Fred, this link was sent to me from the ISHS. It explains in laymans terms the requirements of having a name stick. BGI gathers the names from those who choose to submit them at BGI, they are published in the Herald,which is sent to various libraies around the world. It is also sent to the current ICRA who in turn are required to accept these names and register them. There is no grey area here. There is no reason to fight about it, a fact is a fact. I would hope the ICRA and its registrar would do what is healthiest for the brug community and come together with these facts in mind, with all of those in the Brug community. Anything else is a step backwards. BGI is always moving forward.
Respectfully yours,
Joelle Dewhurst
Canadian VP
Brugmansia Growers International

Here is a link that might be useful: How to name a new cultiver as stated by the ISHS

Thank you for starting this thread Fred, it's an important and often misunderstood subject. Mostly there is confusion about the difference & importance of "establishing" and "registering" a cultivar name.
For those of you who don't know me, my name is Tom Hulse, and I served for a few years as the last Registrar for the Brugmansia & Datura ICRA.
First the background. There is one set of rules for plant cultivar naming, the ICNCP (International Code of Nomenclature for Cultivated Plants), that nearly everyone in the academic & horticultural world has agreed to use. It is maintained by a worldwide umbrella organization (ISHS) that appoints individual organizations, called ICRA's (International Cultivar Registration Authorities), and charges them to publish and keep track of cultivar names within a specific group of plants. The ICRA for Brugmansia and Datura is currently IBADS (Ibrugs); Fred is the President and Helmut is the Registrar.
According to the ICNCP (the rules), just registering a brug with the ICRA or with anyone else does NOT cement the name as permanetly yours. For instance, if you pick a name and register it with the ICRA it is not cemented for you until they actually publish it. Someone can still beat you to the name if they get it published on their own first, and you would have to reselect.
I only bring this out to highlight that "publishing" is what is most important to cement a name, and "registering" is only a means to get to publishing. So registering can be done by anyone, but it really means nothing until a cultivar is actually published.
When a cultivar is published according to the rules (by anyone), and it is cemented as yours, the rules call that "established", and no one can ever use your name again for a plant in the same genus. So if you are a hybridizer, what you want is to get your cultivar published so it can be established, and registering is just a means to get there.
There was also a question in the past about the term "provisional" that was used for some cultivars back when I was Registrar. This was a term that applied to the breeding set only, not the cultivar name. So if we weren't sure if it was pure versicolor or perhaps a x candida hybrid, then we would use "provisional" for the breeding history.
For cultivar names, there are just two states: established and not established (basically properly-published and not-yet-properly-published).
On the question of who can publish/establish a name, the answer is anyone. However, we have been provided with an ICRA that is set up to do it for free (or small fee) for nearly every single genus of plants, so that we don't have to do it ourselves (IBADS in our case). Additionally, there are other organizations or societies that will do the publishing as well, and as long as they follow the rules of the ICNCP, then the names will also be permanently established. Also individual growers that publish paper catalogs can be a perfectly valid method of publishing and establishing cultivar names.
Let me know if you have any questions. :)
- Tom

I was gonna register one of mine but then got to the part where it said I needed a photo of the entire plant lol. I had some pics of the blooms and leaves but forgot to take one of the entire plant and now it looks like complete crap because it was in the greenhouse overwinter and cut back. So is the other one that is taken from the same plant. Sooo I guess I have to wait for it to grow back?

No, SJN, you do not have to wait, you can use pictures that were taken previously if you have older photos of the plant, or if you don't, you can add a fifth picture of the foliage, etc. We would really LIKE to have a photo of the entire plant, but don't wait until you have one to enter it if that is the only thing holding you up.

Tom, thank you so much for your information, it makes everything very clear.

Thank you Tom for the facts. I feel the main confusion is over this area :

" the difference & importance of "establishing" and "registering" a cultivar name"

"publishing" is what is most important to cement a name, and "registering" is only a means to get to publishing. So registering can be done by anyone, but it really means nothing until a cultivar is actually published"

If BGI publishes the name and sends the written publication with photos (The Herald) to ibrugs/ibads (and many libraries) this would meet the criteria set by ICRA ? Is this correct ?

