Re: Response From Dave Niswonger to Paul Black Letter

[Capeiris <capeiris@aol.com>]

Dear Bob:

   Thanks for responding to Paul's letter. I think you have some very fine
suggestions to consider. Dave






-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Pries <robertpries@embarqmail.com>
To: aisdiscuss <aisdiscuss@aisboard.org>
Sent: Wed, Dec 1, 2010 11:51 am
Subject: Re: [AISdiscuss] Response From Dave Niswonger to Paul Black Letter


I have left Paulbs Letter at the end of this very long post so that everyone
can
efer back to it. I really appreciate that Paul has taken the time to raise
hese issues. I agree with much of what Paul is saying with the exception of
ome Key points. I also believe the way forward may be different than any of
the
urrent thinking and would like to propose several new approaches.
First I wish to put all this in context. The American Iris Society has been on
a
ownward trajectory for the last 17 years. At first it was not understood. And
ven now there are some that are STILL in denial, but you do not go from a
embership of over 8,000 to a membership of 4,000 and claim success. I have
pent weeks of time interviewing principles in other plant societies,
esearching data on the internet and talking with Garden Writers,
orticulturalists, etc trying to understand how to turn this around. This type
f market research should always be a part of the PR office I chair and frankly
 could use of team of people that could help acquire data, assimilate it and
evelop strategies to act upon it.
My research leads me to believe that the natural size of our Society should be
round 12,000 members. That said I believe if the Iris Society would have been
ore pro-active instead of just reactive they could still be at this level.
hile comparing notes with a director of another plant society director, they
ommented, bYour just about ten years behind usb. While I do not believe this
is
xactly true, I would ask you to think about the amount of change in the world
n the last ten years and ask yourself, Has the AIS changed as fast?.
I have tried to understand what brings people to join and participate in a
plant
ociety. I have boiled it down to an acronym PIPP. Plants, Information, People,
nd Praise probably in that order. Let me address each and how they relate to
aulbs suggestions.
PLANTS: In 1980 I came to the Iris Society because I was looking for Dwarf
Iris
nd species. I believe for most people the contact and interest in the Iris
ocieties develops because of plants. Thatbs what we are all about. Years ago
in
earching through garden magazines you would discover ads for AIS. By joining
ou would find sources for all types of Irises advertized in the Bulletin.
Clubs
lant sales, shows, etc also all brought people into the Iris society because
hey were looking for plants. Club sales and shows still function this way, but
ulletin and Magazine advertizing serves a new role I will explain in a minute.
oday most gardeners are going to the internet if they are looking for a
articular Iris.
But first let me suggest that AIS as an organization does not have enough
input
rom hybridizers and nurseries. We should be working together to the benefit of
ll. I have suggested the possibility of a trade association of nurseryman and
ybridizers that could work with AIS. And even if that could not happen, at
east a liaison to the board could be created that represents the industry. How
ould this be useful? It could develop a code of ethics for Iris nurseries.
embers of the Iris society already practice such a code although I do not
elieve there is a formulation of such anywhere. The first basic tenet is that
rises are sold true to name. Today there are large nurseries outside the iris
ociety, who do not care, and e-bay nurseries that are downright fraudulent.
The
ew role of the Iris Society is validation of sources if only by their
ssociation with AIS. AIS has not even discussed these problems and we ask
urselves why are people going to Davebs Garden and their!
 Garden Watchdog.
If there was such a structure I believe Paulbs point one could be implemented
uickly and point two worked out also, although perhaps in a different way than
e is suggesting on point two..
 Because the world is changing and the internet has become so important, I
xpect E-memberships to be where the AIS will gain the money to operate the
ociety and prevent the print services we already provide from disappearing.
resently the only place left to cut to balance the budget would be an issue of
he bulletin. But by bringing in other revenue from e-membership and other
ervices I believe we can prevent this. There are greater improvements on the
ay that will make a subscription even more desirable.
