How many of you knew that there is no option for not presenting the presidential address? Raise your hands. According to Jacob Kingsley Shaw in his 1938 presidential address called simply “Foundations,” captured forever in print by the noted ASHS poet laureate and historian Dr. Jules Janick in his massive tome Presidential Addresses 1903–2003, Dr. Kingsley stated “The first printed copy of our By-Laws requires that the president shall deliver an address at each regular meeting and this is one section that has never been amended.”

So here I find myself, as has every other president from Liberty Hyde Bailey onward, with the daunting task of imparting some coherent words of wisdom while keeping you awake for at least the first two hours of my scheduled four-hour presentation. Remember also that this address is being given by a person whereupon making full professor was asked by the provost of the university to recognize that significant achievement by selecting a book to be placed in the collection of the Penn State Library and chose Lonesome Dove by Larry McMurtry, which if you have never read it, I highly recommend. There is a lot in the book about friendships, character, living life to the fullest, love, professionalism, commitment, and adhering to a code of conduct that makes it much more than a simple story about a cattle drive to Montana. I am sure that Gus and Woodrow are in the audience here today.

Being a student of history, I decided the first step in this process was to review all the presidential addresses since I suspected that these were people who had something to say about horticulture and the current state of affairs during their careers. The diversity of subjects and varying length of the addresses certainly, I believe, warrant a scientific study in itself. In my address I will attempt to tease out some of their nuggets of wisdom that I believe speak to the issues that we horticulturists face today. It will be done (I hope) with a seamless blend of humor, entertainment, and enlightenment, the mark of a true extension specialist (sorry, I meant to say outreach educator). I also want to keep the address interactive in the purest sense, not the current age of electronic enlightenment but the good old-fashioned one-on-one human interaction so as to tease out some nuggets of information on horticulture and the society from you the audience. No sleeping in this talk! Being an extension specialist, I am a firm believer that you cannot have enough personal interaction, although today I sometimes feel like the push is toward more technological interaction and less human interaction. I trust at the end of my address that at least half of you will remember at least one “nugget” and the other half will be knowledgeable enough to ask the other half what I said. Having said all that, I am now looking forward with excitement to fulfilling my obligation to you the members and presenting the presidential address at the 107^th Annual Conference in sunny Palm Desert, California.

I would have loved to have personally known Liberty Hyde Bailey, who was the first president of ASHS and served from 1903 to 1907. There were not term limits at that time. Also, who is going to tell Liberty that he cannot run for a second or third term? Are there any members in the audience today who can say that they personally met or knew Liberty Hyde Bailey? In addition, you have to admire his really cool first name—Liberty. I have several of his books on gardening on my office desk and I as countless others certainly consider him the godfather or dean of American horticulture. In the foreword of his book Manual of Gardening published in 1911, he stated “of course an author cannot hold himself responsible for failures that his reader may suffer. The statements in a book of this kind are in the nature of advice, and it may or it may not apply in particular conditions, and the success or failure is the result mostly of the judgment and carefulness of the operator (code word for gardener). I hope that no reader of a gardening book will ever conceive the idea that reading a book and following it literally will make him a gardener. He must always assume his own risks, and this will be the first step in his personal progress.” That certainly sounds like a disclaimer if I ever heard one. Will all the members from industry please stand up? Dr. Liberty Hyde Bailey presented three presidential addresses. He was indeed a horticultural giant and his knowledge of horticulture legendary.

Of Ulysses Prentiss Hedrick in 1913 it was said “he had a genial personality, was a distinguished scientist, historian, scholar and exemplar of the art of gracious living.” Now gracious living sounds like Ulysses is a person that I might have enjoyed being around. I am sure there are others in the audience who might have also gravitated to his table. If so, please raise your hands.

A person after my own heart was Maurice Adin Blake, who in his 1916 address, “Horticulture as a Science and as an Art,” said that “a correct knowledge of the art of gardening cannot be obtained from theoretical writings” and “that a college graduate who goes into horticultural extension service of any state should have a full appreciation of the meaning of the art of horticulture.” He also went on to say: “science may state the cause of an effect; it may reveal the factors determining size, color, and quality of flowers and fruit, but it requires art to produce results.”

