Re: HYB.Breeding for Older Form and the Market
- To: Multiple recipients of list <i*@rt66.com>
- Subject: Re: HYB.Breeding for Older Form and the Market
- From: "* S* C* <b*@mnsinc.com>
- Date: Wed, 25 Mar 1998 18:35:54 -0700 (MST)
Well Ryan says:
I think that credo is correct, and that the newer varieties far
outweigh the older varieties by virtue of their better form, color,
substance, etc. etc. It is alright to grow them for a historical
standpoint, but to give them a good award or to breed them is to evolve
backward and destroy what the hybridizers have worked so hard and tediously
for. They have had their day.
Ryan
I know you are thinking I would make a good politician...
>Walta said:
>
><< One in particular a number of people want is the removal of the statement
>that for the best specimen the nod should be given to a newer variety, thus
>ruling out an historic as 'best of show.'
>
>Good grief, I would hope so!
>
>I would abhor to see some modern cultivar get an edge over another splendidly
>shown specimen purely because it was more recent. This is the presumption of
>"new is progress" operating at its absolute worst. Why, when I think about
>Copper Lustre or Beotie or Great Lakes or Henry Shaw or One Desire or Pewee or
>any of many magnificent older irises...... well.... the mind reels....
>
>Anner Whitehead, staggering off to her fainting couch in Richmond Virginia
--------------------------------------------------------------
Ryan Carter
Five beds of irises, one hundred varieties
Half and half medians and TB's.
Winchester, VA
birddog@mnsinc.com
Youth Chairman of C & P Iris Society
AIS, DIS, CPIS
Visit my MDB homepage at http://www.geocities.com/~dwarfiris
Visit my Tree Frog homepage at http://www.geocities.com/RainForest/Vines/6617/