But AIS is very poor at marketing itself. Despite my ranting there are many
reas in which we do things terribly. Let me suggest an element that could help
oth nurserymen and AIS gaining members. The Daylily Society has a program
where
hey give new members a coupon for the price of their membership. They do a
much
etter job of marketing their membership than AIS at least in some areas of
heir website. The coupon is one of those things that could just tip the scales
s to whether to join or not. I will let each of you do your own homework. Go
to
he American Hemerocallis Society website and see how they do it. Even though
he nurseries compete for the customers as to how they will honor the coupon,
hey can benefit by additional business. Before AIS gets a big head, let me
oint out that the nurseryman do a lot more for the society then it does for
hem. But when we turn this society around that will change. There is good
vidence that with the Iris Encyclopedia and other!
 improvements, the AIS website could generate more than 30,000-40,000 unique
isitors a month during peak season. And I believe we could bring a great deal
f business to nurseries.
Now let me address the area where Paul and I disagree. As I have said before,
eople come to the Iris Society for plants. They want to have the best, or most
nteresting, or rarest in the World not just the USA. Although including
foreign
rises in the award system does not necessarily bring them to North Amerca,
xcluding them could easily have an adverse effect. With phyto-sanitary
ertificates and more and more regulations it is getting harder and harder to
et the worldbs plants into our country. Instead of limiting possibilities we
hould be trying to expand them. Last Year when it was revealed that Decadence
nd Slovak King could not compete on the Ballot for the Dykes Medal, the Medal
ost some of its luster in the eyes of many irisarians. They assumed that it
epresented the Best of the Irises grown in this country not just the best
roduced by North American hybridizers. For the 50 years after World War Two,
mericans had a huge advantage. This countrybs gene pool!
 of Irises had not been plowed under to grow food as happened in much of
urope. We were way ahead of the rest of the world. We shared Irises with
verseas hybridizers in exchange for species that grew in their native lands.
veryone benefited. Now overseas hybridizers have done some remarkable things
in
everal types of irises and continue to share them with us. The more we take a
hauvinistic American viewpoint the more everyone looses. Now is not the time
or the AIS to turn inward. There are many types of organizations that would
eplace us. Limiting our awards in my mind would be one more way we could
weaken
he Society. Remember that plants are what people want not just USA plants.
INFORMATION; Hear is where we have some of our biggest failure in the last ten
ears People used to come to the plant societies for information. But in
todaybs
nternet world information is all over the place. Our presence on the internet
as superceded by Wikipedia, Davebs Garden and over a dozen other sites that
ere providing more content than AIS. Who needed the plant societies? Several
lant societies responded with Daylily Dictionaries, Daff-Net/Daff-Seek, And
ulb wikis. While those societies continued to grow the AIS had already started
ts decline The Daylily society that was smaller than us grew past us while we
ell. Now all plant societies are suffering and those that had been successful
hen we were not are doing even more change. We are catching up as some of the
hings we are doing I believe will be even better than what the other websites
ave done. But much is not in place yet. We still have to have a bylaws change
o allow the addition of e-memberships. I!
f we could have accomplished much of this before the current economic collapse
he results would have been much better than they will be now. It will take
onger to get the growth I believe we can achieve and it will take a better
rganized organization than we have now.
But e-membership can address another of Paulbs points. Right now it is
horribly
xpensive for members to be members in AIS and all the sections. The sections
re much more nimble when it comes to change than AIS. Two already have
-memberships and others have them in the works. It will become easier for
ections to provide bulletins and less a cost as fewer have to be printed. With
heaper rates it is likely that more AIS judges and members will participate in
ore sections at least through e-memberships. There is one point that is still
a
roblem,  Fewer members in AIS the workforce available to edit and write
rticles for all these groups until we can grow members again.. But I also
think
-memberships will bring more younger and more energetic members to the
society.
ut this transition period of raising the sinking ship and sending it in new
irections will be painful.