Another interesting address was “Horticulture and War” presented by Charles McCue in 1918. He compiled a listing of those in the society who served during the war—will all veterans please stand up? He also stated: “One of the great results of the war has been its effect on the diet of our people. We have by necessity learned the great lesson of the value of fruits and vegetables in our everyday menu. I doubt if we ever again will become the great consumers of meat that we were. Fruits and vegetables upon the tables have come to stay.” I find his statement certainly interesting in light of the tremendous interest in and current discussions centered on the health and nutrition of our citizens. He also stated: “We are now having our first opportunity to compare notes as to the effect of the World War upon horticulture, an industry that was meant for peaceful days.” See, that is why you need to really study these addresses; they are full of nuggets.

In 1922, Joseph Cullen Blair gave an address, “Administration a Vital Factor in the Development of a Department of Horticulture,” and said, “I view with very great alarm the disintegration of so many of our best horticultural departments in this country. The trouble, it seems to me, is due chiefly to the lack of appreciation, in many instances at least, by those in authority of the importance of this very matter, which we are now discussing. I think it is our duty to emphasize at this time the fact that qualities of leadership, wise statesmanship, as well as technical, are more essential and more a vital factor today than ever before in the development of these institutions.” He stated his definition of an executive (code word for department head) is as follows: “gifted with clear thinking and vision, with knowledge and power ever to be exerted toward improvements, economies, betterment and progress. A real man is needed, one capable of commanding the regard and respect of his subordinates, whose very presence bolds the morale of the workers; one who is never lax or over-exacting in the management of his organization; a person of understanding and experience, of training and natural ability, and infinite patience. The chief executive is, or should be, the highly charged battery brimming over with dynamic force and infectious energy.” Whoa—I trust that those administrators sitting in the audience or those aspiring to such positions of leadership were listening or do you want me to read that one again in case you missed it? Now will all the women in administrative positions please stand up?

I did have the wonderful opportunity to meet Homer C. Thompson when I was a graduate student at Cornell University and he delivered his address on “Research in Vegetable Gardening” in 1925. Dr. Thompson stated: “since most of us are employed by public supported institutions, we are under obligations to render specific service to the public. Most of us are inclined to take up some problem in which we are personally interested without giving much consideration as to its importance to the public. By a little study of the needs of the industry we can find problems of interest and value to the public, and at the same time satisfy our personal desires.”

A must read on my list is the 1926 address by Eugene Auchter: “The Future of the American Society for Horticultural Science.” Dr. Auchter, talking about the banquet and social evening, states “Such programs could consist either of inviting some noted horticulturist to address the members or of informal discussions by members on horticultural subjects where the fellows (I am not sure where the women were) could sit around and smoke (I am sure they were probably envisioning Larry Knerr, Fred S. and T. Davies, and Barclay Poling smoking their cigars) and present their ideas informally with minutes being recorded or if it was felt that some lighter form of amusement was desired, considerable thought could be given to the arrangement of a witty and entertaining program.” Having been personally involved in several of the latter-type programs, I cast my vote for that route. After a full day of science I need to unwind—how about you? Stand up if you agree with that statement. Look at all the exercise you are getting.

Charles Close in his 1928 address “What Twenty-Five Years Have Wrought in American Horticulture” closed with this really wild futuristic picture (and he wasn't even on the Deck of Sentinel Pines sipping Jeremiah Weed): “The Lord forbid, but we may have air trucks and ether tubes to shoot our crops through the air to market, and individual air scooters to scoot our men high in the air from college to orchard and back. By 1953 (I was only 8 years old and in 3^rd grade at this time) it may not be necessary to gather audiences to hear our speakers, but rather to sit comfortably at home while the President introduces the speakers from their homes. A spirited discussion then would be indeed being a real scream!!” He goes on to say “for the immediate present, provision should be made for ‘long winded’ Presidents (there have been some) with subjects too big to cover at one meeting. It might be well to extend the term of office so the President's address could be given in annual installments, until it and the audience are exhausted.” I want to direct this question to Fred T. Davies and ask for an extension of my term so as to finish my long-winded presentation in 2011.

Arthur Thomas Erwin in his 1930 address, titled “The Advancement of Horticultural Research,” stated: to the extension service also belongs the miscellaneous testing of seeds and other work of a similar character; a useful service, but not a research activity.” Will all those in the audience with any percent extension appointment please stand.

