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: Disgusted

  • Subject: Re: Disgusted
  • From: "Gerry/Bob O'Neill" <eoneill@attglobal.net>
  • Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 08:25:09 -0400

 Doesn't the official registration system allow you to "reserve" names in advance (with a finite reservation period)?

Or maybe the answer to your particular problem is to follow Mary's example and call your introductions "Bridgewood's Whatever"


At 10:51 AM 5/15/01, you wrote:

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.


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.

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