Precisely. Thanks, Sharon.
I would love to see a rose I created in someone else parent tree of their rose. It would suggest they thought enough of my rose to use it. When I first started I used what was a hand, but more and more I use roses I highly repespect in one way or another. This respect is not limited to the rose but to the breeder themselves. If someone gained success using my rose I am happy for them and that I could help them on their way to where ever they are going.
Being offended by someone using one of your roses does suggest selfishness. It comes down to money I suppose, if you are hoping to make money via rose hybridizing then the selfish instinct is more likely to kick in, but frankly, you could buy a car at auction on Saturday, sell it on Sunday, and make more money than 99% of rose hybridizers will make in 10 years worth of breeding. For me, I just want to beautify my surroundings and possibly add some food to the world. If I make something valuable, feel free to use it.
Charles, that pretty well agrees with my take on it. Of course it pleases me to create plants which others see value in and which please them, and prove successful in their gardens, but it’s creating combinations which may provide better results that really intrigues me. It’s as if the problem presents itself first, then the potential possible “improvements” suggest themselves which lead to the ideas for which to mate with what in hopes of finding a better path to results. If that makes any sense. Yes, there are many which are simply, “What if…?”
Thanks for the response Kim and pointing out the legal and financial ramifications of which I was totally ignorant. I just thought this was another avenue that might be pursued for those interested but it is good to know in advance the possible hurdles one might encounter. I was just throwing the thought out for others.
I am too old, and still stuck in trying to get my seedlings to live after they germinate! First grade level here , LOL!
I keep thinking about the odd troubles this lass has relayed to you Kim.
The whole complaint here could be a reflection as much on one party and what they do/have done, as the other party apparently making some “complaint”.
Likely more information about the nitty gritty might bring out matters that make the scenario more understandable (having just written that, I am also not interested to find out the nitty gritty, to be sure LOL).
Using other breeder’s released cultivars is part of the usual breeding game all over the world (at least as I understand it), unless there is some unusual and specific patent restriction on useage of the released CV for breeding purposes necessitating prior breeder-permission.
I think there could be something amiss in the whole original story here, in terms of lack of full information given to you, but having said that, this is also not intended as a criticism of the party/parties involved…
DUNNO.
o_O
Just my opinion.
To Kims comments on using other roses than your own to generate improvements in the offspring. My therory is , if the offspring are not of the same quality as each parent, or better, then there has to be a big evaluation on the roses which you have used. Some times it does not click, hence my prolonged research prior to breeding in spring, It keeps the % rate of decent offspring higher.
I could care less what others’ use, as long as it is legal to do so.
I don’t understand how anyone could be offended when a variety that is in commerce is used for breeding. Certainly professional breeders use varieties created by other breeders, while also developing their own breeding stock. And, like Ralph Moore, they are happy to give credit where credit is due.
But maybe it isn’t the breeder who complains. How many “breeders” are actually corporations?
Harkness (1989) eventually gave up working with Rosa persica because, he explained, “…my nursery was getting a bit restive by this time, surveying so many years’ work done, and nothing at all to sell. After all, we are supposed to be a business.”
McGredy borrowed heavily from other breeders, while also striking out on his own with the “Hand Painted” varieties.
He also made an important point about the best commercial varieties not necessarily being the most useful in breeding. The commercially available varieties may be used as starting points, but the really important breeding roses are likely to be those unnamed seedlings that are so commonly listed as parents. For those you’ll have to “roll your own”, unless some foolishly generous breeder gives you one.
Karl
[hr]
The American Rose, p. 32-33 (Aug 1969)
Roses of Health and Vigor - My First Aim
Sam McGredy, Northern Ireland
"When I took over the family firm in 1952, most of the McGredy strains were played out for breeding purposes, with the exception perhaps of ‘Queen Alexandra,’ introduced by my grandfather and ‘McGredy’s Yellow.’ Varieties were chosen which other breeders had found useful – Spartan (from Boerner), Crimson Glory (Kordes), Peace (Meilland), and Karl Herbst (Kordes) are examples.
"‘Spartan’ quickly proved to be a useful breeder and though Gene Boerner was using it to a certain extent, he never seemed to realize its great potential. This wonderful variety gave me ‘Mischief,’ which won the R.N.R.S. President’s International Trophy. Then came ‘Timothy Eaton,’ ‘Violet Carson,’ and ‘Paddy McGredy.’ This last named was an outstanding breakthrough in the search for a rose with Hybrid Tea blooms carried in Floribunda-like profusion.