In his 1931 address, “The Evolution of the Horticulturist,” Thomas Hubbard McHatton (middle name reminds me of a hubbard squash—tough rind and warty) stated “It took men almost twenty centuries to grasp some realization of the importance of agriculture, and it has taken the greatest economic crisis in the history of our world's civilization to crystallize that realization.” I believe, given the way things look today, it may take another crisis to recrystallize it again.

Some like John Robert Magness in his 1934 address “Status of Orchard Soil Moisture Research” or Howard Henry Zimmerley in his 1935 address “New Approaches to Edaphic and Nutritional Problems with Horticultural Plants” or Samuel Emsweller in his 1950 address “Recent Developments in Lily Breeding Techniques” covered very specific topics and had extensive literature citations at the end of the papers. These were what I would best characterize as the technical/informational type of presidential addresses.

Arthur Heinicke in his 1937 address “Progress in Horticultural Science” stated “The motto of those whose duty it is to select recruits for our profession might well be: Let no one presume to enter the field of horticultural science unless he loves to work with plants and folks, and has the ability and the patience to acquire a thorough understanding of the basic and supporting sciences.” Will any students or departmental recruiters in the audience please stand up?

The award for the shortest title goes to Jacob Kingsley Shaw for his 1938 address simply called “Foundations” in which he stated: “I wonder if the people of a thousand years ago realized they were passing through the dark ages. Whatever may be in store for the human race, it will need more and more, a sound knowledge of the of the world around us and the spirit and outlook on life of the men who founded our society. May we all consider what manner of men they were and, as may our successors in future years, strive with what powers we have to emulate them.” Will all of the audience under age 40 please stand? No cheating on this one!

Dr. Harold B. Tukey in his 1947 address “Horticulture in Science and Society,” quoting Dr. Crow, stated: “horticultural science could make no greater mistake than to underestimate the importance of horticulture at large to the amateur and his special interests.” This is a theme that recurs in many addresses and should be taken seriously as we chart the future of horticulture.

In 1952 Dr. Kenneth Post in his address “Change Challenges Research” states: “If we are to maintain support for research in the field of horticulture, we must show 14 out of 15 people that the things we are doing in horticulture benefit them directly and at the same time go on helping the producer to do these things for the consumer. We have a public relations job which each of us must be charged with if we are to stay in business.” Boy, that is a true statement that resonates in today's world—are you doing your part in the public relations arena?

In his 1955 address “Teaching versus Research” Dr. Haber stated: “I do not want to leave the impression that I do not favor or that I am opposed to a teacher—either a classroom teacher or extension teacher—doing some research work. On the contrary, I am heartily in favor of it because doing some research will make him a better teacher; but we should not place so much emphasis on research that teaching is neglected.” As you think about that one, will all those with teaching responsibilities please stand up?

In his 1960 address, “A Challenge to Horticulturists,” Howard Rollins stated, “The future of horticulture will depend largely upon the planning and developing that we do now. These are fast moving times and again I ask, “Are we building a horticultural program today that will meet tomorrow's needs?”

Vernon T. Stoutemyer in his 1961 address, “A Look at Ourselves,” said “Horticulture departments in the future will be staffed to a greater degree than present with biochemists, geneticists, plant physiologists and others who sometimes have little interest in the living plant in a horticultural sense.” Reflect on the makeup of your own departments today some 49 years after this statement was made.

Russell E. Larson from Penn State, who I had the pleasure of interacting with on many occasions before his death, asked in his 1964 address “The American Society for Horticultural Science” for all the past presidents to stand and be recognized. I now do the same and thank each of you for your service.

In 1966 John Carew (or, as he was known, “Big John Carew”) in his address “The Composition of Horticulturists” struck this optimistic note: “In my opinion, horticulturists have the same bright future as the plants with which they work. The world is seeking the products of horticulture: its science and its art. Although our traditional organizations and its financing may change—and perhaps even our professional titles—if, deep within our hearts, we have the desire to make fruits, vegetables, and ornamental plants more useful to our fellow man, we are horticulturists and nothing will keep us from making progress.” That is certainly one to hang on your bulletin board to give you inspiration.