SJN if you are registering to have it published at BGI, then no, as Mary says, but it really depends on where you are registering. IBADS may have different requirements, perhaps Fred could tell us.
Edna yes, but it's not so much the sending the copy to the ICRA that establishes a cultivar, since the rules say that part is only a recommendation, not a requirement, if a cultivar is being published elsewhere. BGI has been publishing by sending a their periodical, The Herald, to multiple botanical libraries. This is the part that technically meets the requirement for publishing/establishing a cultivar.
- Tom

Hi Joelle, I am fully aware of the ISHS requirements for establishing a new cultivar name and that is why I will always register my new cultivars with ISHS's designated International Cultivar Registration Authority for brugmansia, IBADS/iBrugs. My goal is not just to make the name "stick" as you say, I want all my cultivars to meet the guidelines established by the ICRA for brugmansia. I consider myself to be a professional grower/hybridizer and I prefer to personally submit the data directly to the IRCA rather than have my cultivar data submitted to the ICRA second hand via a third party organization. I also want to make certain quality photographs, without someone else's watermark stamped over the center, accompany my submission. Again, this is my personal preference and I realize some hybridizers don't care at all as long as their cultivar name is established somehow. I realize how important the data collected is as a reference source for all growers and hybridizers. Having all the data submitted directly to the official ICRA helps maintain the accurancy and integrity of the data.

I would be lying if I didn't admit that I'm also looking forward to seeing my new babies published in a full color glossy print journal, another benefit of registering directly through the ICRA.

If all I wanted to do was make my cultivar names "stick", I would just rely on the color catalog sheets I am publishing and mailing out in advance of my store opening. But that would be self-serving and would not benefit the worldwide brugmansia community.

I've been a supporter of BGI for years and am proud to be a current business member. It is a great organization. I'm excited to learn that BGI is always moving forward and has the best interest of the brug community in mind. This should make it much easier for them to understand the importance of supporting the official ICRA for brugmansia.

There are plenty of great things happening in the brug community and I'm hoping all the organizations can work together for the good of everyone.

Fred Sommer
Sommer Gardens

Tom...
A fine explanation and a great service to the entire Brugmansia community.

I expect we hybridizers can be a varied and sometimes eccentric lot. As a hybridizer, these matters are not my greatest concern. They are a concern, but not my greatest concern. Producing good plants is job one for me. I work at it sometimes to the detriment of my own health...I love it that much. I also love the Brugmansia community that I have been a part of for many years now. My main focus is the moment when a person's plant blooms and they feel glad to have obtained it from me as a hybridizer. That moment makes my work worthwhile.

Many of us have been around for a while and have seen various Brugmansia groups come and go. All of them had the best of intentions. All of them wanted to succeed at their chosen mission. As it stands right now, from my standpoint, the only proven and reliable way to publish registered Brugmansia is through The BGI Herald. For me, it's easy. I enter the information, BGI publishes and distributes, done deal. I could do it myself, or find some other way, but doing it through BGI is something I've done for years and I'm good with it. As I mentioned, it is a small formality easily accomplished.

I understand that iBrugs is a fledgeling organization seeking to establish credibility within the community through both their ICRA status and their intention to publish a journal. That being said, having ICRA status is not a rod of discipline to be applied to the backs of the hybridizing community for the purpose of accomplishing that goal. If anything, it must embrace, reflect and allow for the wide latitude offered by the ICNCP and ISHS as it relates to individuals as hybridizers and the various ways they may seek publication that will establish their cultivars.

If 100 responsible Brugmansia Societies worldwide took registrations, published journals, then submitted those journals to various libraries with an additional copy to the ICRA - where is the harm? There will still be plenty of work on the cultivar list to accomplish and the ICRA could then submit their paperwork to the next entity in the food chain.

For those interested in these matters, they occupy a lot of thought. For those interested in hybridizing, they occupy little thought. We are thinking genetic combinations, strengths and weaknesses of various pollens and plants, opportunity and time. There simply isn't enough time to accomplish all we wish to accomplish...so, registering quickly via tried and proven means of doing so is the mosquito we squash when we have to.

Thanks again, Tom and best wishes.

Liz

Thanks Liz.:):):):):):):):):):):):):):):)
Cb

Thank you Liz. I appreciate input from a hybridizer such as yourself. Very wise words.....

Fred, I have tried to use the Ibrugs process of
registering my Brugs in January of this year but
was unsuccessful in my Attempt to get them Registered.

I even contacted several other respected Hybridize r
on the process of getting my Brug Registered when I Were.
having adifficulty time in the process.

All of my Information was submitted Back in January
and to this day It still have not appeared in the Ibrugs
Registrar.

I tried several attempts to email you regarding the
matter but never received a response from anyone from
Ibrugs.

