Hello Joanna!

My collection consist of:

37 Phals
2 Oncidium
2 Paph
and 42 phals babies

Claude

"J Fortuna" wrote in message
news:43Xwd.308$1U6.157@trnddc09...
| This post was inspired by Dave Gillingham's moving story in the Who We Are
| thread (which by the way I continue to enjoy immensely, and am very glad
to
| read each new post there).
|
| Dave's story makes me wonder what the cutoff point is for when a
collection
| becomes to large to rejoice over every individual plant's new leaf, new
| root, and new spike. My collection currently consists of 31 orchids, and I
| still watch every one carefully and rejoice over each activity of each
| plant.
|
| I know that Claude also does that, and I have the impression that Claude's
| collection is somewhat larger than mine, though I'm not sure about that. I
| checked Claude's post in Who We Are as well as Claude's Web site, but I
did
| not see the total number of plants in your collection, Claude?
|
| Anyway, it appears that somewhere between 31 plants (my current number)
and
| about 200 (Dave's current number) one can no longer keep track of each as
an
| individual and rejoice in each one. I wonder what the cutoff number is? Of
| course, I know that this cutoff will vary somewhat based on the
individual's
| determination and the amount of time available to spend with plants and
| maybe some other variables, but: What is the largest number of orchids in
a
| collection that a single human being can report keeping track of in an
| individualized way, rejoicing over each one's activity?
|
| This is not just a rhetorical question. I really want to know. And then I
| will try not to exceed that number if at all possible. Well, probably it
| will not be possible since I am an orchid addict and I feel the craving
for
| new orchids at most a month after the last orchid was bought. But I might
| try to postpone the inevitable if I know that exceeding x amount will lead
| to a dire consequence such as the de-indivualization of individual
orchids.
|
| Joanna
|
|