Sorry you've quit on me Edwin, if I were helping someone as stupid as me, I'd have quit too though.

That said, I don't see any clear spelling errors based on last year's thread though you did seem to think the plants were incorrectly labeled. Given the difficulty in identifying the blue/green varigated types, I'm going to keep them labeled as such until I find out definitively that they are something else.

While no plants in my gardens are intentionally disabled, I'm not going to jump off a bridge because a few are questionable, rather I'll treat them as a long-term project to correctly ID and confirm their true names. Your assistance helps steer me a certain way but if you're too frustrated to help, then don't.

I think what joy is getting at is that it should be 'Arneson's Blue Variegated' and 'Sander's Blue', though I could be wrong. Appreciate all of the pics Will, thanks,

Dan

Yes,'Arneson's Blue Variegated'. Correction noted.

Dave

Cool pics, Will!

P.S.

I know you've mentioned in several threads that your conifer collecting is driven by OCD, but based on this thread and others, I'd say Coniferjoy exhibits greater tendencies toward OCD.

P.P.S.

Coniferjoy, it's great to have someone with your knowledge base hanging around, especially for newbs like me, but constantly acting like an uninvited and put upon pedant does not become you. ...cue the defense team...

Well, I'll be perfectly honest, I've had them listed incorrectly like this since I started collecting. I do indeed now notice they were corrected last year but I don't see letters in words like that very well and I'm a numbers guy - bad with memory on names.

I apologize for the repeated errors folks - it's hard when your new to a hobby and so much to take in. When I have thirty years of knowledge, hopefully I spell correctly by then. Until then, forgive(or correct) the errors, and I'll keep them from becoming 'sloppy' ones.

I'm one of Edwin's biggest fan, as a young collector, hopeful to soak up information and conifer history as well as help with ID'ing conifers I am unsure of. His style, perhaps that of the region, is terse and assuming, but this is an international website and it's important to understand and appreciate different cultures and customs whenever possible. I hope you're still willing to lend me an ear Edwin, but if I've busted up my limit on corrections, then rebill me and we'll start a new subscription.

Here's a few plants, including one that may need Edwin's help.

Picea glauca 'Pendula'. The classic narrow tower, one I have planted more then once in my gardens. My backyard specimen, this plant gets about 4-6 hours of direct sunlight a day(and maybe the reason it's losing some of it's inner needles).
{{gwi:599417}}

Picea glauca 'Gold Tip'. Maybe the wrong plant, first year I've had it in Spring, a lighter green, but no gold yet.
{{gwi:599418}}

'Rainbow's End'. Another gold flusher, as I've heard, it's the second flush.
{{gwi:599419}}

'Pixie Dust'.
{{gwi:599420}}

-Will

Well, if it's an issue of "cultural style," I'll have to make note of which countries to avoid, as I'd likely spend much of my vacation there kicking people in the shins and then getting arrested....

I generally Google unsure names before posting to see the commonest spelling usage. If it's still wrong then it's already gone viral which I think is what CJ tries to nip in the bud, in his own sweet way.

Picea glauca 'Arnesson's Blue'
{{gwi:599421}}

Enough whining for now.
The thing is that I spend a lot of time here to correct conifer names and try to give more value to everybody's conifer collection.
If plants aren't written in the good way, the collection is worthless.

People will give their new founed plants a cultivar name which always must be written that way and they don't like it if it's written in another way.
I don't like this either so I've to make corrections once and a while...
For instance Picea abies 'Sherrie' which is named after Dax's mother.
Keith Guess was the founder of this one but I'm very sure that Dax wouldn't like it if he came across this plant written like 'Sherie', Sherry' or 'Sherrey'.
All these 3 are incorrect because 'Sherrie' it is!
This is just a simple example...

