Re: AIS: REF: AIS as International Registration Authority

Anner,

My use of the word "assigned" was used by me with no ulterior thoughts, rather, it was simply used to convey my message. I guess if you really want to see the verbatim wording from the ICNCP then here it goes ( I used "assigned" where they use "appointed").

<<< DIVISION IV: REGISTRATION OF NAMES (page 49)

2. An International Cultivar Registration Authority is an organization appointed by the ISHS Commission for Nomenclature and Cultivar Registration to be charged with the registration of cultivar and Group names as provided for in this Code and with ensuring their establishment when this is necessary.

5. The registrar is the person appointed by an International Cultivar Registration Authority to carry out the duties of registration. >>>

Anner, if I understand your position in regards to any type of "appeal process" regarding registrations you feel this is totally unnecessary. If I am asked for my personal thoughts regarding this then I must say that I am only aware of one person that is perfect in all ways, and I believe most people should know who He is. I guess I was simply assuming that an appeal process would be a part of the total registration process just as completing a registration form is part of the process for the registrant, and that a review of the proposed name is part of the process for the registrar. I have not read anything regarding appeals with iris registrations and was curious if any policy exists. Given the two definitions above, who would you say has the higher responsibility and accountability (not duties) of the registration process? Is it the AIS because it is the assigned ICRA, or do feel it is the registrar?

Robert wrote: "It is my understanding that a registrar may make additional rules for their particular group as long as they don't violate the established rules of the international code."

Personally, this sound reasonable to me. However, if anyone is remotely interested what the ICNCP says in regard to this then here it is:

<<< DIVISION VI: MODIFICATION OF THIS CODE (page 52)

This Code may only be modified by action of the IUBS Commission for the Nomenclature of Cultivated Plants. In the event of this Commission no longer being extant, an alternative body shall be appointed by IUBS. >>>

This may be one of those grey areas. For example I do not believe that there is any mention of a registration fee in the ICNCP rules (I really have not even looked for one) but I am aware that some ICRA's do not charge a fee, others charge $5, others charge $15, some even have name reservations for a fee prior to actual registration. A nominal fee seems appropriate to me for several reasons. However, if the registration fee for an iris were $200 per cultivar, then I would see this as unreasonable and think that the ISHS would take action in this instance.

Prior to the release of the new ICNCP this year, there was no rule regarding names that could be considered offensive. The ISHS told an ICRA that they had to register a name that was considered offensive to many people. The ICRA was not able to create their own rule to keep this name from being registered. So that name was approved several years ago. If a similarly offensive name were applied for today, then it could be rejected under the new ICNCP guidelines.

If an iris hybridizer wished to have a non-offensive 5 word cultivar name that met the 30 character rule outlined in the ICNCP, then perhaps the ISHS would overrule name rejection from AIS's rule of limiting names to 4 words. Perhaps the ISHS would agree with the AIS's rule. The hybridizer can appeal directly and immediately to the ISHS if AIS does not have an internal appeal process. Generally, an appeal to the ISHS would be the last resort. It might be interesting to see an iris hybridizer challenge the 4 word rule. I am not an iris hybridizer so do not look to me to challenge it. However, I do enjoy discussing these situations.

One of the new ICNCP rules that I have not yet figured out is in regard to "coded" names. Here is the new rule that I am referring to:

<<< * Article 19: Names Of Cultivars

-19.7: A cultivar epithet may also be in the form of a code of up to 10 characters excluding spaces and that consists of no more than four alternating sets of a letter or letters and a number or numbers.

* Ex. 45: Names with the epithets '12AB34CD', '123-ABCD4', '123/ABCD4', AND '1231BCD456 may be established, but names with the epithets '12-AB 34 CD 1', AND 1AB/33' may not be established. >>>

I sure hope that hybridizers do not take "advantage" of this rule. Can you imagine if we had talk about the similarities and differences between three iris cultivars named 12AB34CD, 12AB3456, and 12ABCD34.

Bobby Baxter
Happy Moose Gardens
http://happymoosegardens.com



----- Original Message ----- From: <ChatOWhitehall@aol.com>
To: <iris@hort.net>
Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 12:03 PM
Subject: [iris] AIS: REF: AIS as International Registration Authority


In a message dated 12/6/04 10:42:19 AM Eastern Standard Time,
irismoose@daylily.net writes:

<<  How this relates to irises is that the American Iris Society (AIS) is
assigned
as the ICRA for irises by the ISHS. >>

*Assigned* is a odd word to hear here. Rather smacks of the boot on the
throat. Or are you using the word subtly in the pure legal sense, so that the
mechanism you are describing is a trickle down of *authority*, hierarchy-wise, as
it 'twere?

In any case, as I understand it AIS was *requested* to assume these important
international duties because of AIS' very long and distinguished history of
sorting out muddled nomenclature of the genus Iris, publication of Check Lists,
and establishment of formal registration procedures, all of which activity
dates from the very earliest days of the Society. The first AIS Check List was
Bulletin 4, dated January, 1922. The formalization of the role as you are
describing it came in 1955 when broad changes were effected in the international
system itself, but there was little question that AIS would handle the garden
Irises. I believe there is material in the Archives about all this. It has
certainly come up from time to time.

<<The Iris Society then assigns the Registrar, in this case, it is Mike
Lowe. In fact, Mike Lowe is listed in the new ICNCP book as the Registrar for
irises through the AIS.>>

Well, the Society then *requested* Mike Lowe undertake the onerous task of
Registrar, and Lowe--having failed to talk me into taking the job-- relieved
Keppel of the baton, and so it has gone for decades. I think we do need to
remember here that we are talking only of the non-bulbous Irises----new bulbous
cultivars are handled by the Dutch Bulb Growers Association---and remember, too,
that establishing a new Iris species is a different and more elaborate kettle
of fish altogether, one which follows the rules and formal procedures of
botanical science.

Here is a fun page for those who want to know more about IRAs. It is
interesting to see who is keeping up with one genus and another.

<http://www.ishs.org/icra/>

<< Does anyone know if the AIS has an established appeal process for the
registration of an iris cultivar? Is there a registration review committee
that handles appeals? >>

It is not impossible, I suppose, although I have never heard of such a thing
and I doubt there is any such standing committee. Why would it be needed when
the Code is perfectly clear and those selected as AIS Registrar are invariably
smart and reasonable and there is all that fine assigned authority for Lowe
to stand on? Surely the problems that arise are few. Are there so many
ambiguous situations in other genera that a court of appeals must be established to
sort out heated and icky muddles? But when did any committee ever sort out
anything....my word, the exciting new stuff you learn on this list!

BTW, I am changing the subject line. It seems to me that because Irises *are*
the topic of this mailing list, nothing concerning Irises is really Off Topic.

Cordially,

Anner Whitehead
Richmond VA USA
"There is yet among the Irises quite a confusion in names, some kinds having
three or four. Then again there are two Josephines and three Sapphos, and it
will take some time to get the kinks out of the tangle."
The Rev. C. S. Harrison, York NE, (1832-1919)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@hort.net with the
message text UNSUBSCRIBE IRIS


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@hort.net with the
message text UNSUBSCRIBE IRIS

Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index