The only Golden DR I know of is 'Ogon' aka 'Gold Rush'...you say the info you found stated globular. What cultivar was it?

ACS database ... info and pix ....

looks like i can not link directly .... type GOLD RUSH into the cultivar name ....

ken

Here is a link that might be useful: ACS database

The name of the cultivar is "Golden Dawn" it was introduced by Kenneth Murray. Although the specimen I saw looked sort of weeping. It is actaully a dwarf globose cultivar that grows only 6" a year. the 10 year size of the plant was 5' tall and 4' wide.

It's patented - PP11848.

Interesting thing is that once the nurery person mentioned to me it was pattented I checked with the patent office and there is another yellow leaf cutivar 'Shibata', trade name Golden Oji. That was introduced in 1995. Interestingly enough it was 'created' from x-ray exposure of seed.

I dislike when people patent plants...
Thanks for the info and the extra info.

Chub Harper here in Illinois has a broom of Dawn Redwood. It too is globular but not golden. It's decent-looking but not great in my opinion. Oh well I just thought I'd throw that in.

There was of course feedback about the new weeping cultivar 'Miss Grace'...folks are saying this isn't a great plant in their opinon.

Dax

The whole 'Miss Grace' feedback thin is a little funny considering most of the people that aren't happy with it have only had it a year or two. I think the test of time will tell.

Having worked in a plant breeding program for a few years, I see the plant patent thing a little differently.

I'm a firm believer in once you purchase a plant you should be able to propagate it freely, especially conifers. All the foofoo flowers, well maybe that's a different story. I still don't like people patenting plants regardless, but that's what makes the world the "beautiful" place it is. So tell me "hoe" as Ken calls you (lol), where can I find which conifers have been patented. I'm sure I've come across it somewhere but I forget. I am interested however.

Thanks (lol),
Dax

Propagate what you like, as long as you don't distribute it to anyone. When a plant is patented it means you can't propagate it for monetary gains or fame. Can you propagate it so you have 2 of that cultivar rather than one? Of course you can.

Well thanks 1kz. I still want to see what's patented and what isn't. I'm actually very curious to know.
I know there's a site that tells of new introductions as Ron has linked it in the past, however I don't know if that page has patented plants listed. That's the closest thing to this discussion off hand I can think of.

Dax

Here a link to the US patent office. In the top left hand corner ther is a link to the serch page. All you really need to do on the search page is type in the genus name and any patent has something to do with the plant you are looking for comes up.

It is actually helpful. You get a full description of the plant and how it differs from the species and other cultivars and there are pictures of the original plant.

Plant patents are like the copyrights put on music. No one is going to send you to jail for making a copy for your own use but if you tyr to profit from making a copy you will get in trouble.

On the other hand I do have issues with trade mark names of plants. There is a national countainer grower that puts trade marks on older cultivars just to make a few extra bucks.

Here is a link that might be useful: us patents

Thank you very much.

That's an interesting adventure searching for patented plants. Unfortunatley, one can only search for things patented from 1976 to present.

Not many conifers are patented along these dates. I searched several species of Abies, Picea, and Pinus.

I now wonder what else was patented before 1976. I don't think I have access to this information as an error message comes up.

Thanks again,
Dax

Dax,

Plant patents are only good for 20 years. Once the patent is up any one can propagate the plant. That's where the trademark comes into play trademarks are good for 10 years and can be renewed for ten year periods from here to the twelth of never.

If you are outside the conifer realm you see this more often. Take for instance the "Sugar Tyme" crabapple. "Sugar Tyme" is the trademarked name. The cultivar name is "Sutyzam". So once the patent is up on this tree any one can propagate it but who will be able to sell a tree named "sutyzam". So You still would have to pay a fee to call the tree Sugar Tyme.

I don't think that there are that many conifers that are patented when compared to other plants. I think part of that may be the mind set of conifer people which (don't take it as an insult) is sort of like that of daylily freaks. With all of the daylily cultivars around you rarely see a patented and trademarked daylily.

One other thing about using the patent site. Try typing in the common name. I mis-spoke previously. Where you can find plants using the scientific name you may also find them, sometimes easier, by using the common name.

Hi Happyhoe,

So tell me this as I need in my own mind a distinguishing answer as to what the difference is among a trademarked name and a cultivar name. In my mind and for clarity within the horticultural trade, only "one" name should be allowed when speaking of a plants name...to avoid confusion and also to keep any other people from giving it yet another name and another name and so on... Does this make sense?

In other words the only way I can interpret your words is that anyone is welcome after the Patent has expired to propagate it, but if they don't want to pay the fee for the tradmarked name, they can still propagate it and call it whatever they wish. Are my thoughts incorrect?

If I am wrong..that's great. If I am right..that seems like utter chaos just waiting to brew up which ultimately effects naming concerns/problems within nomenclature. (What started off as "such and such" now has 10 other names for the same plant because 10 different growers didn't want to pay for the trademarked name)

Thanks again,

Dax

"In other words the only way I can interpret your words is that anyone is welcome after the Patent has expired to propagate it, but if they don't want to pay the fee for the tradmarked name, they can still propagate it and call it whatever they wish. Are my thoughts incorrect? "

Yes, once the patent is up any body that wants to can propagate the plant for profit. I'm sure you could call it whatever you want if the name is not trademarked.

The trademarked name and a nonsense name undermine the concept how plants are scientifically named.

