TerraForums Venus Flytrap, Nepenthes, Drosera and more talk
Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Regional head growers
- Thread starter Copper
- Start date
That is what a regoinal head grower is, but there is no such thing as a regular growing. Even the lowest level of grower will have to report how their plants are doing to the regional head, who will report the information to the Head Grower. Record keeping is everyones job. The amount you are responsible for just gets larger as your power is greater. We are looking at going non-profit in the future. The records must be kept near perfectly. It can not be the Head Growers job to keep track of all the growers. It would be over whelming. That is why it will be broken down. The head grower just needs to check with the regoinal heads. If we finally get too many growers for the regionals to keep track of we will create area growers, who will answer to the regional grower. THis will be the same with distribution and conservancy. This is a big country. Think of it as mayors, governors,president.
PlantAKiss
Moderator Schmoderator Fluorescent fluorite, Engl
Did you get a the map I sent out to the board members? If not I will send it again. No, a region is large. Eventually there may be Area Head growers (if we every have enough growers that the numbers require it. Sorry Buggs, it will be bigger then cali for now, but I figure that California and Florida will be the first to have Area Head Growers. It is all about span of control and 12 growers is the limit under the Head Grower before we Divide it again. If it was then divided into Regions the Regional Head would be resposible just for his Area Head Growers and the would be responsible for the growers in their area. The span of control gets smaller as you get closer to the top of the chain, so Dean is resposible for the Regional Growers, but may check on any level.
Look at the map that I sent, If you received it. We need to decided on the areas. I am using various methods to figure the divide. I am using the cenus divide, the time divide and CP books (do as to figure where the heaviest concentration of CPs are) I will make my suggested divides from a combination of those. I will probable end up taking a region or area. Only three brave volunteers have contacted me thus far. Any board member hear from anyone else? I think it is time to start contacting known growers. We also have many other positions to fil. I emailed the list that I had os people that wanted to help, but I have not heard from them.
Look at the map that I sent, If you received it. We need to decided on the areas. I am using various methods to figure the divide. I am using the cenus divide, the time divide and CP books (do as to figure where the heaviest concentration of CPs are) I will make my suggested divides from a combination of those. I will probable end up taking a region or area. Only three brave volunteers have contacted me thus far. Any board member hear from anyone else? I think it is time to start contacting known growers. We also have many other positions to fil. I emailed the list that I had os people that wanted to help, but I have not heard from them.
PlantAKiss
Moderator Schmoderator Fluorescent fluorite, Engl
Here is one
<a href="http://www.50states.com/us.htmMap
Here is one of the time zones
Time Zones
Here is one of cenus zones
http://www.census.gov/geo/www/us_regdiv.pdf
Now we have to turn to our books and figure out where all the CPs populations are. I found a map of them last year, but have not been so lucky this year. After you look at all the info try to figure how we should set our regions and how many there should be to start with. Remember after there are too many growers in a region that region can be broken into areas with the area heads answering to the regional head.
<a href="http://www.50states.com/us.htmMap
Here is one of the time zones
Time Zones
Here is one of cenus zones
http://www.census.gov/geo/www/us_regdiv.pdf
Now we have to turn to our books and figure out where all the CPs populations are. I found a map of them last year, but have not been so lucky this year. After you look at all the info try to figure how we should set our regions and how many there should be to start with. Remember after there are too many growers in a region that region can be broken into areas with the area heads answering to the regional head.
PlantAKiss
Moderator Schmoderator Fluorescent fluorite, Engl
No, not where the cps are, but there are more growers consentrated in those areas due to the climate. The entire US will be divided into regions, but some regions will be expected to find growers faster than others. Hope that Helps Come to the meeting on the 10th and maybe we can explain better.
We need to find a good balance for regions..
for example, having each state be its own region is obviously too many regions..
we would need to find a "regional head grower" for each of the 50 states..
thats totally unreasonable.
on the flip side, dividing up the USA into say, 4 regions, north, south, east west, is too few regions, and each "RHG" would have far too many people to keep track of..
so we need something in between.
Perhaps something like this:
(this is just a very rough draft..off the top of my head..open to debate and changes!
http://img409.imageshack.us/img409/4053/nascregiondraft3tc.gif
you also have to factor in population density..
for example, the "North East region" looks much smaller than the "plains region" in terms of area..and it is.
but more people live in he NE region than the plains region..
so the regions would also need to be balanced out in terms of number of NASC members in each region..
Scot
for example, having each state be its own region is obviously too many regions..
we would need to find a "regional head grower" for each of the 50 states..
thats totally unreasonable.
on the flip side, dividing up the USA into say, 4 regions, north, south, east west, is too few regions, and each "RHG" would have far too many people to keep track of..
so we need something in between.
