Galanthus registration

[Martin Baxendale]

Gerard, you may have missed my question. I was asking if these two registered snowdrops are recent selections and if these one or two bulbs of each are all you have yet?

I have selected White Kay i think 7 years ago and have a small number of it now.
Anneke Claasen did flower 3 years ago for the first time and i have 5 bulbs inclusive offset.

I have to say it wouldn't even occur to me to officially name a new snowdrop that I only had a handful of bulbs of, and I certainly wouldn't register one that was still so few in number and virtually untried as a reliable, healthy and long-lived garden plant. It's difficult to tell from the photos (did the registrar really accept these as suitable for your registration application?) but I also think you may be setting your sights a bit low in terms of quality and uniqueness when selecting new cultivars. Also, what is your evidence for Anneke Claasen being a gracilis x elwesii hybrid? It looks to me like it could easily be simply an elwesii selection.

[Martin Baxendale]

It looks like what's needed is for someone somewhere to do a lot of hard graft (far more than has been done so far on this register) drawing up a comprehensive register of existing named cultivars that have been published, no doubt using the Snowdrops book as the starting point for reference material. Then, and only then, I think would we be in a position to start adding newer unpublished cultivar names. At the moment it would be ludicrous to be adding new names to a register which is not a full and comprehensive listing of all those names published so far. The potential for confusion and "registration" of duplicate names is immense if that's not done first.

[Martin Baxendale]

And Gerard, please don't try telling me that only "registered" names count, and that previously published names don't. If that were the case then, as Alan says, anyone could quite happily register a new snowdrop called 'Magnet' with the KAVB and the fact that James Allen's 'Magnet' has been around for a hundred years and is grown in vast numbers of gardens would simply be ignored.

[Gerard Oud]

It's difficult to tell from the photos (did the registrar really accept these as suitable for your registration application?)

I have been there with a pot full with Anneke Claasen and this registration is a tribute to a very good friend of me!Her name is Anneke Claasen!

And what the registration concerns, finally after more then 100 years, new snowdrops will be registrated from the UK and other countries were its supposed to be over here in the Netherlands at the KAVB. Its a great pity that only a few knew that before it would have safed a lot of work!

And about quality and uniqueness you dont have to worry, and my setted sights are never high enough. And to give comments on a snowdrop just from a photo is a bit easy dont you think?

[Martin Baxendale]

I did say it's difficult to tell from the photos. It was just my opinion that they don't jump out at me as instantly obvious "wow-that's-really-good" candidates for naming and registration (especially in view of how few bulbs there are of them). As many people have said on this forum, there are a lot snowdrops being named very fast, and not all of them are really either worth naming or in wide enough circulation or large enough numbers to have been trialled as good garden plants prior to naming, let alone official registration.

And if the KAVB is the official registration organisation then so be it, but work has to be done to create a register that's fit for purpose.

[Martin Baxendale]

I was, by the way, already aware that the KAVB was a registration authority for galanthus but from what I'd previously read I understood that it was necessary up until now to send a number of bulbs to the KAVB for trial in their gardens as a condition for registration, which I think would have put off many people from the idea of registering a new snowdrop, especially if it was a very valuable one (or had the potential to be very valuable). Apart from cost, the security of those bulbs would, I imagine, have been a major issue for some growers, especially in relation to plant breeders' rights.

[Gerard Oud]

Yes it can be expensive when you have to send bulbs, but that is only for Dutch growers. The photo and discription is rather new and enough for foreighn growers/breeders.

By the way the evidence for Anneke Claasen being a gracilis/elwesii hybrid is simple when you do know the parents, and i do

[steve owen]

The whole idea of "registration" feels to me a bit like shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted. And whilst Martin may rightly comment that many of us have criticised the speed and volume of appearance of new named varieties, perhaps it should be said out loud that some of the main perpetrators of this rush to name are well-known persons in the snowdrop world and seemingly above criticism. If "Snowdrops2" is going to apply somewhat fiercer qualifications for snowdrops to be "fit for naming", lets hope the writers don't flinch from applying those criteria to those well-known persons as well as everyone else. Maybe what is needed is a galanthopoly version of the financial FTSE Index, which is composed of the top 500 accredited companies' shares; for a successful company's shares to become part of the FTSE Index, another has to drop out!