As we learn how to benefit from the internet old sources of revenue in the
iris
ociety can be done away with or with more equitable charges. Perhaps we will
be
ble to eliminate charges for registration for everyone but we are not there
yet
nd sadly it is very hard to get AIS to create a business plan. Too much of the
ociety is done item per item as opposed to creating a comprehensive strategy.
ven small investments in new products tend to be sidelined if there is any
risk
nvolved. Yet if you are providing new things you have new sources of revenue.
PEOPLE AND PRAISE:  Another reason people join is for the socialization. As
embership declines there are fewer people to man clubs and do activities. It
is
ard to believe that we are still doing all the things we did when we had twice
he number of people in the society. If so I expect a number of people are
eaded for burnout.
he Iris Society does a poor job of praise. Often by the time some one is
onored they are so old most members do not even know what their
accomplishments
ere. The enormous success of the Master Gardeners, which I believe is the
astest growing plant organization, is based on praise. People join because
they
ant to make a contribution to society and enjoy being recognized for that
ontribution. Does anyone believe that it is a great honor to be an AIS judge?
re we respecting the time and work it takes to put on an iris show. The Iris
ncyclopedia allows people to help build something bigger than all of us and
ach picture that is entered recognizes who entered it and photographed it. We
eed more ways in which people can contribute. I believe with Dave that the
reater number of sections and Iris groups allows for greater participation.
The
ontributions of many have created an awesome Iris society that can be even
etter. I realize I have not covered all Paulbs points b!
ut I am wearing out typing and you are wearing out reading, so I will cease
for
ow. But I think the better AIS address PIPP to more successful it will be.
October 20, 2010
American Iris Society
oard Members
RE:  Suggestions and thoughts
Dear Board Members,
Jean Clay Plank was always aware of the contribution hybridizers make to AIS.
he was also aware that there are actions that AIS can take to help promote and
upport hybridizers, of which I am one.  One of her mandates during her term as
IS President was to solicit and act upon ideas and suggestions from us.  I was
oefully negligent by not contributing very much to that process.  I would like
o a little to remedy that by comment on several aspects of AIS with some
uggestions that might be considered.  Some of these can be considered
mmediately while others are longer term.
1.	Extension of registration name reserve from 3 to 5 years.  Ibve visited
with
any hybridizers about the 3 year expiration of reserved names for registration
urposes.  All have been in favor of extending this to 5 years as it was some
ears back.  Times have changed and the justification for the reduced reserve
ime has also changed.  At the time it was reduced, one of the justifications
as the time and effort it took to track these reserves since it was a
ompletely manual paper system.  Now that this process has been automated,
there
hould be no more work to track a name reserved for 3 years as opposed to 5
ears.  It was also reported at the time of this change that there was a very
ow percentage of names that werenbt being introduced within that 5 year
period.
hat has also changed with many hybridizers already either having to make a
ummy registrations to hold the name or paying another reserve fee.   I think
sking for names to be held in reserve for 5 years !
is a legitimate request given the large increase in registration fees levied
on
ybridizers without asking for input from us.
2.	Requirement that a registration fee be implemented on overseas/foreign
egistrations.  As with other aspects of AIS, the lack of a registration fee
for
verseas reservations is rooted in history.  Again, times have changed
rastically.  The justifications for not charging a fee are no longer valid.
he biggest one was transfer of money.  With the use of credit card and wire
ransfers, this is no longer a problem.  The reasons for doing it far outweigh
he negatives.  At this time, overseas registrations make half or more of the R
 I.  In effect, North American AIS hybridizers are completely subsidizing
verseas registrations.  With no reasonable fee to deter them, overseas
ybridizers are registering and reserving ever larger numbers of names.
mplementation of this increase would need to be worked out with the AIS
egistrar, Treasurer and others who have expertise in this area.  I think it is
o longer acceptable to ask hybridizers in this country to continue to subsi!
dize overseas registrations.  We should remember that any hybridizer in any
ountry can make a choice whether to register a variety or not.
