Submitting plants recently purchased in bloom: ethical or unethical?

[NYEric]

If it grows,

That's what I'm worried aboutoke:

In fact, If I remember correctly, maybe Lien gave a piece of this one to both Blake & Zach?
Did Lien, Blake, or Zach ever enter it?

I don't think so; but didn't Blake sell you his?

 

[kentuckiense]

In fact, If I remember correctly, maybe Lien gave a piece of this one to both Blake & Zach?
Did Lien, Blake, or Zach ever enter it?

If I remember correctly, Lien had a whole batch of sibs that bloomed out fully flavum. Thus, what we all have are sibs and not divisions. I'm hoping mine will bloom in a few months.

 

[Hien]

That's what I'm worried aboutoke:

I don't think so; but didn't Blake sell you his?

Yes, I will try my best. honest.

 

[paphioland]

Again the award is not about earning, it is about the potential of the plants genetics!!!!! If you want to be recognized for that get cultural award!
Again if you want to talk about earning you would have to have collected all parents in bloom from the wild, made all the crosses, grown all the parents from flask, made all subsequent crosses and then get it awarded. This is a community like the scientific community. They are striving for truth and build on the work of those who come before. Most of us are striving for quality and it is more efficient to build upon the work of others.

Great growers do not have all awardable plants. People are greatly overemphasizing culture in awarding. Again I am no super grower but my plants pretty much ALWAYS improve on their second bloom. A larger plant puts up better blooms. Much of culture is financially related too. Greenhouses, heat, ro water are darn expensive! Again many great growers few great hybridizers.

 

[Hien]

If I remember correctly, Lien had a whole batch of sibs that bloomed out fully flavum. Thus, what we all have are sibs and not divisions. I'm hoping mine will bloom in a few months.

Really, I have the assumption that it is only from one plant, since on OL website they all varying so much (and none is yellow)
That is quite something to get a whole batch that turn out yellow.

 

[Candace]

People are greatly overemphasizing culture in awarding.

You've stated the same thing over and over. I'm not overemphasizing. I just believe that culture is at least 50% of a healthy, awardable plants merit . Whereas you strictly believe in genetics. We get it, really.

Much of culture is financially related too. Greenhouses, heat, ro water are darn expensive!

More the reason the grower deserves credit for an award.

 

[Rick Barry]

There is yet one more argument for having an orchid judged without regard to the question of who actually bloomed it.

The value of a plant is considerably enhanced when it receives an award. This is especially true of a genus that we are not currently capable of mericloning, such as Paphiopedilum.

Consider the Paphiopedilum Armeni White 'Gold Country' FCC/AOS, which Candace recently had awarded. I don't know what she might have paid for it, but you can assume that its value increased exponentially upon receipt of that award. It went from being a very nice plant to being one of the rarest of Paphs. In Japan or Taiwan a division would likely be worth a small fortune. Had she purchased that plant in bloom and taken it directly to judging she would still have made a huge return on her investment. It was simply an Armeni White when she brought it to judging, but it was pure gold by the time she left. Regardless of the provenance of the plant, it was a very wise investment that could only be realized upon receipt of an award.

Most of us would like to receive awards on plants we have personally cultivated, but making a killing on a purchase is acceptable consolation.

Regards,
Rick

 

[NYEric]

It was simply an Armeni White when she brought it to judging, but it was pure gold by the time she left.

Word!

 

[slippertalker]

I have grown orchids for about 30 years, and there is no doubt that well grown plants bloom much better than poorly grown plants. If the plant has the best genetics and is poorly grown, it will most likely bloom poorly - no up to it's potential. When I received my one and only FCC, I called the hybridizer to let him know and the first thing out of his mouth was that I had given the plant good culture. Culture cannot be overemphasized, that being said you are wasting your time growing inferior quality plants. They will never bloom as well as their well bred relatives.

 

[Candace]

Most of us would like to receive awards on plants we have personally cultivated, but making a killing on a purchase is acceptable consolation.

That makes me smile. Your right, money is a good consolation prize. Since I've not sold a division, I've made no profit. But, it IS nice to know there is value there.

Slippertalker, I think you summed up my feelings exactly.

Since my award was mentioned I'll bring this up,(I don't want to beat it into everyone's head at every given moment). When it was awarded, the breeder of the plant and AOS judge, announced it at our OS meeting and he said this, "Candace bought this as a division from me 5 years ago. She's bloomed it better than I ever did. Don't you hate it when you sell someone a division and they show you up?" Everyone laughed. To me, that was one of the biggest compliments I've received as a grower and what I remember most. This comment came from a great grower and hybridizer, who has won countless AOS awards and at least one FCC of his own. Him saying that made my night.

 

[Inverness]

Superior genetics is the prerequisite for award potential. Culture is the process that allows genetics to manifest themselves in a manner that confirms the expectation of the resulting award. Flowers are awarded on the basis of what's on the judging table, not the pedigree sheet. Because there are no rules regarding who did or did not grow the plant, you have to do what is acceptable to you.

Ken Brewer

 

[aquacorps]

Candance, did the individual that sold you the division also judge it when it got awarded? Rusty

 

[Candace]

Candance, did the individual that sold you the division also judge it when it got awarded? Rusty

No, they have to excuse themselves from judging. He actually didn't know for certain he bred it, because the clerks remove all tags before setting the plants before the judges. But he thought it looked familiar, so he sat out on the judging just in case. And from what I've been told, the head judge will excuse other judges if an entry has a personal association with someone's nursery or breeding program.

