We can do it!! I can wait to see Pat, Cindee, Mark, Jodi, Noni, Frank, Ryan, Maria, Blanca, Chas, Kitty, and all of us with blooms that are more beautiful than anything that is being sold!! :-) Hey...thank you to the people who sent the photos from Dave's Garden. Unfortunately, neither of them really showed the throat of the bloom. I really wanted to see SPOTS! Here is a little comparison I made (Gordie's on the bottom row): Notice that the red on the upper ones goes the the edge, not real distinct stripes, color (maybe because there's more if it) seems darker, and bloom shape is different compared to bloom in upper left. Gordie is really more of a flat bloom (relatively) compared to one in upper right corner...etc, with out the curling back of the petal. As part of this process I even bought the set of RHS colors to classify the colors on Gordie...and there are distinct differences between it and many others blooms. Even just a shade or 2. These 2 blooms show some similarities, but Gordie blooms consistently year after year to look like this (not like our Lady Janes, eh? :-) Anyway, they are similar, but Gordie's veining goes all the way to the edge and there really are no areas filled in with any amount of red. Guess you'd say the spacign between veins determines the color (if there was less space it would appear redder). I think Wren, Edric, and I have cousins...and I KNOW Minerva had to had a hand in making Gordie...the color, etc!! Jodi and others will tell you over and over, blooms vary depending on the care and climate...so I think we could ponder this until next year and never come up with an answer. Hippi DNA...we need it now! :-) K

Riptide has officially been ordered! Thank you Don. Did not realize it was a parent of Mr. Blue. Have high hopes for that hosta next year. Right now it is super low to the ground and a bit strange to look at. Wonder if it is because it was a pot plant? Or new? Eleven that dragons eye looks great. If I had seen that yesterday, would have added it to the order. Going on the list.

Note: FYI: Posted on January 31, 2011 supplement to ARS Official Rose List to "Rose" Group and to Garden Web members. I noted that "Mary Pickersgill" is listed as single (4-8) petals in the 2011 January/February Rose magazine, while MR 12 database list it as having 26-40 petals. Purpose: to inform ARS, judges and exhibitors of a mistake in an ARS official judging document. Rather than ARS acknowledging an error, compounded the mistake by posting on its website "News" section, (Corrected Jan/Feb 2011 Rose Registrations.) "Due to a system upgrade in the publishing department, a font compatibility issue caused several squares to print in the 2011 January/February "Rose" Registrations. Please see the Resources section under "American Rose" to download a corrected PDF. We apologize for the inconvenience." Yes several squares were filled in, even though it had nothing to do with actual judging, but not a word that it also changed "Mary Pickersgill" petal count to full (26/40) petals in the revised 2011 January/February "Rose" Registrations. While the "News" section is not considered an official judging document, by noting corrections to 2011 Jan/Feb "Rose Registrations, ARS sneakily filled its obligation of notifying the public that "Mary Pickersgill" has a changed petal count. The "Mary Pickersgill" incident is a typical example of ARS twisting the facts. To learn more, go to ARS IRAR-R/ Rose registrations, information listed is that Mary Pickersgill was registered on 10-13-2010, being in bold print indicating a change accrued in the previous 4 months. Next try ARS MR 12 database, use the Search box to locate "Mary Pickersgill" listed as full (26/40) petals, with the latest update of 10-21-2010. After completing this circle several times, realize a change was made, but when? Approximately 18 months ago a similar issue accursed with "Renegade" registered in 2008 was listed as a single when it�s a double. Finally it was changed to the proper petal count in ARS 2010 Official List. When the 2011 handbook was published, "Renegade" again was listed as a single, this time without noting a correction to the 2011 Handbook, in MR 12 database. *As previous posted, ARS is not ready for Modern Technology.* 2-4-2011

I was perusing my kane county illinois codes and I came across this and thought of this post. Maybe your area has a similar ordinance you can trump up to solve your problems: Codes: (8) a. Notwithstanding any other provision of this code, to operate or permit operation of any sound amplification system in a vehicle or on property, or to perform lawn mowing or utilize power or nonpower tools, or to operate off road vehicles, including, but not limited to, off highway motorcycles, minibikes, all-terrain vehicles (ATVs), snowmobiles or other like or similar vehicles, on private property where the noise from such vehicle or activity is such as to unreasonably disturb, injure or endanger the comfort, repose, health, peace or safety of reasonable persons of ordinary sensitivity; and when after written or verbal warning from law enforcement personnel the owner or operator fails to cease and desist from such operation or activity. The terms "motorcycles", "off road motorcycles", and "all-terrain vehicles" shall have the same meaning as in the Illinois motor vehicle code. "Snowmobile" shall have the same meaning as in the snowmobile registration and safety act. b. To make, continue, create or cause to be made or continued any loud or raucous noise. c. To make, continue, create or cause to be made or continued any noise which is harsh, prolonged, unnatural, or unusual in time or place as to occasion unreasonable discomfort to any persons within the neighborhood from which the noise emanates or as to unreasonably interfere with the peace and comfort of neighbors or their guests or operators or customers in places of business, or as to detrimentally or adversely affect such residences or places of business. d. Factors for determining whether a sound is unreasonably loud or raucous may include, but are not limited to, the following: 1. The proximity of the sound to sleeping facilities, whether residential or commercial; 2. The land use, nature and zoning of the area from which the sound emanates and the area where it is received or perceived; 3. The time of day the sound occurs; 4. The duration of the sound; 5. Whether the sound is recurrent, intermittent, or constant; 6. Any violation of section 12-602 of the Illinois motor vehicle code; 7. Removal or modification of adequate sound suppression equipment as set forth in section 4-1(E) of the snowmobile registration and safety act.