Re: CULT:More on those 450 rotters



On 21 May 01, at 7:43, Iris Moose wrote:

> I posted a week ago the 450 known rotters that were mentioned in the
> January 2001 Iris Society Bulletin.  That message is copied at the bottom
> of this letter if you missed it the first time.

  Did you publish the list of 450 rotters?  I did not see it.  If this came as 
an attachment, it was stripped off.  One rule of iris-talk is that no 
attachments are permitted.  The 450 known rotters are not listed in 
the Bulletin and wisely so.  Is there a separate list floating 
around?

> There was quite a range of responses.


   Here is mine.

   I believe the following excerpt from your message is apt.

> When someone posted publicly via this email forum their response was calm
> and basically saying that different growing conditions and climates
> produce different effects --  basically no problem.
> 
  If you have a mind-set to make a rhizome rot, you can make it do so.  Violate
all rules of good iris culture, and your wish will come true.  If 
this is a test with control and experimental groups, let's hear what 
happened to the same cultivars that were treated properly with 
moderate elevation and good culture.

I did not see the list of 450 rotters and don't care to.  To 
publicize such as list is not prudent and is as bad as the infamous
black list of years ago. (Some on that list proved the author(s) 
wrong).  It is also a disservice to the public and the hybridizers 
whose irises may appear on the list.  No hybridizer deliberately
introduces a rot-prone iris, and irises are no more rot-prone today 
than they were years ago.  To publish such a list stigmatizes all 
irises and not just the ones on the list.

I live in one of the rainiest, most humid climates for growing irises 
and have very little rot.  I attribute this to good culture.



> Since The Bulletin is the publication of the Iris Society and gets wide
> distribution, I was surprised that the Spoon's statement was incorporated
> so matter-of-factly in the article.  Is rot something that is simply
> accepted by growers and hybridizers as not being a real problem?  

   This is the Spoon's opinion and not necessarily that of the 
Bulletin editors, growers or hybridizers. Nor mine or those you got 
feedback from already.  

   Walter Moores
   Enid Lake, MS USA 7/8

   

 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index