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
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
Given the problems with botanists, the solution may be to give cultivar or
names to some of the variants, which aren't under the province of the USDA,
	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".

More information about the pbs mailing list