I am with David considering that we have to attempt at different and original breeding goals.
Notable achievement by recent newcomers were from such endeavours. Moore, Radler as well as Austin, Noak or Warner breeding is litteraly outstanding and initialy was definitely singular. No coincidence.
Most nurseries have too much roses novelties. Those that do not breed also as they have links with established breeders that offer them trialed rose with included marketing from the introducing nursery.
That is why try to compete i.e. a Meilland var with a similar plant and eventually brighter colored flower is hopeless.
David experience is rather similar to mine: getting seedlings to be trialed is easier than having the promised reports.
You may eventually get more reports from an exclusive testing agreement… but… I was proposed one a few years ago linked to an exclusive marketing agreement with only 33% of the royalty back to the breeder.
Experience of others points to the risks of exclusive agreements. The marketer being able of never selling the trialed vars and forbiding any other sale. Breeders such as Kordes did experiment this for years as well as MacGredy in US market. Moore vars have a very restrictive european marketing where Meilland is his exclusive partner.
Even if rarely pointed one will never too much emphasize that exclusivity should allways be with:
1-restricted territory
2-limited lapse of time
3-fall when there is no marketing.
About european trials: most are public funded. London one (St Anne) is private and funding by breeders is considered.
Actually most rose trials here rather look for candidates.
Personally I have never attempted to place any of my seedlings with a large distributor. It did not seem particularly feasible, considering how much I have heard about the difficulties experienced by others (very similar to those shared here by David and Rob). In cases where an “amateur” has had success in doing that, it appears to me that they actually established themselves/their roses independently prior to having a large distributor concientously look at any of their seedlings. This is just my view from the outside in, so I could be completely wrong there.
In any event, I agree with David that likely the best outlet for most amateurs is some type of agreement/understanding with the smaller distributors that do not have a breeding program of their own. This is in fact the route I am going (with Ashdown). I do not have an exclusive agreement in place. However, to date, they are the only nursery I have sent my seedlings to. No current indication of anything being released anytime soon. But, I sent my first cuttings to them only 3 years ago, and these things do take time.
Personally, I don’t think I will feel satisfied until I do get at least one seedling commercially released in some fashion. Big or small distributor is irrelevant to me. I’m not saying that has to be the ultimate goal for everyone. But, for me personally, that is my goal. If I achieve that, then I may re-evaluate and shoot for larger goals. However, in the meantime, that is the initial goal. Monetary rewards have nothing to do with it. I would just love to see a rose of mine being grown in many different gardens. That feeling could change though if I had a rose the likes of Olympiad or St. Patrick and everyone else was making lots of $$ off of my rose. Then I might change my tune a little. LOL
As for sharing my seedlings with others. I have not done much of that to date. A few plants here and there to family members, and one plant sent to a fellow amateur breeder with growing conditions vastly different than mine. I am now at a stage though, that I have become more interested in doing this. More or less to get more feedback from others rather than just my own thoughts. I will likely loosen my grip a little on a few exhibtion potential roses and let some exhibitors give them a try in their gardens. I know I run the risk of having exhibition roses shared all over the place if they prove to have consistant show potential. However, with the first few, that is an acceptable risk. I will just have to make note of who kept them to themselves and who didn’t, and then share accordingly moving forward. Now I digress even further…
OK…I think I thoroughly and completely got off topic here. I just had a lot of thoughts pop up after reading some of these posts. LOL
Michelle,
I too am not focused on monetary goals but more focused on getting at least one variety to the market either through a small or a large distributor. Distributors that don’t have their own breeding program sounds like a desireable route to go initially. Honestly, I think that the chances of making huge amounts of money breeding roses is unlikely for most of us. The thought of having a rose(s) of mine being marketed and grown in gardens throughout the country is very appealing…even if I’m not making lots of money from it. The big dream is to come up with a rose that has staying power on the market for many years. One that other breeders want to use in their own breeding programs. Should a ‘block buster’ rose come out of my breeding program, I’d be thrilled but I’m not counting on it.
I think the prospects for making large amounts of money breeding roses nowadays is virutally nil.
I think there was a time when it was more profitable.
I’ll bet the only real prospects are for very easily propagated disease resistant shrub roses.
There seems to be a scramble on at the moment to meet the needs of folks who don’t have the time, money or energy to do even basic landscape maintenance.
I feel that for the amateur hybridizer, making available new gene combinations that can contribute to future roses that will have to survive without chemical spraying and/or less than ideal growing conditions is a realistic goal.
That is a great goal Henry.
Robert, I think you are correct about “a scramble on at the moment to meet the needs of folks who don’t have the time, money or energy to do even basic landscape maintenance.” Do you see this as a short term or long term “need”? Any guess?
I see it as a long term trend. Yes.
Part of this has to do with production costs. It’s the only way we will be able to compete in a global economy.