"When selecting breeding material, it is not always the most promising seedling, as a variety in itself, that will produce a first class new rose, the seedling must be chosen for its promise in further hybridization. For instance, in a line of fifty red Hybrid Teas, three may be outstandingly attractive in appearance, but these are not necessarily the plants to select for breeding. One of these fifty could have a particular quality which has been recessive in previous breeding: so that is the plant to use.
“And I hold very strongly to the opinion that you cannot breed very good roses unless you start with outstanding roses: general standard of plant material must be of first quality. Commitment to such a policy allows breeders like Kordes, Poulson, Meilland and me to get so far ahead in the type of breeding material we use that it makes it very difficult for anybody else to enter the rose breeding field and to catch up on our lines.”
I agree with all that’s been expressed here about the necessity of using other breeders’ work and why. I also agree that for one’s work to be ignored would be lack of validation of your efforts. I posted the question in hopes of showing it to an overseas breeder whom I asked for parentage information concerning their work. The response was that an acquaintance in a large European breeding firm told this breeder that advertising use of competitors’ roses to make commercial varieties would result in “hard feelings” and this person wishes not to cause them.
I sounds like a ruse to me… I’m pretty good at picking them being around teenagers all day every day. It’s like asking my daughter (15 going on 21, or so she’d like ot think), something like what do you think of ‘x’ and because she didn’t really want to get involved in the conversation she would respond with some kind of conversation killer like “I don’t know… it depends…” which roughly translated means I don’t know… why the hell did you ask me? I don’t really care! LOL This response, that it would cause ‘hard feelings’, is that kind of response given by someone who really couldn’t be bothered to go and actually find the information and get involved in the discourse. I would tell your friend that it was probably a similar thing that was intended as a conversation killer to stop any further requests because they really couldn’t be bothered with it (or they were an office grunt who didn’t know what they were talking about anyway). I don’t really think anyone really believes it… even on a commercial scale… because as has been said nobody can really claim sole ownership of any rose-breeding idea… they are all just slightly massaged versions of other ideas someone has already in another time and another place. It is, however, typical of commercial attitude so I would bet my bottom dollar that this is what was behind it and would take it with a grain of salt (a sip of lemon, and a shot of tequila).
I share lots of my things around, registered or not. The only thing I stipulate is that if I send someone a cutting or similar such material of one of my breeder seedlings or unregistered seedlings that they are free to breed with it as much as they want but they are not, under no circumstances, to redistribute it because once it gets out there it is gone and someone will find it in years to come and then spend the rest of their lives trying to ID it until someone learned looks at it and slaps an incorrect ID on it so that it is forever known as the wrong thing and all traces of origin are lost forever (or is that how roses ‘evolve’???). Others are welcome to them as well… but they have to come from me so I have the opportunity to express that I don’t want it to escape to the general public because there is enough who-ha about IDing old roses now to go ahead and deliberately create problems for future generations. If it’s registered and available commerically… then it’s public domain. If I PBR it then the only thing they can’t do is propagate it and sell it.
Having said this… in the last year I have been cold-called by three commercial entities interested in ‘pushing’ my roses. Two were wholesale nurseries and one was a large plant management agency. When I mentioned that one of my roses that I was considering for release was ridiculously fertile they recommended I keep it because I didn’t want to release anything fertile to the public, who could then breed with it, when I could keep it for myself and make more of the good thing. I have thought about this and decided that anyone who says this really doesn’t get it. You can breed two roses together your whole life and not get the same result twice so being precious about lineages is stupid (unless GM is involved… and then I’m going to stay out of the argument because I don’t know enough about it), so I’m going to go ahead and investigate its release anyway and good luck to anyone who wants to try breeding with it. I can sleep well with this decisions because for one of my seedlings to make it this far it means I am happy with it, in all the aspects that I select for, and I would (and do) breed with it myself…
I understand your point, Simon. Perhaps the initial information that using the roses to create commercially successful ones was an issue, but not disclosing their breeding. This person has offered to share any parentage information of their crosses with me, all I have to do is ask, and they have. What they fear is the information being posted, getting back to the creator of the original variety used and causing tensions.