3.	AIS awards.  I wrote to Clarence Mahan and also Roy Epperson about what I
onsider to be a very unfair inclusion of non-North American varieties in the
IS awards system.  I received no reply from either.  Ibll approach the subject
ne more time.  First let me say that Ibm not advocating this because I havenbt
eceived my share of AIS awards.  I most definitely have received my share and
robably more than is warranted.  Ibm writing it because I think each and every
orth American hybridizer deserves the full support and attention of the
merican Iris Society judges.  I will make several comments on why I think it
snbt a correct policy to include foreign originations in our awards system.
Our organization is the American Iris Society.  It isnbt the World Iris
Society.
t is the American Iris Society and as such should be an organization for the
upport and promotion of irises originated in North America.  Most other
ountries have their own awards system.  If they donbt have an awards system
and
hey want one then they should take the time and effort to create it.
One of the reasons given for including them in the awards system is that it
ould encourage registration of hybrids from other countries that might not
therwise be registered.  I would say that is completely without merit.  The
eason most foreign hybrids get registered and introduced in this country is
ecause someone in the U. S. imports them, helps with or registers them and
arkets them.  I can think of no instance where an overseas hybridizer
egistered their variety based on the possibility it might win an AIS award.
he Internet has also had a profound effect on the ability of hybridizers to
istribute their hybrids.  Overseas hybridizers can distribute their hybrids
lmost anywhere they want without assistance from AIS or North American
ommercial gardens.
AIS, through its members and hybridizers, took the time and effort to set up
his system of awards, trains the judges, prepares and tabulates the ballots.
t is a lot of work.  The ballot is already large and difficult to deal with
ven for someone like myself who sees a lot of irises.  With the maturing of
our
udges, it becomes increasingly difficult to adequately fulfill the obligations
f an AIS judge.  The possibility of the ballot becoming increasingly larger
ecause of overseas hybrids is very real.  We have to look at what effect all
hose 100bs of overseas registrations will have on our system if they are
ntroduced in the way that they are eligible for AIS awards.
The following have to do more with overall structure of AIS.
4.	Adequacy of Species-X classification.  It seems to me that a problem arises
hen a class has been created that creates conflict and misunderstanding rather
han adding a positive benefit to the classification system.  I recognize and
pplaud the knowledgeable members who contributed to the creation of this
class.
 understand that the intentions were to further innovative development of
ybrids.  Sometimes that crazy blaw of unintended consequencesb diminishes the
esired effect of some of these changes.
In some cases it has pitted members more interested in beardless irises
against
nes interested in bearded irises.  There has been much discussion about this
hat I wonbt repeat here.  There is also a conception that these hybrids should
ore closely resemble the species than the more modern hybrids.  I question
this
dea.  It seems that part of our goal is to improve not only the plant habits
ut also the form of the flowers.  It seems the improvement of form is one of
he goals of hybridizing.  If one wants them to remain more species like then
hy not continue to work at the species level.
The class was purposely left loosely defined to encourage innovation.  The
real
ffect of this lack of definition has led to much confusion for hybridizers,
udges and the general public.  Each hybridizer has their own interpretation of
hat the class is and this creates confusion and conflict.  In speaking to
other
udges I find that most donbt understand what the class is and how to judge it
ased on the loose definitions provided.  Judges trainers are just as confused
bout how to explain the class and how to judge it.  The general public and
more
pecifically garden writers have no idea what a bSpecies-Xb variety is.  They
as
ell as most irisarians donbt know whether the variety is bearded or beardless,
hether it most closely approximates a Siberian, an Ensata, a SDB, a TB or any
f the other classes.  If they look for information in the R and I, all they
ill find is bSpecies-Xb and a description.  Unless they have the ability and
esource to research parentages!
, they have no idea what it is.  Very few will take the time to do such
esearch.  The effect is these innovations arenbt covered in gardening
ublications.