[Martin Baxendale]

By the way the evidence for Anneke Claasen being a gracilis/elwesii hybrid is simple when you do know the parents, and i do

Well, that doesn't really answer my question, but I've had more than enough of this thread. At times it's felt like wading through treacle.

[Gerard Oud]

The whole idea of "registration" feels to me a bit like shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted. And whilst Martin may rightly comment that many of us have criticised the speed and volume of appearance of new named varieties, perhaps it should be said out loud that some of the main perpetrators of this rush to name are well-known persons in the snowdrop world and seemingly above criticism. If "Snowdrops2" is going to apply somewhat fiercer qualifications for snowdrops to be "fit for naming", lets hope the writers don't flinch from applying those criteria to those well-known persons as well as everyone else. Maybe what is needed is a galanthopoly version of the financial FTSE Index, which is composed of the top 500 accredited companies' shares; for a successful company's shares to become part of the FTSE Index, another has to drop out!

When investmentcompanies start taking options on it will blow up the whole thing Steve! And the 16th century Windtrade in tulips will repeat again!

[Gerard Oud]

By the way the evidence for Anneke Claasen being a gracilis/elwesii hybrid is simple when you do know the parents, and i do

Well, that doesn't really answer my question, but I've had more than enough of this thread. At times it's felt like wading through treacle.

Treacle? It feels like a swamp i am sinking in, i wish i had never started to be just a help for official registration

[Gerard Oud]

I was thinking last night there are more then 5000 registrated Tulips and more then 5000 registrated Narcis and there are maybe only 500 Galanthus excisting and with names.
 So lets start because its maybe only 10% of the others, if it is 10 %. And i have said this now for the last time ITS FREE OF ANY FEE/PAYMENT/CHARGE basta.

For what i have heard there has been only contact yet with a guy from Cottbus Germany

I hope the others will follow and be cooperative, because we have to do this together!

[Alan_b]

I must say that this thread seems to have become unnecessarily ill-tempered.  Despite my scepticism of some aspects of the KAVB, I intend to investigate further and to try to register one of my snowdrop "unknowns". 

[Martin Baxendale]

I must say that this thread seems to have become unnecessarily ill-tempered.  Despite my scepticism of some aspects of the KAVB, I intend to investigate further and to try to register one of my snowdrop "unknowns". 

I'm sorry you feel like that Alan. I've tried very hard not to be ill-tempered but to stick to a logical and factual discussion of the issues of galanthus cultivar naming and registration, including various aspects that have concerned forumists in the past. It's an important issue and not one that I feel should be taken lightly, as the whole issue of snowdrop cutlivar naming is already rife with problems if not completely out of control.

Gerard, according to Chris Sanham, who keeps a record of snowdrops named, there are (at the last count I heard from him) over 1,500 named snowdrops, not 500, and that number is increasing all the time.

I won't be contributing to this thread any more because I've found it very hard work, and I find it upsetting to be accused of being ill-tempered when I feel I've been trying my best to conduct a reasonable discussion on a very important problem and to tackle some very difficult and delicate issues. I've found
Gerard's attitude towards me personally and the British in general insulting at various points but have repeatedly tried not to rise to it.

I'm sorry I felt I had to comment on Gerard's methods of selecting for naming and registration but they seem to me symptomatic and illustrative of some problems that are common in this area and about which forumists have complained in the past. I didn't feel that I could just turn a blind eye to them, and I thought that I really should say something. I thought that was acceptable on a forum like this, where I didn't think we were about just patting each other on the back all the time, but about tackling difficult issues while trying to be tactful and polite. It seems I've failed. Sorry.

[Maggi Young]

I was applauding Alan's comment that he was going to look further into the KAVB registration scheme!

This thread seems to engendering a great many misunderstandings and I am going to close it.