Weedy bulbous plants

Adam Fikso adam14113@ameritech.net
Fri, 26 Nov 2010 22:49:42 PST
Thanks Michael, for the reminder.  It will continue to be necessary to be 
reminded and to continue our input for many, many years, I suspect.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Michael Mace" <mikemace@att.net>
To: <pbs@lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Friday, November 26, 2010 11:25 PM
Subject: Re: [pbs] Weedy bulbous plants

> Folks,
> I wrote a message to the list last July summarizing the "whitelist"
> situation in the US.  If you're new to this discussion, you might want to
> check it out:
> http://pacificbulbsociety.org/pbslist/old.php/…
> A couple of thoughts...
> I agree that the import regulations in the US are unreasonably eroding our
> ability to practice our hobby.
> And I agree that bureaucracies tend to be, well, bureaucratic.
> But in this particular case, I don't think we can put most of the blame 
> for
> the regulations on the bureaucrats.  The US Congress *ordered* the USDA to
> put controls on potentially invasive plants.  It's written into a law. 
> The
> USDA has moved slowly on implementing that law, and in many cases has 
> tried
> to modify it to minimize its impact on our hobby.  There have also been 
> some
> amazing behind the scenes cases in which a few involved people from the
> gardening societies have worked with the USDA to prevent major mistakes 
> (the
> save that I'm aware of was the potential banning of the entire genus 
> Moraea
> from the US after Homeria was merged into Moraea).
> The "bureaucrats" have been listening to us (when we've bothered to lobby
> back) and have been trying to accommodate us.  But we're late to the 
> party,
> and in most cases we're getting outshouted.
> The people pushing the whitelist in the US are the native plant societies,
> some academics, and their allies like the Nature Conservancy.  They are 
> very
> well organized, and many of them are amazingly strident.  They are the one
> who pushed through the original legislation requiring import restrictions,
> and they've been lobbying the USDA (and threatening lawsuits) trying to
> enact the most restrictive regulations possible.
> I do think we should be very careful about what we label a weed, but I 
> don't
> think we need to worry too much about our wiki being used as a source for
> banning plants.  Unfortunately, the whitelist regulations as they were 
> being
> structured the last time I checked would rely on peer-reviewed scientific
> articles to evaluate invasiveness.  That sounds like a good approach, but
> some of those peer-reviewed articles make scientific guesses at 
> invasiveness
> by looking at factors like the native climate of a bulb and how many seeds
> if it sets.  So if it grows in a climate similar to some part of the US, 
> and
> if it sets a lot of seeds, it could be assumed to be invasive even if all 
> of
> us testify that in reality it isn't.
> On the other hand, if a species is shown to already be present in the US, 
> it
> will be exempted from the whitelist.  So I think one of the most useful
> things we can do on the wiki is document what we're already growing here.
> If you live in the US and don't like the regulations, tell your
> congressperson, and participate in the public comment opportunities when 
> new
> regulations are proposed.  And if you belong to a native plant society, 
> tell
> it to back off.
> If you don't bother to do these things, then look in a mirror before you
> blame anybody else for the new regulations.
> Mike
> San Jose, CA
> _______________________________________________
> pbs mailing list
> pbs@lists.ibiblio.org
> http://pacificbulbsociety.org/list.php
> http://pacificbulbsociety.org/pbswiki/ 

More information about the pbs mailing list