RE: Perennial plant of the year 2001

Okay, I guess I'll put in my cents worth too.

I thought the main point of their selection was NOT that it was unusual, but
that it was mostly hardy, easy to grow, floriferous, did well in most
climates, not persnickety (sp?)  -- an outstanding plant in those respects.


From that standpoint I can understand most of their choices.

Perhaps their should be a SEPARATE award for the "new, unusual, exciting"
discoveries?  That makes the most sense to me.  Have an award for a
"stalwart" in the garden is not a bad idea at all, but having one for the
"new" releases is a good idea too.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: James & Donna Davis [d*@intop.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2000 8:27 PM
> To: perennials@mallorn.com
> Subject: Re: Perennial plant of the year 2001
> 
> 
> Dean
> 
> I have the same thought.  when I saw the picture of the Rudbeckia
> "Goldstrum" .....I kept looking for something outstanding,   something
> that only I couldn't see.   I was beginning to think I might 
> be odd ball
> out.   good to know that I don't stand alone,
> that's  not to say it's not nice,  but not outstanding.
> 
> Donna in   NE Mississippi   zone 7
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@mallorn.com with the
> message text UNSUBSCRIBE PERENNIALS
> 






NOTICE:  This communication may contain privileged or other confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient or believe that you may have received this communication in error,  please reply to the sender indicating that fact and delete the copy you received.  In addition, you should not print, copy,  retransmit, disseminate, or otherwise use the information.       Thank you.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@mallorn.com with the
message text UNSUBSCRIBE PERENNIALS
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index