It seems to me that if the class is going to continue, that as a minimum, part
f the registration needs to designate the class that the hybrid most closely
pproximates.  It seems to me that further definition of the class is
necessary.

.	Dwarf Iris Section.  The combining of the Dwarf and Median Iris sections has
een discussed for some time.  At this time a majority of people involved with
hese sections agree that they should be combined.  Without going into a lot of
iscussion, I think it is time that there be a recommendation to combine the
two
ections and that work begin to accomplish that.
6.	AIS Sections.  I think Lincolnbs famous words, ba house divided against
tself cannot standb, may have something valuable to offer AIS.  The division
incoln speaks of is extreme but still speaks to what I consider a problem for
IS.  I can think of no other plant society that is factioned into separate and
utonomous sections with a full organizational structure within each one.  The
ose society doesnbt have separate floribunda, damask or tea sections.  The
osta society doesnbt have separate sections based on leaf size or color.  The
aylily society doesnbt have sections based on miniature, pony or spider forms.
t is difficult for me to understand the reasoning and necessity of having 9
tand alone sections, each with its own board of directors, publications, fund
aising, etc.  The waste of time, talent and resources should be quickly
vident.  The problem isnbt from the presence of sections but the very wasteful
uplication.  The amount of money for someone !
to join all the sections and AIS is a disincentive for people to join AIS at
ll.  In a time when membership and peoplebs involvement is dropping it seems
here should be a better way forward.  It seems to me that all our best efforts
hould be channeled into the national society and national publication.  When
he public joins AIS they are expecting a bulletin that at least in some part
epresents what they are interested in.  As it stands, if someone is interested
n Spurias, it might be 2 years before they ever read anything about that
group.
 think they wonbt stay a member very long.
I might suggest one possible solution that I also suggested to Clarence Mahan
hen he was President of AIS.  Instead of each section having their own
ublication, is it possible for there to be a bmedia personb in each section
hat can collect and organize articles and information that can be published in
he national bulletin?  Instead of putting money into separate publications
that
nly a limited number of members have access to, is it possible for each
section
o sponsor and pay for space in the national bulletin to publish their
articles?
n this way the totality of the membership is able read all this material
ithout joining individual sections.  With an enhanced and larger bulletin, an
ncrease in membership would be appropriate to offset increased costs.  AIS
ould routinely designate some space for each section to fill as a part of the
ulletin.  This space would be bfreeb, so to speak, to the sections.  It would
e in addition to the bpaid for by sectionsb !
space.  I think it would be expected that membership fees for sections would
ecrease to reflect the absence of individual publications.  Some fundraising
by
ections would be necessary to pay for publication costs.
When a commercial entity advertises in a section publication, they receive no
rue benefit. This advertising doesnbt reach and potential customers.  It is in
ffect a donation to the section.
These are only some formative thoughts on such changes.  I realize it is much
ore complex than what my few words indicate and that it will require a
oncerted and diplomatic effort on the part of a numbers for any such changes
to
ccur.  A very smart and successful businessman said that when things arenbt
orking well, an organization must critically examine everything they think
they
now and keep the parts that make sense and drop the parts that donbt work.
Thank you for the opportunity to express what I trust are helpful and useful
deas that might help advance AIS.
Paul Black
----- Original Message -----
rom: "John I Jones" <jijones@usjoneses.com>
o: aisdiscuss@aisboard.org
c: "BLACK PAUL" <midamerg@earthlink.net>
ent: Tuesday, November 30, 2010 5:45:48 PM
ubject: [AISdiscuss] Response From Dave Niswonger to Paul Black Letter
Attached.
John
---------------------------------------------------------------------
o sign-off this list, send email to the AIS Secretary
aissecretary@irises.org>
he archives for AISDiscuss are at:
ttp://www.aisboard.org/lists/aisdiscuss/

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off this list, send email to the AIS Secretary
<aissecretary@irises.org>
The archives for AISDiscuss are at:
http://www.aisboard.org/lists/aisdiscuss/