In his lengthy address (pages 309–319) in 1969, William Allen “Tex” Frazier summed up as follows: “The heart of our profession of horticulture lies deeply within each of its members; people with dreams, ideals, sense of purpose, soundness of judgment, excellent performance of responsibility, faith in the American dream of democracy and freedom. These have been the hallmarks of members of this Society for 66 years; they are also today; youths will make it so tomorrow—as long as they are individually free, as long as their profession is free, and as long as they are dedicated primarily to superb service to humanity.” Tex knew how to inspire and motivate people.

John P. Mahlstede in his 1972 address “Eleven Decades Later” said “We must never lose sight of the reason why we are in higher education—to serve society through developing youth, in particular, and people in general, the ability to think and be creative.” Think about: why did you choose a career in higher education?

In 1973 Charles Hess in his address “Horticulture—A Medium for Education” echoed these words: “Our problem has been that, although people have a basic interest in plants and gardens, they do not associate us, or more specifically, our society with this interest.” I can certainly see that this statement has been the case for at least 107 years.

In his 1977 address, “Roles for the Horticultural Scientist in National Issues,” Edwin Crosby said to the audience: “to hold to old ways and systems just because they are old and the way we have always done it, fearful of change and loss of identity, leads to stagnation and senescence.” That is what can happen to us if we do not keep vigilant and agile.

I have always admired Conrad “Bud” Weiser (not because of his name; it could have been Miller or Yuengling just as easily) who in his 1981 address “Expanding Needs and Finite Resources—Can Science Meet the Challenge?” said “Extension was a lot simpler a generation ago when change was slower, technology was simpler, and the audience was reasonably homogeneous—and largely captive.” Boy, I second that as a true statement.

In 1982 Warren Barham, in his address “What is Horticulture and Who Are Horticulturists?” said this: “the future of horticulture is, like so many other areas of human experience, dependent on what the plant-lover of today communicates to his children, grandchildren, his neighbors and friends, his students, colleagues or others.” I urge each of you to continue to pass on your love for horticulture to future generations.

In 1983 John Seeley in his address “I Love Horticulture and Its Challenging Opportunities” said “Yes, horticulture has breadth of opportunity and satisfaction in life. It has something for almost everyone.” That is why John loved horticulture so much and was a great ambassador.

My wonderful friend Dermot Coyne from the University of Nebraska, in his 1985 address “Tackling World Hunger and Malnutrition Through Horticultural Research, Graduate Education, Extension and Management in Cooperation with U.S. Universities” said in his conclusion that “we can continue through our work to affirm and to strengthen the lives of others where they have grown weak through hunger and malnutrition, we can build hope where people are mired in despair through poverty, and we can enhance beauty of place and of mind where starkness and austerity now prevail.” Dermot's thoughts are for those that have or are contemplating work internationally. Dermot was a person who led by his personal example of giving and teaching. Will all those that have worked internationally or are interested in working internationally please stand up?

I would be remiss and probably never hear the end of it if I didn't find a nugget in Jules Janick's 1987 address “Horticulture, Science, and Society” in which Jules said, “we horticultural scientists are the original humanists who believe that our science is only useful if it is useful. We are people-oriented. We believe not in science for science's sake, but science for humanity's sake. We are concerned with food for the body and food for the soul. Our clients are producers and consumers—and the world is our garden.” All I can say is: You're the man, Jules.

George Martin in his somewhat long but extremely thought provoking 1990 presidential address (pages 412–428) titled “The Corporate University: A Place with Few Values and No Soul” states: “My indictment is that the land-grant universities have abandoned their mission, that faculty of those universities may not know of nor agree with the land grant mission, that grant funding has moved its focus from society's problems to those of the government or of narrowly defined private agencies, and that tenure criteria are misdirected. Tenure criteria should not be based on the ability to acquire grants; rather, they should involve evidence for critical thinking, for excellence in scholarship, and for prospective advancement in the chosen field of study.” How many remember that address and those certainly challenging words, please raise your hands?

At the meeting held at Penn State in 1991, sweating profusely, Richard Lower in his address “Horticulture at Risk” said to the audience “the future of horticultural art and science are at risk! Why at risk? Because of declining student enrollments, declining numbers of agriculture-oriented extension specialists, and declining numbers of horticulturists in Departments of Horticulture.” Think about those words in light of today's environment.