I have use the BGI registering process and have found
BGI Registering process to be very user Friendly.

As you know I enjoy growing Brugs and have purchase
quiet a few from you as well. I'm hoping we can all
come together and enjoy the Beauty of growing Brugs
and work together for the Brug Lovers who enjoy that
which we all contribute to the Brugmansia Community.
Cb

Hi William,

I apologize if your emails went unanswered. As I stated when I replied to a similar post in cubits a couple of months ago, I show no record of any emails being received from you at our general purpose admin@ibrugs.com address or at my personal email address. Do you recall which address you sent them to? We also have a feedback tab on every single page on the website that makes it real easy to email us. I take pride in the fact that our typical response time is usually only a few hours.

We did have some glitches in our online registration system when we first introduced it. They have since been resolved. Registration problems and questions are quickly resolved by emailing registrar@ibrugs.com.

We are always open to suggestions as to how we can make the process easier and better.

Thanks.

Fred

Tom,
thanks for the job you did in the past.
Just a few words to your introduction in registering. It is in principle true that everyone can publish or establish a cvs as long as the criteria for this according to the rules are met. For the ICRA it is essential to have accurate data and if possible unwatermarked pic material - besides a few other requirements given by the code. Otherwise such a list is a useless thing.
So refering to a webpage - as some do here - where only the half information is given is not the best reference.

CB - I regret that you had troubles in registering brugs with ibrugs. I took over at the beginning of February and the changes on the website where made at that date. So please could you tell me where you have sent the data.
I also wonder in case you have registered them successfully with BGI why those cvs are not in the Herald-paperstack from the 02/09/2011.
As breeders like Monika Gottschalk and Alice Harris have made it - it couldn't be so bad and there is also the possibility to send the data via email to the registrar.

Liz - I don't care if 100 brugmansia societies are up and publish. There is only one per plant genus that holds the ICRA position - and the rest is good communication. We have sent out initialy a mail to BGI - but we didn't get any response. As I have discussed with you before only a strong cooperating brug community can animate people to join in and get interested in brugs. I think this is not the case at the moment.

SNJ - you are welcome at any time to register your cvs. You also can sent the data directly to registrar@ibrugs.com

Best wishes,
HJ

oh sorry - I forgot to mention: What sense does it make to a hybridizer to register a brug with BGI if it is 4 years later published in the Herald (in case the given time stamps at the papers are valid and real time). Examples for this can be found on the first 3 pages of the last issue.

Best wishes,
HJ

What sense does it make for a plant society to harp on paperwork when they have no gallery, no pollen bank, no seed bank, no journal, no regular delivery of monthly email bulletins, and a registry form that screws up? After a full year?

Like William, I also tried doing it your way at iBrugs. It didn't work.

So, I registered at BGI. It worked.

HJ...I am convinced you're an ernest, intelligent and well intentioned person. Of that I have no doubt. But iBrugs is paying attention to the flea while letting the dog starve.

Beef up and organize your site, develop credibility with the community and success will come.

Thank you Liz. Feedback is important to us. We have made great strides in our first year, Sure some things have not happened as quickly as we had hoped for, but we are an all volunteer organization and we are moving forward.

I'm surprised you feel the need to bash us. I had to reread this thread a couple of times because it was so unlike the Liz I used to know. I even went back and read numerous email threads from you from last year. Wow, what a difference.

Oh, by the way, we have a great gallery that is continuing to expand. You should know that because you have contributed photographs to it.

Fred

You cannot thank me for feedback on the one hand, yet define it as "bashing" on the other. It is ambiguous and serves no purpose. I have made observations, suggestions, complimented Helmut on his efforts and wished all of you success.

Perhaps, the Liz you knew remains the same, but you no longer recognize her for your own reasons. There is little I can do about that.

I do know that organizations, their motivations and directions, can change over a period of time. It happened at BGI and it will no doubt happen again elsewhere. The BGI that I viewed as somewhat stalled in early 2010 has improved tenfold over the past year. The site and organizational viewpoint suits my needs as both a member and a hybridizer. Yes, my view has changed. But that view doesn't stray from my original view that there is room in the horticultural community for many organizations that promote both hobbyist and professional horticultural pursuits. They will rise and fall on their own merits or demerits. I champion the cause of diversity overall. As you well know, that was my position from the beginning.