Another thing here is that all conifer names which are mentioned here are used in the Google searching machine which is a very serious thing!
The consequences for other people are big if members of this forum are using the wrong plantsnames.
For example now:
Someone is typing at google for
Picea glauca 'Arneson's Blue Variegated'
He/she will find the following (only at todays topic)
-Picea glauca 'Arenson's Blue Varigated'
-Picea glauca 'Anderson's Blue Variegated'
-Picea glauca 'Arnesson's Blue'
Then a "one day fly" participant at this forum starts a topic about this plant and will mention then: "which cultivar name I've to use because I came across several differend one's..."
Stop this BIG MESS and use your head before you write some conifer names down at this forum!
Writing conifer names in a wrong way is a chain reaction which will be a VERY big problem in the future if corrections wouldn't be made!

@John: stop with your nonsens here about "Defense Team" and "To avoid a country for it's cultural style"!
This is an International Conifer forum and it's not wise to offend people in the way they speak or act and specialy not for me because I'm helping our members here...
I do this in my own way and I like to talk straight but with a good haert.

Will, with my straight comment to you I hope I waked you for a next time, no hard feelings from my side :0)
Of course I'll try to help you again when help is needed.
I think it's wise to make your personal database of the one's you've collected and make corrections when you have to.
Use this database every time you'll make a new topic and you'll see that less name mistakes will be made...
I wish you a lot of succes with this :0)

You're right about a lot of things Edwin, but not the third sentence. I 'collect' conifers mostly out of a desire to have an interesting and unusual garden. Even if NONE of my conifers had names, I'd still enjoy walking around, looking at the various plants, enjoying each unique element and the colors and textures they provide. Perhaps to a hardcore purist, it would be worthless, but then again, an expert like yourself can ID 99% of the plants in my garden without tags anyways. So to this point, I strongly disagree.

The google search point is the best arguement for careful documentation, particularly since so many of the GardenWeb forums come up as a high priority for searches. A huge amount of the text, webpages and photos in conifer searches are coming from the GW forums and the work we do here. We(myself and everyone really) should be at least making a strong effort to label plants correctly. I certainly don't know the correct names of all plants, but I can prevent errors like 'Arenson's Blue', etc.

Now that we ironed that out, more photos...

Picea glauca 'Pixie'. My specimen, seems more narrow then Dave's....?
{{gwi:599422}}

Picea glauca 'Goldilocks'. Noting the 'Goldilocks' spelling that is misused for the Pinus parviflora cultivar.
{{gwi:599423}}

-Will

Edwin, ignore all this. You're right.
I will post photos of some of mine later.

And very nice plants folks!

Dax

One last thing to Will's strongly disagrement:
I'm glad that you're enjoying your plants in your garden, even when they didn't had a name.
For private circumstances this is ok with me, BUT when you're sharing your plants on this forum, then a differend situation will arise and plantnames must be written in the right way...
I guess you saw that I allready helped you in the Abies lasiocarpa/magnifica topic :0)

@Edwin: Do not presume to tell me how to behave, as you're simply proving my point.

P.S.

Feel free not to "help" me, should the urge ever strike you in the future.

John is kinda proving my point here as well. People from different cultures act and perceive words very differently. This is the most classic example I can think of. Americans as a rule of thumb are very strong-willed, determined, independant and stubborn. Undoubtably in other parts of the world, the words more often used are spoiled, narcassistic, rude, ignorant, etc. This is from cultural differences. When someone lacking authority tells an American what they can and cannot do, it will often be met with staunch resistance, direct disobedience and occasionally a solitary finger.

Edwin, you've frequently used the sentence 'This plant *must* be written as...'. At it's very nature, this sentence is laughable to some American's and offensive to others.

Now I know you enough to understand these are cultural differences and I appreciare the nuances and give you plenty of 'cultural slack', as I am sure you do with me as well. No doubt if someone from the Netherlands spelled as many conifer cultivars wrong as I have, they'd be in jail by now!

Newcomers though are much more likely to tell you to buzz off and take your knowledge with you, rather then spell plants correctly, particularly by people with one-hundreth of your conifer collecting interest.

I can't change your culture nor will I presume to tell you what to do Edwin, but you may find you have much better luck substiting 'Must' with 'Should'. American's will do 98% of the things they are told they should do, and 70% of the things they must do. True story.

Anyway, hopefully we can all co-exist here for decades to come. I know there will be culture issues(go compliment a Chinese business, see what happens), but we can work through them if we understand that at the very beginning, things are different in all parts of the world.