But the trademark is the real cash cow for the owner of the rights. To put it in persepective, a very wide spread US grower that grows there plants in pots that are green that often have the name of the company on the pot, trademarked the name Majestic Beauty Tulip Tree for the cultivar Liriodendron tulipifera "Aureomarginata". This variegated tulip tree has been around for a long time but the company thought that they could sell it better with an name change. I'm not really sure that giving trademarked names to long existing cultivars is the most ethical thing to do.

My wording was difficult since I used the word "incorrect" instead of correct. I hate to do this but one more question.

When the plant patent has expired and somebody trademarks it (yes the green pot people of the west coast...) Then they have "total control" of the new trademarked name for 10 years and should they continue to pay for the trademarked rights (until eternity)...every 10 years that is, then here's where my question comes into play: "Should anyone else want to propagate the plant, could they propagate it under another name should they choose not to call it the trademarked name...or is this against the rules?"

I won't say anything else. Just answer this for me please.
Thanks,
Dax

My wording was difficult since I used the word "incorrect" instead of correct. I hate to do this but one more question.

When the plant patent has expired and somebody trademarks it (yes the green pot people of the west coast...) Then they have "total control" of the new trademarked name for 10 years and should they continue to pay for the trademarked rights (until eternity)...every 10 years that is, then here's where my question comes into play: "Should anyone else want to propagate the plant, could they propagate it under another name should they choose not to call it the trademarked name...or is this against the rules?"

I won't say anything else. Just answer this for me please.
Thanks,
Dax

My computer was freaking out last night... I have absolutely no idea how those above post got times of 3 hours apart. There was some weird boogie woogie happening.
I was seeing scrambled codes all over the garden web page. It was weird man...

Later,
Dax

Once the patent is expired you can propagate it and sell it under a name other than the trademarked name.

But the whole idea behind the tradmark is to give the plant a market presence. So selling under a name other than the trademark may decrease sales.

I'm just curious if you can trademark more than one name for the same plant? The answer is probably not. But wouldn't that add to the confusion. LOL.

BTW. You can pull up all of the plant patents on the patent site by typing PP in the search box and selecting patent number as the search field.

Arthur

Dax, are you ok? Maybe you should stop ingesting yew seed.
I'm sure that'll be the new 'in' drug for teens someday.
"yeah, my parents grow some in back. Free for the taking"

But in all reality I've also noticed scrambled codes on top of gardenweb once and awhile. I thought it was some plot to mind control us.

Thanks Arthur.

1kz5 Iowa, Tell me about it! I thought I was a visionary but this incident has had me bouncing off the walls.

Thanks guys,
Dax

Are you sure that the "Gold Rush" dawn redwood is "globular"? I just purchased a three foot tall dormant seedling and was hoping for a tree much like the original, just with more dramatic foilage. My little tree has a good central leader and the pics I see of the tree show a standard form with perhaps a bit of weeping.

No, 'Golden Dawn' is the globular form. Gold Rush aka 'Ogon' is the same form as the species. Gold Rush grows about a third as fast as the species.
Mike

I have seen photos of the original Golden Dawn and it is very conical tree, like a dwarf more compact Gold Rush. But we cant assume a grafted plant will behave like the original seedling. Dwarf plants can often grow radical when grafted onto a seedling rootstock, as is my experence with Golden Dawn. Plus it burns in full sun here in Oregon, unlike Gold Rush.

Coniflora,
Why would Golden Dawn be grafted, when it is so easy to root Metasequoia cuttings?
Mike

Because Mike (excuse me for interrupting) a Dawn Redwood seedling can be grafted onto it's first season and costs the grower nothing practically for grafting purposes unlike other seedlings (purchased of course). And I know Mike you understand that a grafted plant takes off much faster than one on its' own roots.

Dax

Dax,
Thanks. No need to excuse yourself since your input is always welcome.

Coniflora said: "Dwarf plants can often grow radical when grafted onto a seedling rootstock, as is my experience with Golden Dawn."

And this is the reason for my question: why would anyone graft Golden Dawn onto seedling rootstock when Metasequoia roots so easily from cuttings? A plant on its own roots should maintain the growth habit of the original plant without the risk of increased growth due to grafting.

I realize that from a production standpoint the grower wants to produce as many as possible, as fast as possible, but certainly not at the expense of losing the cultivar's original characteristics. Correct?
Mike

Isn't grafting much more labor intensive than rooting cuttings? I guess not. I guess the point is to raise something fast that will sell for a high price

Grafting just seems less natural to me, with a huge wound scar to heal... I guess that it is why it seems less desriable to me from my viewpoint of ignorance

Mike, grafting is desired because it produces a more consistent plant, in most cases. You a using the roots of a established plant to jump-start your scion. After a few years a rooted plant may match the vigor of a grafted plant, but this is usually not the case.

It's about time GW has zones appearing after our names. I requested they add that as well as soil type a few years back but never heard back from them.

Thanks coniflora. For my behalf I had either forgotten a grafted plant kept characteristics (probably slim margins in all cases though, I would have to think) ..easier.

Anyway, that's maybe my favorite thing in the world to do. Grafting that is.

Dax

P.s. And Noki, you pick up the pace real quickly. Just like becoming a BMX racer! And other times, you do have to work with the wood until you're satisfied everything is a go. Some grafts take me 5 minutes each. Those darn ones with the tiny wood are difficult to hold onto as well and that's on top of just the finicky ones in general. Then there's the ones where your blade cuts right through the entire understock! that one tees me off. Then there's the a to the b to c to the d .... you're always adjusting to occomodate. It's a lot of common sense technique-wise it becomes apparent rather fast. And there are no rules if you would please allow me to say when you understand what it's going to take to get those two wounds to ajoin.