Re: Peter Paul's

Chris Teichreb (teichrch@Meena.CC.URegina.CA)
Tue, 06 Aug 1996 08:19:20 -0600 (CST)

Hi Gary,

> Sorry for rehashing this thread on my very first post to this group. I
> hesitate to jump on the dissatisfied customer bandwagon, because
> ultimately I've been rewarded with very happy, self-propagating, thriving
> plants. I have to credit CPs' resilience over anything else, which I
> guess makes them ideal for short-term mail jaunts. I've never received
> anything from PP's which was mislabeled. Could mislabelling be the result
> of recent changes in nomenclature? For example, I was amazed to see
> numerous varieties of VFTs listed on one nursery's web page. Back when I

There's threads on a couple of web-pages about the perils of
PP's. The mislabeling was not a result of changes in nomenclature, just
lack of care as to what it was. The main nomenclature problems I've
heard is regarding Nepenthes where they often sell cheap hybrids as
species plants.

> Finally, the only complaint I would have with PP's is that they collect
> from the wild, rather than cultivating their stock. I believe they've
> been in business long before the practice of wild-collecting was frowned
> upon. Old habits die hard. If they've changed this practice, I think
> they should be given a second chance. If not, then shop elsewhere.
>
>
I think laws that protect the plants have been around almost
as long as PP's. They should have learned by now. There were threads
about how they tried to convince people to collect from the wild and
how they refused to let anyone see their set-up, due to the fact that
they probably didn't have any greenhouse grown specimens.

At least you gave them the benefit of the doubt! Just
letting you know the CPers side of the story!

Regards,

Chris