-Will

Will, I understand what you mean, but you have to understand that "must" means that you've to do it this way.
"should" means that you've a choice, you do it or you don't.
With conifer names there's no choice because ANOTHER person, not me, decided how to write a plantsname.
In most cases this is the founder of that plant.
For instance I'll mention your Pinus mugo witches' broom (from which I hope it's still there).
Some day it will be availlable for others and you'll name it after your wife.
I don't know her name but for instance her name is Betty.
Pinus mugo 'Betty' it is.
Soner or later you'll find it somewhere else under the name 'Bety' or 'Bettie'.
Do you also give them a choice to pick the name they want to use, or do you say "It must bin written as 'Betty' because that's the name I gave to this plant!
I hope you understand this situation better now when it will get personal...

Edwin, what Will has written is exactly right.

Furthermore, when you suggest that someone must be "blind" because he hasn't properly followed your lead, or (as in another thread), mention that you have "warned" a person to follow your advice more than once, you come across as a pedantic bully, despite the great reserve of knowledge obviously at your disposal. I am here on this forum to learn and share, but not at the expense of my sense of fair play.

Others on this forum have chalked your apparent grumpiness up to cultural differences or communication barriers, but that is not the impression I get at all. I get the impression that you come across exactly the way you intend to. The comment I made earlier about avoiding your country was a JOKE... I do not blame your COUNTRY for your own personal AUDACITY. I'm sure your country is populated by very nice people.

The point you seem to be missing here is that you have absolutely no control over whether or not a person does as you insist. You cannot tell us what we MUST do because you do not control the banhammer.

Your best hope for influencing another is to make a persuasive argument for why he SHOULD do a certain thing, understanding all along that some people simply won't listen to you no matter what. That's just life. If what you want is to keep the Google searches accurate, it should be enough simply to provide the correct names within the body of the thread so anyone reading in the future will see them.

Just so you know, personal insults are likely to be met in kind, no matter what service you provide the forum or what amazing knowledge you possess.

I tag my conifers with engraved tags so I have an investment in them and want them to be correct. I don't want to waste the money to re-do them. To that end I appreciate Edwin's corrections to my lists.

On that note here's my one input in this category that I'd love to have verified. I brought it up once before some time back and no-one had knowledge of it. So here goes.....

Picea glauca 'Blau Kucken'

{{gwi:599424}}

mark

Yep...I have to go with Edwin a serious guy with a serious collection.

No disrespect to you Will.

Before Edwin came to the forum in 2007 we had very little if any input as to culvitar name correctness. He changed a lot of incorrect names and spellings. About 10% of my offerings were misnamed. To some people correctness is not important. To others, like me, very important. So I appreciate what he has contributed to this forum.

If you are in to serious cultivar collecting you should be well informed, or into the learning stage, regarding correct names. Especially if you post photos of your collection on the forum, it goes to all the world, or open your garden to the community for viewing. While Edwin's approach to to resolving this issue is not to some of your liking...get over it. Be thankful he is interested in you personally to forward valuable information he retains from years of being a conifer guy.

I used to take things personally on this forum and get bent out of shape. Not anymore. Learn to get along. Most of the people don't really mean what they say it come comes across wrong and there we go. If in doubt send a personal email to resolve your differences.

With that said let's get about the business of what this thread is really about.

Dave

John, thank you very much for your most delightful words.
I made myself clear, also did you, now it's time to move on don't you think?

B.t.w. ;0) is the symbol when you're making a joke.
Maybe you need it another time when you're joking again ;0)

Were where we, Picea glauca's...

Dave, you're right about the 'Pixie'.
The true form (your first pic) is a very compact one which derived in Canada as a dwarf mutation on a 'Conica'.
The thing here is that nurseriemen took the biggest shoots for cuttings, which in fact are reverted mutations back to the old 'Conica'. (your second pic)
That's why there are several faster growing types of it...

Picea glauca 'Burning Well'
Found by Joe (Joseph) Stupka as a witches' broom at the Burning Well Road.

Will, your 'Pixie' is an in between form of both forms which Dave are showing to us.
But your's is also a reversion back to the 'Conica'...

