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
Gallery of Plants
Tech Blog
Plant Profiles
Mailing Lists
    Search ALL lists
    Search help
    Subscription info
Top Stories
sHORTurl service
Tom Clothier's Archive
 Top Stories
New Trillium species discovered

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

RSS story archive

Re: JI Symposium - Stop burning the red-heads.

  • To: Multiple recipients of list <iris-l@rt66.com>
  • Subject: Re: JI Symposium - Stop burning the red-heads.
  • From: IKern@aol.com
  • Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 23:32:50 -0600 (MDT)

In a message dated 97-10-18 01:41:22 EDT, you write:
 BUT... to the matter at hand.   Judging.  The system
 >lacked intellectual structure and that there were few standards by which
 >to judge a flower.  
 I disagree that the judging system lacks intellectual structure.  If you
 the judges manual you can see that there is very definate structure to
 judging an iris.... but I think what John Coble was trying to express is
 by it's very nature, this can't be an exact science... but somewhere between
 science and art.  On the show bench, it's cut and dried..  Not rocket
science at all.  You have a standard against which to judge the plant.
 Remember, you're not judging the plant for appeal, but how it matches the
standard set by the plant itself.  In SEEDLINGS is where the question of the
plant's worthiness is judged  
 The equivalent of a petal tear on the show bench.
PEOPLE, PEOPLE, PEOPLE, we are growing flowers here!   Pleasing to the eye,
hand and nose.  Are we doing this JUST to win a couple of ribbons?  Or for
the simple pleasure of walking to, gazing upon and working in our flowers?
 For me, watching my dormant gardens, soon to be burried in snow, is the omen
of new growth to come.  The first green peeking out from the melting white.

 a regular and pleasing bloom, branching and clean, upright foliage. 
 > If that flower is
 >perfect in every way except that it does not have the colour or colour
 >pattern described in the registration, why would it be rejected?
 The reason is simple... because in order to HAVE a standard for a plant,
 there is a registration process.  So, if a plant is registered as white with
 purple speckling... and it throws a sport that is pure purple... well, then
 that's a sport and not the plant as registered!  To accept any less would be
 chaos and would leave the registration process meaningless.  I wonder if the
 sport can be considered in the seedling class. But on the show bench, we
 are judging against a standard - and a sport would not fit the standard.
 >is with the judging or the registration not the flower itself.  Let us
 >accept the facts and change the judging and registration description to
 >be more accurate and scientific. 
 And how would we know which plants are biologically identical (but sports)
 and which are total frauds?  
 I guess, just blind faith and mother nature.  
 So... I hope I explained and I hope I made sense.  I know what I'm trying to
 say, anyway - but whether that comes across is another thing entirely.  What
 I'm REALLY doing is avoiding ironing sheets for the speaker who will be
 staying here tomorrow!
 Kathy, happy ironing.

Iris in Milw.  Snow here soon.

 © 1995-2017 Mallorn Computing, Inc.All Rights Reserved.
Our Privacy Statement
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index