Having other breeders use a rose of mine in their own efforts is my main goal and I’d thrilled if I developed something that was of interest to others.
I have read all the replies to Kim’s question and thought I will not reply as I have not bred a rose YET. Then on reflection I thought about it again. If I was to get a rose up to the stage where someone else would want to breed with it I would be over the moon and help that person or persons with any information they required so the “holy grail” of rose might be achieved.
In saying that I also believe, strongly that prior to registration of any new rose developed has to have it’s pedigree defulged, not this “seedling x seedling”. Surely any of the big breeders know what they are crossing, even before the cross is made. These are only my opinions and some here might not agree.
When I wrote my article, “Some Thoughts on Keeping and Sharing Parental Data”, for The Next Step, I included the following extract from the ARBA Annual 2001 - ‘In the Beginning there was … Eva’ by Bob Webster
“When researching parentage, it is very disheartening to come across ‘seedling’ x 'seedling’. Breeders who do this must fail to appreciate the debt they owe to all past breeders who have handed on their breeding information for the benefit of current breeders and lovers of the rose, and thus fail in their duty to future generations. Roses have been a part of history for thousands of years. It is frustrating therefore, that at a time when interest in rose history has never been so great, some breeders are deliberately closing doors that never can be opened by future generations of rose lovers. Heritage is important and the rose that gives us so much joy deserves better.â€
I recall a conversation with Tom Carruth, Weeks Roses, when he said that the odds were better of winning a lottery than coming up with the same rose using the same parents. Tom was always one to disclose the parentage of any of his roses. He also said that when it was released, he had been messing with it for 10 years.
I was just rereading some of the articles in The Next Step, and thought my article fit in very nicely here. If you don’t have a copy, it can be ordered from Larry Peterson right here o the website.
Personally, I could care less. And if I didnt want anything I create used, I wouldnt give it out. I mean, comon… this is mostly a mass market. What is there to expect other than somethign being used?
Must be honest there is something totally silly about this whole conundrum.
If it were me, I would respond by culling my rose / roses causing this issue (however precious they were to me), and also as a matter of principle I would NEVER EVER hybridize with roses bred by the breeder whose feathers are ruffled.
Just what I would do if I were her… of course she has not requested advice, so this is not meant as advice to her…it is just what I would do, without even a second thought.
Life is too short to worry about such silliness.
JMHO !
Here is a simple question with an obvious answer to the breeder whos feathers are being ruffled
Is any rose in your stable dependent on the work of others or did you breed eveything you have from species?
Like it was said above I think this is a ruse by someone who did not want to take the time. Or maybe it is someone how is generally offended by others using their work. Maybe it is the same reason some firms guard their parentages. Selfish ownership issues. I can understand not wanting parentages to get out there but after 10 years or so after they are released you should be way past that cross anyways if you are doing your job right and not say JP living in the past doing the same crosses over and over into infinity. And if you do not want other to use your work in breeding well their are two solution 1. do not release it in the first place or 2. only release crappy plants no one wants to use anyways.
I marveled at some of Ralph Moores last catalogs when you read descriptions and it said straight out that he thought it had hybridizing potential. Perhaps it was a dieing man seeing to it that some of his lines would be carried on. But it seems that he was always willing from what I have heard to be apart of other hybridizers success. And whether these people like it or not they will be forever linked to others in the history of roses not just before their arrival but long after they are dead. Their are few totally dead ends in history. We all like to think ourselves at the pinnicle of things but in reality there is no peak but one long plain running in every direction.
Perhaps it was a dieing man seeing to it that some of his lines would be carried on.
I met the Prime Minister of Australia last week and led her on a tour of my aquaculture facility. She’s a really lovely person in real life… but… I would have been much more honoured, and in awe, to have met Mr Moore… from the very little I know of him through others I would suggest he was always like this and it was in his nature to cultivate everything from plants to other people’s dreams.
And whether these people like it or not they will be forever linked to others in the history of roses not just before their arrival but long after they are dead.
Adam, I love that! It’s awesome that someone as insignificant as me can be linked to someone as inspirational as Louis Lens (my fav. breeder), Mr Moore (my second fav. breeder) and everyone one here (my collective third fav. breeders)… it’s like a rosey 8 degrees of separation 
Hi Simon,
I love the way that you said this regarding Mr. Moore.
I think that he loved cultivating people more than he did roses.