'Gold Tip' and 'Rainbow's End':
Both seems not to be the right one.
'Gold Tip' (see link) looks simular, if not the same as 'Daisy's White' and the second flush of the 'Rainbow's End' is a creamy yellow which I don't see here...

Picea glauca 'Goldilocks':
Clement several times mentioned here that there isn't such plant.
In his opinion this is probably the Picea abies 'Kornel's Dwarf Yellow', and I agree in this with him.

Mark, I'm very glad to help you with your tags :0)
'Blau Kucken' is German for 'Blue Look'.
Unfortunately I never came across this one till now.
It could be propagated as a reversion of one of the blue 'Conica' types, but I'm not sure.
I'll keep this one in mind and let you know if I've more info about it.

Picea glauca 'W.B. Jay'
{{gwi:599425}}
I hope someone can help me to provide some info about this one.
Thanks in advance!

Here is a link that might be useful: Picea glauca 'Gold Tip'

Right, John, again you are clearly very passionate(and botanically correct) Edwin, but in the US the word MUST is usually associated with fines or tasers. While you no doubt have enormous respect from the conifer collecting community, I don't think you've been issued a taser yet to keep those unruly collectors in check.

I *will* try and follow your advice, listen to your corrections and make changes in my database(and to this forum), but there are no laws, no requirements and nothing to stop people from doing otherwise, other then you suggesting to them that they should fix them.

Frustrating as that is no doubt to you Edwin, as John said, this is life.

I'd like to get back to the Picea glauca gallery, if everyone is happy-go-lucky.

Picea glauca 'Rita'. A gold flushing type, near white in part-shade.
{{gwi:599426}}

Picea glauca 'Daisy's White'. Mislabeled originally from the seller as 'Maigold', now a Picea pungens cultivar name. This specimen is in moderate shade.
{{gwi:599427}}

'Daisy's White'.
{{gwi:599428}}

-Will

I'm no expert here, so I might be totally off...but aren't a few of these trees planted to close to each other?

Picea glauca 'Pendula' looks like it is planted only a couple of feet away from some other conifers that don't look like they are miniatures. Just curious. Maybe it is just the way the pic is taken?

You're correct sir, planted very close together. The pine to it's right is moving either this Summer or the next. Picea engelmannii 'Bush's Lace' will stay and I'll allow them to grow into eachother.

My first Photo Gallery contribution!

'McConnell's Gold'
{{gwi:599429}}

'Dent'
{{gwi:599430}}

'Daisy White'
{{gwi:599431}}

Will - I see. Some others seem fairly close together as well, when you consider what they'll look like in 10 + years, BUT I'm pretty sure you are much more experienced then I am, plus maybe you don't mind some overlap. I have a very large farm yard, so I'm accustomed to giving each tree plenty of space to reach their potential. Obviously you are dealing with a different situation.

Also, this "sir" is a Mrs., ;)

Nice, but I think the name of your first image are :
Picea glauca " Mac Gold"
Cl�ment

Will get's teased and asked about his close plantings all the time. In part he's going for a growing together garden look, but I think it's mostly because it was the only way for him to get thousands of conifers in one spot. lol

His collection is vast and I think a lot of us are waiting to see in the next 5 years or so as begins to have to move a few to make room, and then the next year a bunch, followed by the next when he finally has to move hundreds.

He's going to be one busy guy. But he has a great collection.

mark

Teehee. Well I can understand that. I do the same thing in my perennial bed (is it literally getting smaller?!)..though I must say a perennial is a bit less backbreaking to move!!

Definitely a beautiful collection. "Daisy White" or "Daisy's White"(one of you must have got it right!) is fantastic.

Weeper, It's 'Daisy's White.

Will, didn't it cross your mind that all 3 of your whitish cream one's at your last posted pics are all one and the same plant?
The thing is that the 'Daisy's White' was protected by a breeders license but people tried to avoid this protection by given this plant another name.
'Maigold' is the same one as 'Daisy's White', I'm pretty sure it's also for 'Rita'...