Perhaps something like this:
(this is just a very rough draft..off the top of my head..open to debate and changes!
http://img409.imageshack.us/img409/4053/nascregiondraft3tc.gif
you also have to factor in population density..
for example, the "North East region" looks much smaller than the "plains region" in terms of area..and it is.
but more people live in he NE region than the plains region..
so the regions would also need to be balanced out in terms of number of NASC members in each region..
Scot
Houstonherp
Send in the Clones
I have received PMs relating to this, but have not seen it spelled out in this thread yet, so here goes:
I think Rose is on the right track with the idea that there are more growers in particular areas where Sarracenia are easier to grow. From MY standpoint, I have my mature Sarrs outside year-round, and they do just fine. I'm sure there are going to be many more growers along the Gulf Coast, Atlantic Coast and Pacific Coast than just about anywhere else, and thus there is a need for smaller regions in these areas. As for having a 'Plains Region' that stretches from Texas to Canada, I think (and hope) there would be MANY more growers in such a region than one regional grower could/should keep track of.
This doesn't mean there aren't growers in other parts of the country that can participate. But I DO feel that there needs to be a set of requirements that growers must be able to meet in order to participate. I would hate for a bunch of rare seeds to go to someone who is not familiar with growing Sarrs from seed, only to have them not make it.
Perhaps there should be differing levels of growers, with novice or less able (due to growing requirements) growers getting less critical populations to work with? That way the NASC has the best chance of success in reaching their goal.
Maybe novice growers should be steered towards joining the ICPS; that way they can show their commitment to the CP community, AND they could have access to Sarracenia seeds that may not be as critical. If they have good success with more common populations, then they could be given rarer seeds in the future.
Just my thoughts...
Mike
I think Rose is on the right track with the idea that there are more growers in particular areas where Sarracenia are easier to grow. From MY standpoint, I have my mature Sarrs outside year-round, and they do just fine. I'm sure there are going to be many more growers along the Gulf Coast, Atlantic Coast and Pacific Coast than just about anywhere else, and thus there is a need for smaller regions in these areas. As for having a 'Plains Region' that stretches from Texas to Canada, I think (and hope) there would be MANY more growers in such a region than one regional grower could/should keep track of.
This doesn't mean there aren't growers in other parts of the country that can participate. But I DO feel that there needs to be a set of requirements that growers must be able to meet in order to participate. I would hate for a bunch of rare seeds to go to someone who is not familiar with growing Sarrs from seed, only to have them not make it.
Perhaps there should be differing levels of growers, with novice or less able (due to growing requirements) growers getting less critical populations to work with? That way the NASC has the best chance of success in reaching their goal.
Maybe novice growers should be steered towards joining the ICPS; that way they can show their commitment to the CP community, AND they could have access to Sarracenia seeds that may not be as critical. If they have good success with more common populations, then they could be given rarer seeds in the future.
Just my thoughts...
Mike
I would have to agree. Scot, that map is not bad, but I am hoping to break up the regions a little more. Right now I have heard from 6 to 7 people that will be able to be Regional Growers. We will need growings under them. More important we have to build an army of collectors in the regions that have the cp populace. They are the most Important. Please, if you live in an area where cps are found, please be willing to give a little of your time. If you are willing to save these plants when their destruction is inevitable please contact Ozzy. We will not go recklessly, and without cause, taking these plants from their habitat, but we will rescue them if they are to be destroy. This will be done with permission from the landowner or other responsible parties. Please be listed among those who can help the most. Wthout collectors we have nothing.
seedjar
Let's positive thinking!
All this talk of regional head growers sounds like a lot more trouble than most people will be able to manage contributing to a distributed volunteer organization. Having some stratified pyramid to manage growers will probably prove complicated. Would it perhaps be easier to manage growers' reports electronically? If all the growers could submit their reports via the web or email, then you could have just a few auditors to go through and review reports as they're submitted. Growers could be notified automatically if they fail to report, so there would be accountability for turning in reports in a timely manner. Additionally, having the information in a database format would make running demographics much easier.
I don't have experience with anything on the scale of the NASC, but I have observed in the past that problems tend to crop up a lot in the middle of management chains. It seems like, in this situation, you have the option of making things work with less complication. Having the whole affair centralized and automated would mean less shuffling papers for growers and less sifting through mixed records for everybody else. If you like, I would be glad to develop a system to this end for the NASC.
~Joe
I don't have experience with anything on the scale of the NASC, but I have observed in the past that problems tend to crop up a lot in the middle of management chains. It seems like, in this situation, you have the option of making things work with less complication. Having the whole affair centralized and automated would mean less shuffling papers for growers and less sifting through mixed records for everybody else. If you like, I would be glad to develop a system to this end for the NASC.
~Joe
Joe, That is an excellent idea!!! Copper, and the rest of you, I think this could work. It is enough living life, and taking care of business without taking on too much. I like this idea of auditors to keep the growers straight and the records of the seeding program and seedling distribution on line. And reminding us to report, MAN!!!!, could I use that!