I did my best to participate at iBrugs. I do the same elsewhere. I do it here, on Facebook, wherever and try to accomplish that participation with an even hand. It is why I contributed articles and gallery photos to iBrugs. It is why, though you offered me a free business membership, I chose to pay for it. It was to help finance your work, not to receive perks or special treatment. I was thinking about the entire community, not my own skin or allegiance to any particular individual or group. That Liz remains, and hopes you someday see the value of such behavior.

Again, I wish you and your organization success.

Liz

Helmut, I very, very, very much want to stay friends with everybody, so please do take this correction in the friendly, helpful way it is intended.
When I was first Registrar I lobbied hard to have BGI's method of publishing (by mailing to botanical libraries) ruled as inadequate. I was shot down by ISHS. Like you, I thought the ICRA is the way that cultivars "should" be published, and the ICRA shouldn't support efforts that recorded less information or were sent to less people. I had to learn the hard way that you can't use your ICRA status to leverage more membership in your society. You can not try to scare them into thinking that publishing other than through you is somehow less than adequate, like you did in your two recent mass emails on 3/31 and today, 4/2. Those emails contain many false and misleading statements, and they should be fully retrtracted.
The job of the ICRA is not to be the "main" way to publish cultivar names, or try to hold some kind of monopoly as you are arguing for, but rather it is your job to help everyone publish according to the rules, and if they can't do it themself, then you are there as a backup to help do it for them.
Your main list of established cultivars must include all validly published names, even if they didn't register with you. Registering with the ICRA is not required in order to be fully recognized on your list. Registering with you is only required if they wish for you to publish for them.
Helmut I strongly caution you to shift your focus away from using the ICRA as leverage in competition with other societies, and towards a neutral stance stance where you are helpful to everyone wishing to publish. Otherwise you miss the whole purpose of the ICRA and you will risk losing it altogether.
To help with perspective, I'll include the minimum requirements of what is required for a cultivar to be "established", and so also what the minimum requirements are to show up on your ICRA list as a fully established plant with NO reservations or reduced designations: a name, a date, and a one-word description (e.g. "tall") with copies mailed to one botanical library on plain typing paper. No that is not the ideal for you & I, but yes it must be recognized on your list as complete.
Since most hybridizers mainly want to know that their name is permanently cemented as their own ("established"), some are happy to do that in the technical minimum way, and get their plant widely known through other means, such as electronically through the forums. If you fight them on that then you would be outside your ICRA mandate, and risk losing it.
Again, I very much want to be friends and I'm willing to help you in every way I can.
- Tom

Well said LIZ !!!!!! You said (in a very nice way) what me and a LOT of others have been thinking and talking among ourselves.I was thinking of how to reply without blowing my top because my blood pressure was sky high. But you did it with dignity and class,and I for one applaud you.Sometimes the truth hurts. I am not posting this to start or prolong a fight,just to support you CB,and myself and many others.And I couldn't sit back and watch you go it alone.I am old school,and will not sit back and watch a real lady (even tho I don't know you personally)be bullied as tooo much of that is going on these days. As I said,I don't want to fight,but I won't run from one either.So,if I offended anyone,contact me off list,this is not the place for brawls,it's for our love of brugs.
DAN

Tom,

This is what ISHS stats:
Publication of your new name must be in printed or similarly duplicated matter which is distributed to the general public or at least to botanical, agricultural, forestry or horticultural institutions with libraries. Newspapers, gardening or non-scientific magazines and similar publications which are not designed to last do not count as publications in this case. Publication on the World Wide Web or on CD-ROM does not count as publication since the pages are not permanent.

The paper I got was copied and sent out to 2 hort. institutions here in Europe. The holding of the paper was refused there - so I assume that the paper is not published in the rigth manner that it could be accepted. I can't control if the papers are hold at the institutions they state. So with respect - if I get the data in a proper way with pictures (that don't seem to be taken in a drunken state or pixelized) it could be acceptable.

So please understand I'm not a marionette of someone and I will clearify this also with ISHS very soon.
HJ

Helmut I made the same exact argument... and lost.
First, the quote you included is not from the Code, but from an older information page at ISHS' website, so it is not as clear as the current Code that the first two sentences are fully separate. I, like you, tried to interpret them together, as saying the "pages are not permanent" (in the 2nd sentence) also applied to the printed or duplicated matter in the first sentence. It doesn't. The newest 2009 code is more clear about that, in fact it also has a new provision for a similar item, internet catalogs, to just print them out and mail them (min. 1 botanical library):

"25B.2. Where a trade catalogue is published in electronic media, its formal publication may be effected by the printing and deposit of two copies in a designated library (see Appendix IV). While the publisher of the catalogue is strongly encouraged to print and distribute these copies, anyone else doing so must, where possible, have received the permission of the publisher first."

