[MPWG] RE: ] Science paper on ginseng

Sonya msredsonya at earthlink.net
Sat Feb 12 04:58:24 CST 2005


Some miscellaneous heres and theres that I have noted in regard to the 
ginseng issue, deer browsing, and their control/approach and whatnot.

I read several of Mr. McGraw's previous studies on ginseng, the latest 
one, the Fish and Wildlife reports and various other channels of 
information about ginseng and some of the peripheral background issues. 
I think there are other things factoring in here besides the deer 
browsing. (((Decline in stature of American Ginseng plants over two 
centuries.MCGRAW, J.B.* West Virginia University Morgantown WV 26506 USA 
^1 ^snip--- Assuming herbarium specimens are representative of a 
consistent portion of natural populations, either direct or indirect 
effects of environmental change or human harvest could explain the rapid 
change in ginseng 
stature.http://abstracts.co.allenpress.com/pweb/esa2000/abstracts/JAM-3-81-5.html 
)))

I snipped some of these findings and things that I found to be of note 
or to be pertinent into the email.........I did not summarize the 
material, everyone can conclude from the material what they would 
like........ Another paper, different conclusion, and a different 
approach to to topic.........The creation of a seed bank derived of all 
the species and varieties...
https://drum.umd.edu/dspace/ bitstream/1903/1901/1/umi-umd-1881.pdf.......




Not all species of ginseng would fall under CITES II 
classification......there are some species that are exempt. There was an 
exception granted by the Fish and Wildlife department under the CITES 
Regulations in 2003 to a commonly used format in relation to ginseng as 
it relates to the Field-cultivated ginseng, per their use of references 
as it being a commonly used format for growing Ginseng. Per their use of 
standard protocol--- ginseng shown to be proven as artificially 
propagated “under controlled conditions with human intervention” would 
fall outside the CITES regulations.

Please see the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, International Affairs 
December 11, 2003 MEMORANDUM I posted below
.....as well as the Ginseng Findings from 2003 and 2004 
<http://international.fws.gov/ginseng/2003-2004ginsengfinding.htm> /U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service, /International Affairs which makes note of 
several references to the poaching of ginseng as well as over harvesting 
of ginseng asother issues regarding ginseng that would need to be 
addressed....



http://international.fws.gov/ginseng/Artpropginseng.htm
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, International Affairs
December 11, 2003

MEMORANDUM

To: Chief, Division of Management Authority
From: Chief, Branch of Consultation and Monitoring, Division of 
Scientific Authority
Subject: General advice on artificially propagated American ginseng 
(Panax quinquefolius L.) from States with approved CITES export programs

The Division of Scientific Authority has determined that specimens of 
field-cultivated American ginseng (Panax quinquefolius L.) and its 
recognizable parts, including roots of any age, reported from the 
following States: Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, 
Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New 
York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, 
Tennessee, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, and Wisconsin, 
will be considered artificially propagated as defined by CITES 
Resolution Conf. 11.11.

This general advice does not apply to woods-grown (woods-cultivated) and 
wild-simulated American ginseng. The Division of Scientific Authority 
has been unable to determine that the methods used to produce 
woods-grown and wild-simulated American ginseng consistently meet the 
criteria of CITES Resolution Conf. 11.11 for artificially propagated 
specimens. Therefore, we have included specimens of woods-grown and 
wild-simulated American ginseng in our non-detriment finding on the 
export of wild American ginseng.

We will continue to monitor State reports, and actual exports of 
cultivated ginseng roots, with the understanding that this general 
advice may be modified in the future, if deemed necessary, based on any 
new pertinent information that becomes available.

American ginseng (Panax quinquefolius L.) is hereafter referred to 
simply as “ginseng.”


BASIS FOR ADVICE


Ginseng was listed in Appendix II of the Convention on International 
Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) in 1975. 
Ginseng is a slow-growing, long-lived herbaceous perennial indigenous to 
eastern North America, occurring in southern Canada (Ontario and 
Quebec), west to South Dakota and Oklahoma, and south to Georgia (Small 
and Catling 1999; NatureServe 2001). The States of Idaho, North Dakota, 
Oregon, and Washington, included in this general advice, are outside the 
species’ range.