 

[rdlsreno]

It depends on how you represent yourself. It is unethical to submit a plant with the intention of having it judged for culture, if you haven't been responsible for its culture. Quality awards (HCC, AM, FCC) are awards to the plant, not you. If you want to take credit for it, blame it on your excellent skills at picking plants to buy.

Excellent flowers should be recognized regardless of who grew the plant. If they aren't, how am I (as a judge) supposed to know what I'm comparing the next plant to? The more plants we look at, the better the standards become, and the better we can evaluate the next generation of breeding.

I agree!

Ramon

 

[Bolero]

In Australia the rule is that you must own a plant for 6 months before submitting it for judging in either a show or for an award. I agree with this, it stops people trophy hunting.......getting 1st for a plant one month and giving it to someone else the next month so they can get first place the next month.

It means that you have to have flowered it yourself before you can gain credit. I think that's a good thing but I know not everyone agrees with me.

I know we argue that the plant is the one who gets it.........if that's the case why is it always the owner smiling after it wins an award???

 

[Heather]

I am with you, Bolero...all the way. I still think this is the most ethical way to treat things. That's how our society does it as well.

I think this would be a really good round table discussion for a society meeting if you have enough judges to have one at each table. That and just the judging standards and how they are changing because of people like Terry Root (for the better or for the worse?)

 

[paphioland]

In Australia the rule is that you must own a plant for 6 months before submitting it for judging in either a show or for an award. I agree with this, it stops people trophy hunting.......getting 1st for a plant one month and giving it to someone else the next month so they can get first place the next month.

It means that you have to have flowered it yourself before you can gain credit. I think that's a good thing but I know not everyone agrees with me.

I know we argue that the plant is the one who gets it.........if that's the case why is it always the owner smiling after it wins an award???

I think it is about the plant. Who gets it is meaningles to me. I would agree with Candace in the sense that anyone who gets tons of fcc's is one very passionate and two has deep pockets. Or they could just be great breeders and orchids are their business. That being said I think again you are missing the point of the award. It really is for the plant. If you did it this 6 month way people would know very little about what is out there and actually you would prob get an increase in FCC because people show their plants too immature.

I personally don't care who grew it and how great of a grower they are. I care about the potential of the plant for breeding purposes and aesthetic qualities. That being said if a plant is being a phenomenal bloomer on a single growth that peaks my curiosity. If the plant is a large multi growth plant that has previosly bloomed and grown by a great grower I count that as a slight negative because I think that maybe as good as the bloom will get so it better be phenomenal.

If you do this hold for six months then bloom our knowledge of the spectacular clones out there will be mitigated. I really just want to know what great plants exist. I really never stop to think this person has this many awards so they must be a great grower. I think this person either spends alot or has great genetics or both.

 

[NYEric]

In Australia the rule is that you must own a plant for 6 months before submitting it for judging in either a show or for an award.

Then what happens to the spectacular flower that you just bought but can't show it or have it judged. Then the public is restricted from the option to use this plant's genetic material to improve the breed. Kind of contradicts the purpose.

 

[littlefrog]

Then what happens to the spectacular flower that you just bought but can't show it or have it judged. Then the public is restricted from the option to use this plant's genetic material to improve the breed. Kind of contradicts the purpose.

I don't think that is true, actually. You can use the plant for breeding any time you want, it doesn't need an award. Heck, a lot of plants that are great studs are unawardable, but contribute something awesome (color, for example) to their offspring.

I think we are nibbling from the wrong side of the apple here. Awards should be distinct from breeding. I don't think anybody would argue that you could immediately breed with a plant you just purchased (I do it all the time...). The debate seems to be whether or not you should be able to have such a plant judged by the AOS.

Awards are nice, and they make you feel good. But they aren't necessary. As a judge I would prefer that every very nice plant be evaluated, just so I know what I'm looking for. But as an orchid grower, I have plenty of plants that I know are nice, I love them, and I've never exhibited them. And I have several awards to plants that aren't all that good, and a few awards that I think are way to low... Point is, I own the plants, I grow them for myself, and it is really up to me to determine how much _I_ like them. Awards are a side-note.

 

[paphioland]

I don't think that is true, actually. You can use the plant for breeding any time you want, it doesn't need an award. Heck, a lot of plants that are great studs are unawardable, but contribute something awesome (color, for example) to their offspring.

I think we are nibbling from the wrong side of the apple here. Awards should be distinct from breeding. I don't think anybody would argue that you could immediately breed with a plant you just purchased (I do it all the time...). The debate seems to be whether or not you should be able to have such a plant judged by the AOS.

Awards are nice, and they make you feel good. But they aren't necessary. As a judge I would prefer that every very nice plant be evaluated, just so I know what I'm looking for. But as an orchid grower, I have plenty of plants that I know are nice, I love them, and I've never exhibited them. And I have several awards to plants that aren't all that good, and a few awards that I think are way to low... Point is, I own the plants, I grow them for myself, and it is really up to me to determine how much _I_ like them. Awards are a side-note.

I agree with this. Very true.

However, making the awards for the plant and not making people bloom them also lets people who want good genetics to know more of what is out there and makes the plants easier to locate. So, I think it does aid in a small time person's breeding