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
 Navigation
Articles
Gallery of Plants
Blog
Tech Blog
Plant Profiles
Patents
Mailing Lists
    FAQ
    Netiquette
    Search ALL lists
    Search help
    Subscription info
Top Stories
Links
sHORTurl service
Tom Clothier's Archive
 Top Stories
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

Unauthorized use of a plant doesn't invalidate it's patent

RSS story archive

Re: Disgusted


It's not that I disagree with the premise, but people are only doing exactly what the AHS has asked them to do.  I can't agree that you have to wait years and years before letting a plant out of your garden or nursery, whether to sell it, test it, or simply give it away.  And the AHS says that if it gets out of you garden or nursery, it should be registered.  There is a certain logic to that, as it theoretically brings some order to the process.  Unfortunately, hostas sport so easily and are being hybridized so extensively, there is a question as to whether it's practical.  Unfortunately, I don't know how we can have criteria for registration that can solve the problem, since I for one am not in favor of anyone else deciding which of my plants is suitable for registration or introduction.

I'm not necessarily in favor of registering everything, but I can give an expample of the problem I think the AHS is trying to avoid.  I name my hostas after rock and roll songs.  I'm sorry, I just can't help myself.  I have a fairly interesting yellow hosta that I've been growing for many years and have given to a couple of friends to see how it does and whether they think it's worth introducing.  It's fairly large and low growing so I initially named it Yellow Submarine.  Unfortunately, I later found out that Russ O'Hara had an unregistered plant with that name that was already out.  So I called the people who had it and told them to change the name to Mellow Yellow.  Well, Herb Benedict has a plant with that name, so I called them again and told them to call it Afternoon Delight.  Guess what. I'm still looking for a name that hasn't been used. Well, if I hadn't kept track of who had the plant, and if I hadn't told them not to give it to anyone else, it would be out there with three different names, all shared by another plant.  If I had registered the darn thing in the first place, I wouldn't still be looking for a name.

I'm as guilty as anyone, I have a slew of seedlings here that I have named and not registered.  The names are mostly for my use, I'd rather call my newest favorite Mustang Sally than 98401-226, but people see them here, and I may pass a few around, so if I put a name on one, I probably should register it.  I just never get around to it.  Maybe If I Could Put Time in a Bottle...

By the way, if I get around to it, this year's registrations will be Mustang Sally, Little Town Flirt, Maybelline, Jenny Jenny Jenny, Purple Rain, Blue Suade Shoes, and probably a bunch of others I can't think of now.  Don't nobody else even think of using those names.
 
 

Chick 
 

Dan Nelson wrote:

From Mike Groothuis   (bounced for some reason, Dan) I was leafing through the "volume" of this years new registrations and was
completely disgusted. Granted there are many many plants that were worth
introducing and registering, I found there is an increasing number that
should remain in the garden and stay away from any registration form.
"Cordate, rugose, puckered, blue green, leaf 8 by 9, (sieboldiana hybrid) x
(sieboldiana hybrid). Have I seen this one before? Hmmm...I think so.
Another is a 2 year old streaked plant from weak parents. My favorite is
seeing hostas registered, you read through the description only to read the
bottom few lines, "original seedling 1 year old growing, blah-blah-blah."
Sorry folks, but I for one, am afraid for the hosta business if this keeps
up. How will we be able to tell plants apart if there are 57 clones of a
single plant? Worse yet, what if there are 57 clones of 57 other clones all
resembling 57 clones of an original sport from say . . 1982? How many of you
can swear on your LIFE that your 'Elegans' isn't one of the other
sieboldiana clones. Are you willing to bet some money that your 'Christmas
Tree' isn't 'Grand Master'? I personally feel that some people just want to
see their name printed in that registration book for their 10 minutes of
glory. Please understand that I am certainly not pointing my finger in any
particular direction. What ever happened to growing a unique hosta for 5,6,
or 7 years and properly EVALUATING and photographing it periodically to
track it's growth? Reading through this years issue, I see it less and less.
This isn't a race to register your plant first. Actually chances are,
there's already a better plant out there. They're just little plants that we
enjoy growing for the fun and beauty of it. Let's not flood the market with
plants that aren't garden worthy. You can tell me, "Mike's you really can't
talk here. You've NEVER registered anything." Well, that's true, but being
in the graphic design business I've learned one important thing. A third
party on the outside looking in, occasionally can have better views and
opinions than I could ever come up with on my own. That's my two cents.




 © 1995-2015 Mallorn Computing, Inc.All Rights Reserved.
Our Privacy Statement
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index