Re: New Rules
Jim Hawes questions with short answers; detailed answers with examples follow!
Q. Are the new rules firm and fast?
A. Yes, but only to the extent I, or the other proof-readers don't make a
mistake and I know I am not perfect (and I acknowledge below I already have
accidently missed one in the last issue).
Q. Will only photos of registered hostas be used?
A. No, we will publish high quality photos of unregistered hostas but they
will be captioned as "seedling of X and Y" or "sport of X"
Q. Will future articles be edited or re-written to eliminate references to
unregistered hostas? If Alex, for example, mentions an unregistered hosta in
"Notes from Honeysong Farm", how will you handle this?
A. Interestingly enough this is where I slipped in the past and one went
through without being relabeled. I was accused of favoring Alex as he is a
friend. I did not favor Alex, I and 3 other proof-readers missed it. We
should have, under the policy said it was a "seedling of X and Y" or "sport
Q. I want to know the particulars of the new rules and how firmly they will
A. Other than my making mistakes, I intend to carryout all policies passed by
the Board. There will be several others discussed in my Editor's Message in
the next issue of the Journal as noted below.
Let me use the experience of the last two issues of the Hosta Journal to
provide more detailed answers to the questions posited by Mr. Hawes.
First photographs, under the IAC we have only had one instance, thus far,
where a photo caption was effected. The caption was written as "the hosta is
a seedling of x by y". X and Y were registered names which, I can not
remember at this writing but I can look up. This also came up in this issue
with regard to some black and white photos, the purpose of the photos was to
show the use of BAP paste and the name of the hosta did not effect the impact
of the photo or the purpose of the caption.
Also in the next issue there are two pages of introductions that are in the
process of being registered, but therefore can be shown with their name,
likewise, (not unlike Chick's proposal to the robins on introduction photos)
these two color pages of new introductions were paid for, therefore not in
violation of the new introduction moratorium policy passed in June and
discussed in the next issue of the Journal. (I repeat it below for all of
you so you don't have to send another message asking what I am talking about.)
We have also tied this type of identification to a garden number, which was
contained in double quotes. The seedling winner in Indianapolis is an
example of this. I must I took this idea from the daylily world where some
hybridizers will put the seedling number after the registered name in their
catalogues as many hemeromaniacs (like myself) photo seedlings we like and
wait for their introduction. This "tie-in" allows us to say this is the
"Smith" cultivar we want to buy!
Regarding mention in articles, under the ICNCP mention of a cultivar name
that accompanies a description of the plant would constitute establishment of
that name without the benefit of registration. I believe that I missed at
least one in the last issue that should have been listed under the identifier
"seedling of X and Y". So in answering your question regarding rewriting
articles, it will be only in so far as to saying "seedling of X and Y".
There were one or two others that have been registered, or are in the process
of being registered in this issue, but it has not been a significant problem.
Further, I have been discussing the new registrations with David S., as they
are now published in both issues of the Journal. When I took over the job
from Clyde we were getting about 100 (+/- 10) new registration per year. So
many people are registering hostas this year that we have an interesting new
decision to make. David has 120 or so registrations already done and ready
to go for the Fall issue, but he has received another 300+ registrations (and
he had calls about 40-50 others that were likely to be received by year end)
while getting ready for this issue. Thus, for the year 1999 there will be
between 400 and 500 new registrations!
It is my understanding that a substantial number of these are IAC, and
therefore, the potential for an IAC driven captioning, or rewriting is
Photo selection will not be effected by the IAC. I would like to note that
in choosing photos for articles, or for separate color publication the first
consideration is the quality of the photo. In fact, the principal reason for
the new policy mentioned below regarding the moratorium is that the same
hybridizer kept getting most of her introductions shown in the Journal
because of photo quality. Other hybridizers were complaining, but, forgive
me, their photos "sucked". The second criteria is: does it accent,
complement, support, or improve an article contained in the Journal. IAC
status does not drive a photo's selection, in fact many IAC listed plants
have also been published with photos in the Journal during the past couple of
In reviewing the item below, please note there is flexibility provided. (And
I believe was directly suggested as possibilities by Chick during on-line
Photographs of new registrations shall only be published should the hosta in
the photograph be an award winner, contained in an article written by a
member of the AHS or featured in a paid advertisement.
If introducers wish to run a paid advertisement, they will be charged the
standard advertising rate for that size. Editorial (non-paid) photos of
award-winning new introductions and photo contest winners will be sized at
the discretion of the editor. A one-year moratorium shall apply to all
photographs of new introductions.
To sign-off this list, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org with the
message text UNSUBSCRIBE HOSTA-OPEN