If you have an issue at all with a technicality in their publication, like perhaps they may have only mailed one copy each library instead of two, or perhaps there are better-suited libraries they could mail them to (they do mail to more than the two you mentioned), then it is not your job to try and catch them in an "a-ha!" or to try to use that as leverage in a competition for members, but rather it is the job of the ICRA to help them get it right. You're an ICRA, you help people publish. If you do get to talk to individuals at ISHS, you'll see they are much more worried about just getting names established, and less worried about using the best practices of publishing/recording (I was told that if I find any more technicalities to just republish them myself in the Trumpeter, without formal registration, just to make sure they got established).
You mentioned pixilated pictures. It is acceptable for the ICRA to have reasonable minimum picture requirements in order for you to publish in your own journal, and so it is right they would be required as part of your registration; however pictures are not required for the other publication methods and self publication, so there is no minimum quality. If they were already properly published, then you must add them to your list as "established" even if they have no picture at all.
- Tom

Tom,
I really wonder about that you cite here a trade cataloque and copyrights for them.
The given publication is no trade cataloque and it was sent out for evaluation as printing by official libs and not for archivation.
So as I said it - I will clearify it with ISHS and will stop the discussion here now. ISHS should decide if the want it or not - we also have to clear what sense it makes if a organisation holds a socalled established cvs database where items are entered that have not been registered or established by any legal means.
If you want discuss further and on the outcome later - you know where you find me.
HJ

Hi Helmut. :) Yes the BGI Herald is not a trade catalog. I included that article of the Code just to show that there is also another similar way that ISHS approves of cultivars established by just mailing photocopied sheets to botanical libraries.
On their database, it is good they keep one, and all information and backup records are helpful, but I agree that they should remove the word "established" from the title of the database. It's a word with two meanings; I'm sure they meant in the sense of 'long established names in common use', but there is also a formal meaning per the Code, as we are discussing, that means approximately 'properly published'. So, since their database includes both formally established and not-established cultivar names, like your database, I'll recommend that they remove that word.
- Tom

What BGI sent out and are currently sending out is sent to multiple botanical libraries through out the world. And it is sent out with the intention of archivation, and if you check you will see that it is currently being archived by these libraries
http://tinyurl.com/3dxu7uf
Chicago Botanic Garden Library
http://tinyurl.com/3zr4xlp
Australian Botanic Garden Library
http://tinyurl.com/3f4ng7u
National Agriculture Library
http://tinyurl.com/3pydr9k
New York Botanical Garden Library
http://tinyurl.com/3pclxra
National Botanic Garden of Belgium

We have recently contacted several additional libraries worldwide, 20 or so more, and are making arrangements to have them sent and archived by them, and have removed from our mailings those who did not wish to receive/archive them.

Could someone please outline the bottom line here so that i do not need a law degree to figure this crap out. From what I understand although ibrugs is having an issue in getting everything organized but THEY DO HOLD THE OFFICIAL ICRA authorization in getting cultivars registered. Although other nameless sites allow for easy name placement in a database and pretty magazine pictures THEY are not officially recognized and so by me as a hybridizer will be ignored. The "other" site took many years for them to attempt to get their stuff together. They lost many well established and respected hybridizers as members. iBrugs is new and they are in their infancy. A year is not a long time to get an entire organization on it's feet but it has done well enough to establish the ICRA approval where as the older "more established" organization failed to do so. One has to wonder why is that so? With magazine publications, galleries, etc..they were not given the official ICRA nod.....I can't explain why....but there has to be a reason. Just because it's easy to fill out a form and get your name and picture in a database does not make it for an official registration or a solid secured name that cannot be replaced by someone else registering with that same name by the official ICRA recognized registrar. There is false security when you register "the quick and easy way".
It may take time for things to come together but the official qualifications have been met by ibrugs by the ICRA and although it was challenged and opposed by the more established brugmansia website....they lost the bid to ibrugs....given time and the proper support the ibugs group will have all that is needed to support the hybridizer community. Rome wasn't built in a day and if you look at the history of the other groups...their "Rome" has burned numerous times not to mention so many bridges.

Hi Gary, how are you? :) Sorry for getting technical, I'll try to keep it down on the law-degree "crap". ;)
When you say "THEY DO HOLD THE OFFICIAL ICRA authorization in getting cultivars registered", the answer is no they don't, at least in the way you think. There just is no such thing as "the" official way to get cultivars registered/established/cemented. There are many paths, and registering for publication in the ICRA's journal (the Trumpeter), is just one of those paths.