Thomas Fretz in his 1992 address, “Reaffirming Our Land-grant Tradition,” said “Our special challenge for this decade will be to strengthen the linkage between research, instruction, and technology-transfer missions for our land-grant universities, so that this new knowledge can be extended to those who truly own our land-grant universities—the citizens of our individual states. This is what makes these institutions—land grant universities—so special and distinctive.” What about your own institutions—are they still embracing the “Land Grant” philosophy?

Benton Storey in his 1994 address titled “Horticulturists Must Take Charge of Their Own Destiny” offered this advice “Horticulture departments that work closely with both urban and rural people will stay alive and well. We must rise up as researchers, teachers, and extension specialists and agents to do a better job than we have ever done before so that the clientele will want more and not stand for a dean or any administrator who wants them to settle for less.” How many times have you seen that played out?

Daniel Cantliffe in his address in 1995 “Challenges Facing Horticulture in a Changing World” asked the audience: “Who cares besides us? Too many people, too much food, too much crime, a poor economy, too few people dependent on agriculture for a livelihood, too much pollution, cancer, global warming, and on and on. If we care, the challenges are up to us to take on, to solve, to offset before they become impossible problems.” I haven't seen any of those problems go away, so we had better keep working on them.

Daniel Lineberger in his 2002 address “Horticulture in the Post-Land Grant Era” said “while the pool of academic horticulturists from which the society has drawn its members in the past is diminishing, the total pool of professional horticulturists in this country, and worldwide, is growing dramatically. The demand for research-based horticultural information is strong and ASHS is uniquely positioned to be the leading provider of this information to the international community.” Dan is certainly gifted when it comes to using new technology to provide information in a usable format, and ASHS has certainly moved and continues to move in that direction.

Another friend from North Carolina State University, George Wilson in his 2003 centennial address “ASHS 2003: Planning for our Bicentennial” said “Meanwhile, modern internet and distance learning technologies and systems are continuing to alter how we do business. Our clients and audiences are limitless. The vision of horticultural science is the combined product of our proud past and our ever challenging future.”

Cary Mitchell in his 2004 presidential address, “A Vision of The New ASHS,” said “As we roll into the twenty-first century, university administrators have chosen to replace retiring faculty in all areas of traditional agriculture with a new generation of faculty prepared to complete in the dynamic world of federal funding priorities, which has meant that horticulture departments have been shrinking, consolidating with other departments, or disappearing.” I ask you: has that picture changed today?

I cannot overlook Fred S. Davies, who in his ever eloquent and personal style laced with stories of his glory days at Cornell and Michigan gave his forgettable, I meant unforgettable address in 2005 “Meetings, Membership, and Publications: The Fabric of ASHS.” In it he said, alluding to his graduate school colleagues from Cornell, “Nevertheless, in most cases it is the positive associations (Barclay, he must be referring to you) that persists throughout entire careers and that contribute greatly to the value of our meetings.” Fred certainly addressed the positive socialization aspects of ASHS and the bond of friendship that binds us all together.

My immediate predecessor, John R. Clark, gave me the idea of bringing a notebook to the podium so all my papers would be organized and in large print and not fall all over the place, which would be like one's slides (anyone remember what they are?) falling out on the floor and trying to put them all back in order. John also was an excellent speaker and in his smooth southern style of delivery forever embedded in my mind the rallying cry of horticulturists all over the world: “Let the Good Times Roll!”

Let me close by saying that it has been a pleasure serving as president of the American Society for Horticultural Science and it has certainly been the highlight of my professional career. Those individuals mentioned in my address and those not mentioned have each in their own way given us a strong foundation upon which to continue to build the field that we call horticulture, through both fundamental and applied research, education of both undergraduate and graduate students, and to serve the larger world of mankind through extension and outreach, bettering their lives through more nutritious and plentiful fruits and vegetables and enhancing the beauty of their environment through the ornamental, turf, and nursery plants.

In my association with ASHS I have formed many wonderful friendships, and strong professional bonds just like Gus and Woodrow did from Lonesome Dove and I thank you for allowing me to ride this section of the trail with you. Thank you and remember “Horticulture Touches Everyone Every Day”!