "Bringing Wildlife Home" by Dr. Tallamy from the U of Delaware: "...not one species of butterfly in N. America can use buddleias as larval host plants. To have butterflies, we need to make butterflies.... Instead of building a butterfly garden with aliens (plants) that will make no new butterflies, use native species that serve as hosts for butterfly larvae as well as a supply of nectar for adults." He also goes on to recommend buttonbush, "butterflies fight to gain access to its nectar, and it serves as a host plant for 18 species of Lepidoptera in my neck of the woods" (Eastern Pa I think) So I guess I'm planting BF bush in order to SEE more butterflies..... I'm planting milkweed and violets and wild cherry so that there will BE more butterflies..... and I think I want to add a buttonbush.

Hi all - thanks again for the great feedback. For ventilation, we are going with a Best 54" hood and 1100 or 1500 (I forget which) remote in-line blower with silencer... I saw that mentioned somewhere, read up, and was convinced. I also saw a gunked up VAH, and was totally turned off forever. As an update, we've decided on Miele dishwashers, I think the Futura Dimension (I think the plus only adds more quiet...which I won't notice). Dissenters welcome. For the fridge, I don't think we can swing a SZ now, and the Liebherr is, indeed, way too tall for comfort. I think we are going to go with a Samsung with the dual evap. Can't find a good, large FD model with inside water, but we're working on it. Seems you need to downgrade cubic ft. Our final major issue is this: Wolf vs. DCS (I really can't seem to find the benefits of Wolf other than "reliability and history", variable simmer, and no yellowing problem with the top). We are really torn. Everyone who doesn't sell DCS says they're crap. Everyone who does says they're awesome, but that Wolf is better...because they also sell Wolf? Also, dual fuel vs. all gas. We are definitely getting an additional wall oven, and I can't decide if it is nicer to have the option of two types, or to stick to one type and brand?) for consistency with large, multi-oven batches. What I really can't figure out is how much more inconsistent baking will be in an AG Wolf or DCS oven (ie. 3 sheets at once, without tons of turning). Obviously, AG saves quite a chunk of change, and then we could really get any wall oven...considering the KA convection with micro over it, honestly, to not only save money, but to have a reliable, and just fine oven that will still be leagues better than anything we've ever had in an apartment. Then, we can always replace with something fancier down the line. We just really don't want to skimp on the range at this point. I am open to KA slams, if anyone feels we absolutely must stick with a Wolf or DCS oven for some reason or another (the price difference isn't entirely prohibitive, and we can work it out if anyone thinks that quality and/or features are worth it). So to sum up, we really can't decide on gas vs. electric ovens, and DCS vs. Wolf. I think my wife may throw out my computer if I don't stop reading on it soon!

My car's job is to get me from here to there, and back, without a lot of hassle: as long as it does that, it stays. Plus ... without it costing an arm and a leg to do it: I have other important places to use my money. For those of you who like the small ones and have a yearning for a bit sporty and with some get-up-and-go ... ... have you considered Mazda? They have had some performance qualifications, and, lacking the rep of the Hondas, Toyotas, etc., can often be obtained ("used", that is) for a much lower price for the same level of car. Mine is over a quarter my age ... and I'm no spring chicken: it's 24, has cost me some money, lately, and may be about to cost me some more, so I'm wondering how much longer that it may go, with something over 180,000 mi. on its odometer. I'd like to get a standard tranny, as, being scarce and undesirable, they're cheaper - and use something like 6 - 10% less gas than automatics (which is a concern, not only for scarcity of the resource and pocketbook, but environmental reasons). Plus, unless someone is ready to crawl up my tailpipe, I not only shut off the engine and coast to signal lights that just turned yellow ... but am inclined to do it when travelling downhill, as well. As some of you know ... over seven years ago when I was travelling in my little Dodge "Colt" out from my townhouse in town to sleep in uncle's house prior to its sale after his death, to make the place look lived-in, often it was late at night and the road untravelled ... and I found that I could coast for over 16 of the 20 km. going out there (but the return journey was usually during the day, with more traffic, and coasting was much reduced). After the Mazda got hit enough to crookedify a wheel a few years ago, not too long after I got it ... I spent more to repair it than I'd paid ... but it takes a lot of resources to dig ore, smelt and manufacture a new vehicle, along with the petroleum-sourced plastic that they put into them ... ... and repairing requires few scarce resources and fuel/energy, is mostly work-related. ole joyful

Until recently, we drove older vehicles. I had a 95 Chrysler Cirrus (bought in 95) and a 02 Mitsubishi Eclipse Spyder (bought in 05). The Chrysler had 107,000 miles on it when sold to 16 year old as her first car. I traded the Spyder in for a 14 Chrysler 300C. Hubby drove his 99 van until the frame rusted out and we replaced with a 12 Ram 1500 PU. My family has always driven older cars. My brother has my dad's 96 Chrysler Sebring convertible and recently ventured into the 2000s by picking up a 03 Jeep Liberty. He drives multiple cars every day (utility purposes), switching between a work van, his personal 00 Dodge van and a 73 Plymouth Gran Fury. He's got a bout 7 cars (never less; you'd understand if you knew our family). My all time favorite car to drive is now in a museum. A 27 Dodge Cabriolet that was in the family for 30+ years. I loved driving it. The heavy duty truck transmission requiring double clutching, the "grabber" brakes that required an oh so gentle touch on the pedal. I miss that car.....Here's a picture of the car being loaded up to take to the museum. The guy's head that you see is the guy who's in charge of the car. We've kept in touch and they haven't modified the car at all. Still looks like this and is driven very frequently. I've been fortunate to have driven cars from every decade starting with the 1920s and I've enjoyed the heck out of each one.