Re: Re: New USDA Zone Map

Well, Daryl, if that isn't the largest pile of drivel I've read in an
age, disguised as a rationale for changing what was one of the more
useful aspects of the old map.  PR-speak; governmentease; blather.  I
think you're right, "somebody" does want to see his name in print:-) 


Thanks for posting it; I had not been to the AHS site to find it.

Marge Talt, zone 7 Maryland
mtalt@hort.net
Editor:  Gardening in Shade
-----------------------------------------------
Current Article: Wild, Wonderful Aroids Part 5 - Pinellia
http://www.suite101.com/welcome.cfm/shade_gardening
------------------------------------------------
Complete Index of Articles by Category and Date
http://mtalt.hort.net/article-index.html
------------------------------------------------
All Suite101.com garden topics :
http://www.suite101.com/topics.cfm/635

----------
> From: Daryl <pulis@mindspring.com>
> 
> > It is a pity that the new map is based on less data and has
removed
> > the a/b designations.  Wonder just what the rationale is behind
this?
> >  Or is there any?
> 
> Marge,
> 
> To quote from the AHS website:
> "The "a" and "b" intra-zone divisions used on the 1990 map have
been
> dropped, so each zone is broader and easier to follow as your eye
moves
> westward and the mountains make climatic gradients more complex.
West of the
> Rocky Mountains, more discrete, rounded divisions have replaced the
crazy
> tangle of zones that marked the 1990 map. "
> 
> Now how that benefits any of the rest of us, I don't know.
> Personally, I think it's just somebody wanting to get his name in
print
> again.
> 
> Daryl

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@hort.net with the
message text UNSUBSCRIBE GARDENCHAT
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index