and recommandations to the Specialised Conservation
of the World Federation of Roses Societies
is an extract from the Minutes of the Prague Meeting of
Conservation Commitee in July 2004.
Frans Thomas (1°) had received a letter from Ivan Louette.
He had suggested a list that might be useful and Mr
Thomas suggested that a copy of the list be given out
at the next meeting in Geneva. Professor Joyaux (2°)
did not agree, but suggested that anyone interested should
look at the list on the Louette website at www.botarosa.com."
is the text which I wrote and which as you have seen one
of the responsibles of the WFRS Conservation Commitee
refused to communicate to the members of this Commitee.
wasn't on line at the time of Prague meeting because I
not appropriate to publish it before it was discussed !!!
Before beeing approved by the staff of our belgian Royal
Society to be submitted under its name (and not under mine)
to the Commitee, it was discussed with two
very experimented Doctors in Botany, specialists in plant
and FAO experts, and also submitted to the Director of our
Garden (this one where stays Crépin's Roses Herbarium).
They were approved and acclaimed by these very respectable
three persons and one of them suggested me some improvements
course I included immediately.
This text was also discussed with Helga Brichet(3°) who has
copy of it on her demand immediately after it was terminated
several months before the meeting. She even had invited me
it at the Prague meeting, but I was in Canada at this time
that was impossible.
1 Mr. Frans Thomas, President Société Royale
Amis de la Rose" (Belgium)
Mr. François Joyaux, President Fédération
Française de la Rose & Vice President WFRS Conservation
- 3 Mrs Helga Brichet, Chairman, Past President WFRS (Italy)
My question is Why did they refuse to discuss these lines
In previous meetings of the Conservation Committee,
a list of roses deemed "worthy
of conservation" was mentionned.
1- What are the precise uses of this list?
2- What steps does the WFRS intend taking with this list and to what level (international,
governemental, et al.?)
3- Is the WFRS considering steps to prevent the selling of roses not on these
lists (e.g. by requiring registration af all varieties to be sold)?
4- If such steps are not considered, Are other more subtle discriminatory steps
considered to discourage the sale or culture of Roses not on the list? This would
go against diverse points of the Rio Convention on biological diversity.
5- If discriminatory measures are not considered, will the WFRS consider compensation
to small to medium businesses for the adverse effect of the cost of registration
on the development of these businesses, in order to create equitable opportunities
for all. Looked at in this perspective free trade can only add to biodiversity.
A- Creating a Database
The WFRS's and its affiliates societies' objectives, as defined by their statutes,
are to serve the Rose and all peoples and categories of people who are concerned
by the Rose. To supply all these people with complete and objective information,
the WFRS must set up a database of rose varieties. This database must be flexible
enough to serve all categories of users. Its development must rest on principles
of neutrality and equity among its future users.
1- We mustn't reduce its scope by selecting ab initio a list of varieties
that would serve only one category of users (see below Lists and their uses.)
database must allow for the creation of multiple lists and statistics; it
mustn't be the simple result of a list.
2- Each category of users must be able to retrieve information from the database
with a minimum of technical knowledge [The database must be userfriendly]
3- The database must be structured in such a way as to allow the addition of
new categories of information from diverse sources in the future. The Conservation
Committee must always be open to these new categories of data and to contributions
from new and unexpected sources.
4- It isn't in the Committee's mandate to judge the quality of the varieties
included in the database. However, all data concerning the evaluation of Rose
varieties from tests, competitions and such may be included.
5- The Committee must ensure that the database not be used abusively in whatever
manner or at whatever occasion. A non-responsibility clause (disclaimer)
must be included.
6- Use of the database may be on a paying basis to help with maintenance costs,
and to make it self-supporting.
7- To maintain the independence of the Database, it should not accept sponsorship
from companies or individuals involved in the rose business.
8- User fees must be kept as low as possible to allow maximum availability.
User fees may vary according to a region's hability to pay, if only on a temporary
basis (positive discrimination).
9- The collection of data at national and regional levels, and all local initiatives
and ideas that might help with the global management of the database must be
More technical considerations.
A repertory of DNA data linked to the database would be very useful:
- to integrate the evolution of genotypes; the evolution of mutations that
affect morphological and physiological characters. This repertory might help
to trace mutations, whether desirable or undesirable.
-to allow the study of cheap and effective solution to the management of
The use of in-vitro collections of varieties could also be studied.
B- Of lists and their uses.
Without judging the qualities of rose varieties, the Conservation Committee
must clearly state its position on legal, administrative and commercial processes
now in use, or that may come into use, and that may diminish biodiversity of
cultivated Roses, or discourage the expansion of biodiversity. E.g. the well-intentionned
use of rationalization lists that sometimes have particularly nasty side-effects.
1- That the Conservation Committe encourage the WFRS to oppose the establishment
of a list that would restrain or forbid the commercialization of some roses
(e.g. Roses that aren't been registered on the list). Notwithstanding
the use of lists for consultation purposes that may be developped from
2- That no list (restrictive lists in particular) constituted or not from
this database be included in a text of law, of an internation convention
or any other document that may have a similar application, whether at the
local, regional, national or global level. To allow for easy correction
of possible undesirable effets, lists should always be annexed to said
3- That local, national, or regional levels of the WFRS be always involved
in the making of lists that may have applications at the local or global
ivan louette, French version on line
English version translated by Roch Rollin, on line 2005.02.15