Picea glauca 'Fort Ann'
{{gwi:599432}}
{{gwi:599433}}

Picea glauca var. albertiana 'Pixie Dust'
{{gwi:599434}}
Picea glauca 'Palecek'
{{gwi:599435}}

-Sam

Absolutely Edwin, but my mind is young, naive and look at plant names and usually assuming them to be correct. Are you saying 'Rita' is incorrect and also probably a stolen patent as well?

Weeper, indeed, I've done lot of work in three+ years now and I feel that I am ready for plenty more in the future. Hopefully I'll have the luxury of letting some plants go, moving some to a botanical garden and leaving only the plants I feel are doing the best - and looking the best.

My longterm plan is to have about 300-500 conifers, instead of 2,000 - so as you can see, about 1/2 to 3/4's of the conifers will be moved/pruned/culled or trained over the years.

A couple more today.

Picea glauca 'Joseph Rys'. I've also seen 'Josef Rys'. Perhaps Edwin can steer me straight.
{{gwi:599436}}

'Gnome'.
{{gwi:599437}}

-Will

Will, I can only speculate that the 'Rita' is the same one as the 'Daisy's White'.
The surprising thing is that several 'Daisy's White' look a likes will be availlable at the same time...

Unfortunately I can't help you with the 'Josef Rys' or Joseph Rys'.
Even my German friend Jorg Kohout write this one in both ways...

Richard, did your 'Fort Ann' derives from Clement?
I think it is because of his yellow tag and the way of writing... ;0)

Hi Edwin,
Correct! It is one I got last year. The growth this spring is amazing. Certainly looks like a healthy specimen.
Richard

a close-up of 'Palecek'
{{gwi:599438}}

I got a second flush on my 'Pixie Dust'
{{gwi:599439}}

-Sam

'Palecek' I had to post another one 'cause it's just so great
{{gwi:599441}}

-Sam

Picea glauca 'Cecilia' plays well with others.

{{gwi:599444}}

tj

Attended the ACS National Conference this year at the Oregon Garden

The conifer garden is fantastic

{{gwi:599446}}

Picea glauca Pendula

A lovely picture of a beautiful plant.
Thanks.
Richard

{{gwi:599448}}
Stanley's Pygmy

Rispetto, your Stanley's Pygmy' is written as a Picea pungens cultivar, but it isn't and I found out that it's the same one as the Picea glauca 'Cecilia'.
Please change it into the good way.
2 pics above you can see how it will grow after several years...

So which name is the right one? Cecilia or Stanley's Pygmy? Why this cultivar has two names? Where the new name comes from?

Rispetto,the one and only full name you have to use is:
Picea glauca 'Cecilia'.

Here is a link that might be useful: Picea glauca 'Cecilia' photo gallery

Picea abies 'McConnell's Gold'
Bethlehem Nursery Photo
{{gwi:599449}}

Dax

Interesting discovery Dax, and of course I have JUST finished making my steel labels. Damn. Sure was hoping for a gold picea glauca.

NO, the 'McConnel's Gold' is a Picea GLAUCA cultivar!
Look at the habit and it's upright new growth, is has nothing to do with Picea abies...

The synonym for 'McConnel's Gold' is 'Mac Golden'.
Will, do you've a duplicate now?
Luckely for you that you don't have to change your tag and you do have a golden Picea glauca in your collection now :0)

Here is a link that might be useful: Picea pungens 'McConnel's Gold'

Thanks again Edwin, and no duplicate, I didn't have the cultivar before this Autumn. Also is that a typo, Picea pungens??

Edwin, this must be written as Picea glauca 'McConnel's Gold'. lol, couldn't resist.

Yep Will, it's just a typo but I'm glad that you enjoyed it :0)
I was overwhelmed that the 'McConnel's Gold' suddenly was placed as a cultivar of Picea abies while it always was a Picea glauca cultivar.
The differences between these species are huge...

Almost looks like Picea pungens 'Golden Feathers'

Here is a link that might be useful: Golden Feathers

Looked like glauca to me, but I just passed this info along.

Sorry bout' that.

Dax

{{gwi:599451}}
Picea glauca Conica WB E15

{{gwi:599453}}

Picea glauca Julian's Pott's Monstrosa

Henk.