Questions and recommandations to the Specialised Conservation Commitee
of the World Federation of Roses Societies

Here is an extract from the Minutes of the Prague Meeting of the WFRS Conservation Commitee in July 2004.

"Mr 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 and discussed 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."

Below 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. This text wasn't on line at the time of Prague meeting because I have considered not appropriate to publish it before it was discussed !!!
Before beeing approved by the staff of our belgian Royal National Rose
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 conservation and FAO experts, and also submitted to the Director of our National Botanic Garden (this one where stays Crépin's Roses Herbarium). They were approved and acclaimed by these very respectable and well considered three persons and one of them suggested me some improvements which of course I included immediately.
This text was also discussed with Helga Brichet(3°) who has received a
copy of it on her demand immediately after it was terminated and thus
several months before the meeting. She even had invited me to present
it at the Prague meeting, but I was in Canada at this time and thus
that was impossible.

- 1 Mr. Frans Thomas, President Société Royale Nationale "Les Amis de la Rose" (Belgium)
- 2 Mr. François Joyaux, President Fédération Française de la Rose & Vice President WFRS Conservation Committee (France)
- 3 Mrs Helga Brichet, Chairman, Past President WFRS (Italy)

My question is Why did they refuse to discuss these lines ???

Questions

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.

Recommendations

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.) The 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 encouraged.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

More technical considerations.