While the Australian Architecture profession has relatively quickly incorporated and accepted Building information modelling (BIM) as part of its normal work flow and practises, the Australian landscape architecture profession has been less than accepting of BIM it as a management model. This problem is exacerbated within the Australian Landscape Architecture profession, where very little discourse has occurred. While it is little easy to quantify the extent individual Australian Landscape Architectural firms have adopted BIM, little debate has occurred and the absence of BIM discourse on the AILA web sites, forums publications, etc., suggests it’s lack of acceptance. Thus, why is BIM little discussed and debated amongst Australian Landscape Architecture profession? Secondly, why has BIM being little adopted as a management method, as part of the Australian Landscape Architecture business practice? Barth (2016), in North America, has recently highlighted many reasons why Landscape Architects feel frustrated with BIM. One key frustrations is the bias of the software industry that caters for the needs of Architects more Landscape Architects. This paper will discuss and argue that an incremental approach, without a coherent and strategic direction, potentially results in lost opportunities to develop a strong, robust and healthy BIM-accepted paradigm, in the Australian Landscape Architecture industry. The key to BIM’s acceptance is its adoption by AILA members and practices, learning from colleagues in the UK and North America, and tertiary education of its prospective members, taking them on the road to a BIM-based profession. The paper concludes suggesting an opportunity to extend BIM beyond the commercial benefit to Landscape Architect professionals, to be an environmental management tool that could add to Australia’s ability to environmentally manage and address Climate Change.