You asked why was one society given the ICRA and the other not? My understanding was that BGI decided not to pursue it after I explained the responsibilities & cost of publishing a full-color journal, and also explained how the ICRA was not an exclusive way to establish names, and how it could not be used as leverage, like we are discussing here.
Also, Ibrugs did not really receive the blessing of the ISHS; ABADS did, a long time ago. When ABADS went defunct, Fred bought up the name from the state of Florida and informed ISHS that ABADS was changing its name to IBADS, just one letter off. Even though none of the same people carried over, I don't think there's anything wrong with that. If someone with energy & skills wants to take on the work, then I think that's great, and I only want to support them.
I agree with you that they're still a young organization, and I'm sure they'll only get better and better.

If we take on the ICRA with the goal of "using" it to gain members or if we think about it in terms of our dislike for another organization, then we'll only be disappointed in the end. But if we only care about the plants then it's a privilege and a joy to do the work. So the simplest version, Gary: the ICRA is not a boss, it's just a helper.

- Tom

Just for clarification purposes, I did not "buy up the name" from the State of Florida. ABADS as a Florida Corporation was in the process of being dissolved by the State of Florida for failure to file it's annual corporate report. With the help of another former ABADS member I was able meet with the former president, Trish, who then turned over all the official records associated with ABADS to me. I then began the process to get ABADS reinstated as corporation.

After the corporation was reinstated we did apply for, and were granted a name change so we could merge ABADS and iBrugs into one entity.

It would have been a great loss to the brug world had all the ABADS data just disappeared. I did what any of the former board members or interested members could have done had they wanted to spend the time and money.

We are slowly incorporating the ABADS data into iBrugs and I have the entire website and forum backed up on a remote hard drive so the data will always be preserved.

Fred

Fred-
I didn't realize that! Thanks so much for what you did- I use that data baste ALL the time. It would've been a terrible loss if it just disappeared.
kasha77

Probably, the most salient point here is the closer you look, the less you know. Time and the personal, individual choices of hybridizers will sort all of this out. They will register where they feel most comfortable doing so. Obviously, both organizations are complying with even the minimum standards. The community, with its vast and not necessarily public exchange of information is alive, discussing this issue and formulating an opinion. There is much there that is not visible in this thread. In fact, I have had to curtail my nursery work to catch up on my letter writing, because this very issue and the postings in this thread have filled my mailbox to overflowing.

Most of the letters center around something not discussed here...motivation. What is the nature and origin of the energy driving these issues? The individuals who have contacted me have gone beyond the semantics and legalities. Their concerns lie more in the examining of what is happening in the delicate heart spaces where ideas and actions are born, come to fruition or crash and burn.

The internet and the postings visible are marvelous things. They have a handful of active participants, but an audience of millions. It is no less so here on this thread. That my mailbox fairly groans with letters is further proof.

I can assure you, that the confidence I place in the generosity, intelligence and far-sightedness of the Brugmansia community is well-founded. It is reflected in the correspondence I've received, and cause for joy among the honest hearted. Ultimately, those individuals are choosing where they wish to place their confidence regarding the responsible handling of their information...

So, be of good cheer everyone. We have a strong and honest-hearted community of highly intelligent people who talk among themselves in the shadows and make the decisions that move the fates and fortunes of those populating the community: it's organizations, enterprises and accomplishments as a whole. My faith in them, as it pertains to making constructive choices that impact themselves and their fellow members toward the good...has never waivered. In time you will see the result of those choices.

The direction of this community will come from this thread's audience, not the participants in the discussion.

"It is not that I love Caesar less, but that I love Rome more." Julius Caesar - W. Shakespeare.

Have a great day everyone. It's Spring. Let's get growing Brugmansias.

imcanadian , I sent you an email via your Garden Web email link last Friday( I think LOL, age gives me senior moments at times). You did not reply back so I am wondering if the emaill address you have registered with Garden Web is current?

Liz, yours is not the only email box filling up I suggest.

Hi Ruth Ann!

LOL! Is this a great community of people or what? Lots of ideas and opinions...and they sure do love their favorite plant! Hope you're well and in good health! Isn't it wonderful that Spring has arrived?

We can all get back to doing what we love most...
Best Wishes!

Thank you RuthAnn I updated my profile.