Invasive ? plant lists

Wed, 03 Sep 2008 18:26:01 PDT
I think the main point of the criticisms of these proposed changes is that
they may well be no improvement on the existing system at all from the
standpoint of environment or people. It seems the proposals are mainly about
shifting the burden of responsibility-- and cost-- to the taxpayer who is
already funding all government agencies. It is rather like the
"experimental" fee schedule for visiting national parks and forests. The
alternative to that is to say "Look, we have already paid for the original
management scheme, why are we being asked to pay again?" The larger
philosophy of such matters should be addressed before any details are worked
out and that is where we can best connect with our representatives, as Tony
Avent suggests we do.
Dylan Hannon

On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 3:28 PM, William Aley <> wrote:

> I often hear of folk stating that governments are basically inept at
> controlling invasive species or not knowledgeable to tell one invasive
> plant from another that is a passive curiosity. Is there any model or
> method that will predict when a plant species, introduced as a
> horticultural interest  will convert to becoming the next ecological
> invasive disaster? How would one enlighten the policy makers to become
> more attuned to this model, if it existed, that would satisfy the
> spectrum between the ecological purists and rare plant enthusiasts? I
> have read from the broad spectrum of idealistic self interest groups
> ranging between the Nature Conservancy that does not want to allow
> any  international imports or exchange without long, lengthy clearance
> processes to plants men advertising the newest non destructive nothing
> eats or damages tough plant  thing just collected from some remote
> hillside in remote isolated  temperately tropical Shangri-La that just
> cleared customs (maybe). I guess I am a bit curious, it's always easy
> to rant about the social dysfunction without having a better solution
> and encouraging others to pickup arms and contribute to a nebulous
> fight against the process.
> William Aley
> On Sep 4, 2008, at 5:15 AM, wrote:
> > Leaving aside the excellent comments preceding mine here. One aspect
> > of this wider issue is that those who work for government
> > departments and some NGOs take the view, or so it seems, that to
> > make blanket proscriptions against this or that is a reflection of
> > their being on the ball, or any other silly metaphor, when all it
> > reveals is the paucity of their intellectual talents combined of
> > course by their egregious laziness. Such mindlessness is not
> > restricted to governments in any one country, right now this topic
> > relates to the USA but believe me please, these people are a genetic
> > intellectual subgroup to be found in all countries and can be
> > regarded as one of the ways to soak up the unemployable in the
> > private sector.
> >
> > Most people can cite instances where such bereft thinking invariably
> > results in the contempt for the regulations themselves and much
> > effort is spent, intellectually or otherwise in circumventing these
> > unnecessary restrictions. This in short order becomes an end-game in
> > itself, as in " lets run rings round these ..........s". Sadly the
> > downside also includes material which should never be acquired,
> > introduced, etc but the whole 'game' assumes a respectability
> > amongst group peers. Here in Scotland we have an ancient and
> > honourable tradition of running rings round government agencies
> > since the Union in 1707, whether it is illicit whisky distillation
> > where nobody who was caught ever suffered the opprobrium from their
> > social network right through to modern times with other activities,
> > doubtless in the US and elsewhere the same 'games' carry on, witness
> > your prohibitions days.
> >
> > In a previous post or two on this, the point was made about species
> > getting away in one location but never able to do so in others,
> > Cardiocrinum gigantium in south eastern Australia being one good
> > example but it doesn't happen in any other state in Australia. I
> > frequently am asked to send seed of Scots thistles to Canada / USA
> > by some of the Scots Diaspora but never do, most of these thistle
> > species are a notifiable agricultural weed here which require
> > statutory controls on grazing and crop land by owners. Controls are
> > needed, sensible controls based on sound judgement not blanket
> > barring because just nobody has the data to support it nor the
> > intellectual desire to collect it first.
> >
> > You will usually find folk like those that living in high rise
> > apartments with an extreme disconnect between their urban life and
> > that of the rural one are the same who inroduce these daft
> > regulations. Ce la vie. Fight against it and resist it fellow
> > bulbophiles.
> >
> > Iain
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for home users.
> > SPAMfighter has removed 14662 spam emails to date.
> > Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
> > Get the free SPAMfighter here:
> > _______________________________________________
> > pbs mailing list
> >
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> pbs mailing list

More information about the pbs mailing list