L. pitkinense

Kenneth Hixson khixson@nu-world.com
Tue, 01 Jul 2003 21:48:32 PDT
Hi, Diana
>I stand corrected on L. pardalinum ssp. giganteum - I was going on what the
>USDA said.  They would not let me sell it without a CITES certificate, and
>confiscated an overseas order, insisting it was L. pitkinense. 
	The problem is with the botanists, not the gardeners/nurseryman.  
They have trouble defining just what L. pardalinum is and is not, in a very
variable species.  I sympathise with that, but don't always agree with the
conclusions that their definition forces on other people.  For instance, I
can't 
comprehend how L. wigginsii could be considered a subspecies of L. pardalinum.
	The purpose of a plant name is to identify a specific plant so everyone
understands just which plant is being discussed/offered for sale/being
purchased.
Given the problems with botanists, the solution may be to give cultivar or
clone
names to some of the variants, which aren't under the province of the USDA,
etc.
	L pardalinum "giganteum" was also at one time called the Sunset lily.
I don't know if that would be an acceptable cultivar name, but something
similiar could probably be found.  If growing from seed, a "grex" or strain
name could be used.
	The beaurocracy is supposed to be protecting us from ourselves-and
sometimes the rules they use seem incomprehensible to those being "protected".
	Ken


More information about the pbs mailing list