possible change in importation rules (NAPPRA)

William Aley aley_wd@icloud.com
Sun, 22 May 2016 13:12:37 PDT
Unfortunately NAPPRA is now the rule of the import system. There are USDA staff busy placing taxa on the NAPPRA in conjunction with university scientists to compile the background documents. The problem is USDA does not know uf a taxa is a host to a disease that could become established or if the taxa is a potential plant lest ie:///weed/. No one will have an understanding of the potential until a Pest Risk Analysis is completed. Once upon a time USDA was chided by the American horticultural Association because a popular plant was not allowed to be imported into the USA. It was viewed at the worlds fair to be the most adaptive , tough and disease resistant taxa and it would not only stabilise the soil it would also add nitrogen to the soul. So USDA  allowed unregulated import of the plant to satisfy not only horticulturalist but soil conservationists.  The result is a plant know as kudzu. The rest is history. So is unregulated import of unknown plants a good idea until something 
 goes wrong? Then try to clean up the environment after?   Who pays for the clean up of plants tossed from a private garden into the hedge row that eventually naturalise and begin invading the environment and other peoples gardens? 
USDA has this dilemma. People who want unlimited access to plant taxa and conservationist that want to protect the natural birth American ecosystems. 

Currently we are seeing the demise of the North American Elm forests.they became a climax plant following the demise of the American chestnut. 
What climax species will out live the death of elm trees? 

Sent from my iPhone

> On May 22, 2016, at 12:14, pelarg@aol.com wrote:
> If this is true it will create more problems than it will fix.  The current system of "innocent until proven guilty", ie allowing the importation of taxa that have not shown themselves to be a risk or likely risk is a better system than using NAPPRA.  And properly applied the current system is perfectly capable of excluding  taxa that are likely to present problems if imported, if anything I dare say that some of the currently disallowed taxa are of low risk if any to US agriculture.  
> Ernie DeMarie
> In NY where Allium moly and camassias are in bloom, including a rare pink form I got years ago from a former nursery woman out in Oregon,  and the summer growing bulbs in pots are going outside while the winter growers in the garage are finished or finishing up for the most part.  Winter hardy gladioli galtonia, Ledebouria cooperi, Crocosmias, Dieramas, Galtonia, Crinum bulbispermum (and Super Ellen and x powelli), and Agapanthus are all up among others and I still wait for Eucomis, which is always the last thing to emerge.  Also seeing growth just starting on well protected (wood chip mulch) Erythrina zeyheri.  
> -----Original Message-----
> From: William Aley <aley_wd@icloud.com>
> To: Pacific Bulb Society <pbs@lists.ibiblio.org>
> Sent: Sat, May 21, 2016 11:34 pm
> Subject: Re: [pbs] Importing bulbs
> The US system allows for any plant to be imported unless there is a reason not to allow it to be imported.  This is most likely because the list would have been long when this was published.   Currently USDA is starting NAPPRA. Which will reverse how plants may be allowed import. Only plant taxa that have a pest risk assessment completed would have the conditions of import  published. All others would not be admissible. 
> _______________________________________________
> pbs mailing list
> pbs@lists.ibiblio.org
> http://pacificbulbsociety.org/list.php
> http://pacificbulbsociety.org/pbswiki/

More information about the pbs mailing list