Landscape Management Plans (LMPs) are increasingly recognized as valuable tools for guiding the stewardship of public gardens, yet little research has examined how these plans are understood and used in practice. Existing literature often focuses on historic landscapes, municipalities, or generalized planning frameworks and assumes formalized systems, adequate staffing, and consistent organizational capacity. This study explores how horticultural professionals within public gardens conceptualize and implement LMPs in the context of real-world constraints. Using a qualitative approach, semi-structured interviews were conducted with seven horticultural professionals working in public gardens, arboreta, and museum landscapes across the northeastern and southeastern United States and the Midwest. Findings indicate that there is no shared definition of a LMP and that gardens use a wide range of formal and informal planning systems, including spreadsheets, notes, seasonal calendars, and shared digital files. Despite this variation, several common themes emerged, including the importance of design intent, seasonal task organization, critical site-specific knowledge, documentation of past actions, and clearly defined processes for updating and using plans. The study also identified tensions regarding the appropriate level of detail, the role of standard operating procedures and archival materials, and the need to balance comprehensiveness with usability. In response, this paper proposes a scalable framework for the development, organization, and evaluation of LMPs. Ultimately, to be effective, LMPs are best if they are not rigid or exhaustive documents, but flexible, modular systems that help public gardens translate long-term vision into everyday landscape care.