Ginseng has long been recognized as a valuable horticultural crop 
because of the properties of its roots for both herbal and medicinal 
purposes (Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada 2003). The United States is 
the world's second-largest producer of field-cultivated ginseng 
(Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada 2003). The major center for 
field-cultivated ginseng in the United States is Wisconsin (mostly in 
Marathon County), where 80% (approximately 3,800 acres) of the 
cultivated ginseng in the United States is grown (Hankins 1997; Small 
and Catling 1999).


Ginseng cultivation in the United States began sometime around the 1880s 
as wild ginseng was becoming scarce (Tellico Plains Mountain Press 
2003). By the early 1900s, the U.S. Department of Agriculture 
recommended the cultivation of ginseng for its highly valued root 
(Koehler 1912). Growers originally collected ginseng seed from local 
wild populations for cultivation (Boehm et al. 1999; Proctor et al. 
1999), and also transplanted wild roots into gardens (Agriculture and 
Agri-Food Canada 2003). Further expansion of ginseng was achieved by 
planting seeds produced from wild-collected plant material grown in 
cultivation (Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada 2003).


The optimum seeding rate for field-cultivated ginseng is between 80 and 
100 pounds of seed per acre (Brun 1999). There are approximately 8,000 
seeds per pound. Field-cultivated ginseng is usually harvested by the 
third or fourth year because of diseases that threaten older plantings 
(Beyfuss 1999; Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada 2003). Yields range from 
2,000 to 4,000 pounds of dried roots per acre (Hankins 1997; Brun 1998).

Roots of field-cultivated plants are usually cream colored, smooth and 
fat in shape, and exhibit few concentric rings as compared to wild 
ginseng roots, and typically have a shorter rhizome (neck) than wild 
ginseng roots (Hankins 1997).

Ginseng may be exported under the exemption for artificially propagated 
specimens if it meets the specific criteria established in CITES 
Resolution Conf. 11.11. We have determined that specimens of cultivated 
ginseng and its recognizable parts, including roots of any age, reported 
from the States covered in this general advice will be considered 
artificially propagated as defined by the CITES Resolution Conf. 11.11. 
Our decision is based on our evaluation of the following known 
cultivation practices used to produce ginseng in the United States. 
[Criteria of Resolution Conf. 11.11 are shown in italics.]

a) The term ‘artificially propagated’ shall be interpreted to refer only 
to live plants grown from seeds, cuttings, divisions, callus tissues or 
other plant tissues, or other propagules under controlled conditions; 
and that ‘controlled conditions’ means in a non-natural environment that 
is intensively manipulated by human intervention for the purpose of 
producing selected species or hybrids.

Field-cultivated ginseng is grown as a monoculture in raised beds under 
artificial shade of 70-80% (Beyfuss 1999). Cultivation techniques used 
for field-grown ginseng include standard horticultural practices 
consisting of mechanical tillage, fertilization, weed control, 
irrigation, and pesticides. Specialized tractors, sprayers, and diggers 
have become common on larger corporate ginseng farms that constitute the 
bulk of the industry. Ginseng seed and/or 1-3-year-old transplant roots 
(rootlets) are commercially grown on farms (Beyfuss 1999). Planting 
artificially stratified seed is the principal method used to propagate 
ginseng.1

b) the cultivated parental stock used for artificial propagation must be:
i) established in accordance with the provisions of CITES and relevant 
national laws and in a manner not detrimental to the survival of the 
species in the wild; and

Ginseng farms and nurseries are regulated by the States covered in this 
advice, and therefore must operate in accordance with all applicable 
State and Federal regulations. Growers of field-cultivated ginseng 
either produce their own seed or transplant roots or obtain such 
propagules from other commercial operations.

ii) managed in such a way that long-term maintenance of the cultivated 
stock is
guaranteed.

Field-cultivated ginseng has been intensively grown in the United States 
for over 100 years. There are approximately 3,800 acres of 
field-cultivated ginseng intensively grown under artificial shade 
(Hankins 1997). Commercial ginseng growers maintain a sufficient number 
of cultivated parental stock plants to meet their long-term planting 
needs, or purchase commercially available propagules (seeds and 
transplant roots) for outplanting.

c) seeds shall be regarded as artificially propagated only if they are 
taken from the specimens acquired in accordance with the provisions of 
paragraph (b) and grown under controlled conditions; or from parental 
stock artificially propagated in accordance with paragraph (a).

