Re: Test Gardens
- To: Multiple recipients of list <i*@rt66.com>
- Subject: Re: Test Gardens
- From: "* a* C* W* <c*@cache.net>
- Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 18:58:09 -0700 (MST)
Elena Laborde writes (26 Jan 97):
> I agree 100%. We could develop a form of some king (kind) with all the
details we
> want recorded, besides the obvious ones: increases, blooms, rot, etc.
> We keep records anyway, we just have to make them more complete.
> What does everybody else think?
>
> Elena Laborde in Santa Cruz, with FAUX PAS and TWICE DELIGHTFULL in
bloom.
Let me say first, that I don't imagine any of us believes that iris in the
garden are like white mice in a laboratory, who only exist to be poked,
prodded, measured and weighed. We grow iris mainly, perhaps solely, for
esthetic reasons, and Beauty is and shall long remain in the eye of the
beholder. I cannot collect objective data that will determine whether
VANITY or BEVERLY SILLS is the more beautiful iris; I can assure you that
for vigor, increase, floriferousness, and growing to registration height,
VANITY beats daughter BEV hands down in this locale.
Secondly, collecting observations on iris takes time, and just at the very
season when that commodity is in shortest supply among irisarians. If
anyone is going to make the effort, it has to be worthwhile, i.e., the data
gathered has to be meaningful and useful to the person who collects it.The
question then becomes, what sort of
information is useful? One person cannot provide an answer that is good for
all, but let me suggest that among the observations that I have found
useful over the years are (for each cultivar): date planted(replanted),
date of 1st bloom, date of last bloom, height of stalk, number of stalks
per clump, and medical history.
What does anyone else think?
Jeff Walters in Winter Wonderland with FAUX PAS Botrytis meat if it takes a
false step, and Twice Delightful nowhere in sight!
Jeff Walters in northern Utah (Zone 4)
cwalters@cache.net
"This is the Place" - Utah Pioneer Sesquicentennial: 1847-1997