I think there will still be a place for other roses but less so as time goes by and as the new no-spray shrub roses become better in terms of flower form, color and fragrance.
Once upon a time a rose breeder, now deceased, was approached with the request that he name a rose for a certain singer.
The breeder had never heard of the singer and blew off the folks who approached him.
I can tell you this because I heard about it independently from both the breeder and from one of the requesters.
The singer is famous and beloved in country and western circles and a rose named for him would sell.
But an opportunity was lost, just because…
And this has to do with regional rose trials… I will go to the requesters (who are from my part of the world) and tell them about the trials at Ashdown once we see that there are new roses that do well in our part of the world, and, just maybe we’ll get a rose named for the beloved singer. And the market is already there, not in knockout numbers but it would be a beginning.
Ann, I remember when Ralph Moore offered to name a rose for Dorothy Hamill, the Olympic Gold Medal winning skater back in 1976.
She turned him down flat.
The rose was subsequently named, ‘Rise n Shine’
It works both ways. Have you heard much of Dorothy lately?
If I ever had anyone offer to name a rose after me, I suspect its alternate name would more likely be ‘drag your lazy carcass out of bed already, would ya?’
David Z., does the Earthkind program have an actual testing program spelled out, and if so, can you share their procedures? Obviously, that is a program with a seperate source of funding from what I was inquiring about here, but I would really be curious as to the nitty-gritty of how such is planned, executed and funded, as well as knowing how they promote their mission.
Thanks.
Hi Philip, The Earthkind program does have a testing program spelled out. It was written out and will soon be published as a ~100 page booklet. This coming Saturday in Houston, TX is an all day workshop on the program. I’m looking forward to attending it!! David
Fun! I hope you might be able to share some insights!
-Philip
Hi David!
How’d the workshop go? Can you share any new thoughts??
-Philip
Hi! The workshop was fantastic and I learned a lot about the overall program. THey have a manual. There was an Earthkind seminar at the Dallas National Convention and those attending that will get this manual sent to them soon. The program started out of a need to respond to some voices that claimed to be strongly environmentally concerned and that the research and recommendations of Texas A&M were strongly biased towards chemical companies. In response Dr. Steven George and others decided to do more research regarding more sustainable / organic practices and actually have data on the topic to support future recommendations. Those voices were just talking and didn’t have any real data, just ideas and philosophy without solid support. Anyways, roses became a model crop because they have a reputation as hard to grow. The Earthkind approach involves good soil management, fully composted compost initially to build soil organic matter and nutrition, the use of appropriate mulches for moisture retention and a slow release nutrient source in the years to come.
For the rose component there were well over 100 roses first tested years ago (about a decade ago). Roses are not given supplemental irrigation after established and no preventative pesticide treatments and basically no control pesticide treatments. The only pesticide that is recommended is roundup at first to control perennial weeds before the bed is planted. The list of roses trialed were compiled from recommendations of rose societies and nurseries in the South as good landscape roses in a low-maintenance setting. The idea was to trial roses over 4-5 years. Space and labor are significant, so the idea is to widdle down potential candidates that would meet the objective rather than just accepting new varieties from all the nurseries that claim something could be a good contender. Out of those 117 or so roses initially trialed very very few were able to withstand those conditions and grow and flower year after year.
With the new trial going in and trying to get roses that would be good landscape choices in other regions of the country, the same idea is being held to- try to find roses to trial that have gained a bit of a reputation of being a good performer under those settings. I don’t think there will be the resources available to trial new roses all the time from the breeders in these 4-5 year studies mostly supported by volunteers and public or university gardens. Roses that show they have potential will later be trialed and trialed over a wider range of conditions.
Many are excited about the program because of roses, the soil management portion that is being applied to other plants (it seems to really be working and enough nutrition for the most part), and/or just because of the sustainable portion. Cities that tried the approach in Texas (roses and perennials) are saving money on water, planting adapted plants that do well, and have improved soils in their beds in parks. It doesn’t seem to be all that new of an approach to take care of the soil and use mulch and plants identified as being well-adapted, but I guess for it is new because of all the marketing voices and business decisions that get said and become confusing.
I look forward to partnering with Earthkind and getting at least one trial in this spring in MN. I think a rose evaluation program for new seedlings needs to be a different program, but many of the principles can be applied to it in terms of culture.
Sincerely,
David
Thanks, David!
I am curious though as to how the trials are funded, and how the test sites are selected. Any thoughts there?
David I am a Texas Master Gardener in Abilene and worked with Doctor Geaoge in trialing the original roses that are now known as Earthkind roses adapted to all areas of Texas. The program was to not use any fertilizers, no spraying of any kind and water only to get established. We have these roses and other roses that are in the on going trials in our demonstratin gardens at the Extension Office. Have been in the program for over eight years and have not lost any of the plants under these abusive situations and ours have thrived. I believe you will enjoy working with Steve. He is a wonderful man and I am honored to call him my friend. Fred