- Subject: Re: [iris-photos] Re:SPECIES-X
- From: Robt R Pries <email@example.com>
- Date: Sun, 23 May 2004 16:57:19 -0700 (PDT)
If we had a micellaneous median class or a Tall bearded Novelty class i would be all for it. If anything we need more classifications. Reducing the number of classifications would be very destructive to the Iris Society. I have had these arguments before with people that could see nothing else but tall-bearded Irises. One of the stupid arguments they use is the only real concern should be the Tall bearded Iris because they are the most important economically. It shows their stupidity because the most economically important group of Irises are the Dutch Bulbous Iris. Tall-bearded are not even a close second. The rule that people should apply is how do we create the most diversity in Iris interests and how can each group help maintain the others so that we can attract the most number of people into the genus. The more we concentrate efforts on a particular group the less interesting the society becomes to the majority of
gardeners.Vicki Craig <firstname.lastname@example.org>
I personally think the term SPECIES X is being misused. I think it
quite apropriate when one parent is a species. i.e. I. aphylla, I.
croatica, I. pumilla. etc. With iris 2 generations or more removed
from an actual species, I do not think the Species X term is applicable.
I think the term SPECIES X is a great classification for any first
generation crosses with different species.
Also it is my understanding there are Irisarians who want to eliminate
all the classes outside of TB's and want to lump them into one class
known as Medians. This would no doubt fragment the membership in the
AIS. It is possible the AIS would loose several hundred members if
they do eliminate these classes. It would do away with SDB, IB, MTB
and BB classifications.
|Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
Yahoo! Groups Links
Other Mailing lists |
Author Index |
Date Index |
Subject Index |