Licensed Hybridizers

Granted, the problem is real.  Too many introductions to readily evaluate, so
much competition that it's hard for introductions of a new hybridizer to get
much attention. 

Licensing, however, is not a realistic solution. It does not take system
response time into account.  (I _am_ allowed to throw in a little computerese,
here, am I not?)

First -- remember that it takes about 10 years to get that first introduction
and about 20 to become "established".  Hybridizers whose introductions span
decades are the exception, not the rule.

Now  -- imagine that we wave a magic wand and suddenly have licensing.  Today's
active hybridizers would undoubtedly be "grandfathered" into the system.
Because the primary effect would simply be to cut down on the number of
newcomers, we wouldn't notice much change for quite a while

Next -- jump ahead 10 years.   I see fewer hybridizers, fewer introductions --
it would seem to be working.

Finally  --  look ahead 20 years.  Most of the "grandfathered" senior
hybridizers are now gone.  Few new ones have entered the system.  I see
consistency attained at the expense of diversity, breakthroughs discarded as
nonconforming.  And a new, pressing problem:  what can we do to get people
interested in hybridizing again?

Sharon McAllister (who gave up TB hybridizing in favor of ABs some 15 years ago)
Southern New Mexico
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index