Ginseng seed is artificially propagated from cultivated parental stock, 
that is, grown under controlled conditions (fertilization, irrigation, 
tillage, pest and weed control) in a non-natural environment (raised 
beds under artificial shade). Cultivated ginseng plants require a 
minimum of three years of growth to produce seeds for outplanting. 
Planting artificially stratified seed is the principal method of 
propagating field-cultivated ginseng.


d) all other parts and derivatives shall be regarded as being 
artificially propagated only if they are taken from specimens that have 
been artificially propagated in accordance with the provisions of 
paragraph (a).

As described in this general advice, standard horticultural practices 
are used to grow field-cultivated ginseng; therefore, we consider all 
parts of such plants as artificially propagated.
____________________________
1Stratified seed is subjected to a 12 month period of storage in moist 
sand with a warm/cold treatment to after-ripen the embryo of the seed 
before germination can occur.
==========================================
Illegal poaching of Ginseng.........

snip-----------http://www.naturalresources.umd.edu/Pages/BO_Fall2002.
Security Measures
The greatest threat to a crop of wild simulated ginseng is human theft. 
Criminals who think nothing of "No Trespassing" signs know they are more 
likely to find more ginseng on someone’s property than in public forests 
where legal gatherers search. Many will wait just prior to the harvest. 
One advantage for growers in the piedmont region is that many residents 
are unfamiliar with ginseng or its value. The references provide ideas 
on improving security for your ginseng patch.


snip---------

In the last 10 years, park law enforcement rangers have seized nearly 
11,000 illegally harvested ginseng roots in the national park. Park 
staff believe that only a small percentage of the roots actually poached 
from the park are detected, despite routine ranger patrols. In an effort 
to track the health of ginseng populations throughout the park, staff of 
the Resource Management and Science Division have weighed and dated more 
than 9,000 of the confiscated roots. Undamaged roots are then replanted 
for monitoring. Confiscated roots as young as one to three years have 
been processed. Sadly, plants younger than five years of age are usually 
not mature and have not had the opportunity to contribute seeds to the 
population (the only method of reproduction for this species).
http://www2.nature.nps.gov/YearInReview/yir2001/05_risks/05_2_rock.html

snip-----http://www.imagesbuilder.com/gsmnp/poachers.html

Superintendent Karen P. Wade reported that over the past several years 
ginseng poaching has become one of the most frequent and damaging 
resource crimes committed in Great Smoky Mountains National Park. Its 
continued high commercial value has directly contributed to an increase 
in theft of the plant


snip-------------http://www.npca.org/magazine/2005/winter/poaching3.asp

Ken Johnson, a recently retired criminal investigator based at 
Shenandoah National Park, cites a pilot project in which database 
information from scientists is merged with law enforcement violator 
information to understand patterns such as bear and ginseng poaching, 
then predict where violators will be and successfully intercept them.

Ginseng is federally protected as a species of "special concern, 
threatened due to exploitation." The plant can be legally harvested with 
proper permission on private and some public lands, including three 
national forests that adjoin the Great Smokies. Prime dried wild roots 
from legal harvest areas sell for $350 to $400 per pound and must be 
certified for transport across state or international boundaries. 
Ginseng roots constitute a large percentage of the
$7 billion annual world trade in medicinal herbs. Much of the herbs 
traded on the black market come from the Appalachian Mountains. Certain 
Asian buyers covet the ginseng roots stolen from national parks for 
their purity and physical appearance, important aspects of traditional 
healing treatments and use as an aphrodisiac.

"I can't imagine people walking into the Smithsonian and carrying away 
artifacts," says Jim Northup, yet he knows casual thieves and 
well-organized crime groups are stripping Appalachian parks of ginseng, 
goldenseal, and orchids. Illegal harvest of ginseng was so prevalent in 
the Smokies during the 1990s that rangers seized 11,000 illicit roots.

During the last eight years, Jim Corbin, a North Carolina Department of 
Agriculture plant protection specialist, has developed a simple 
procedure for tagging ginseng with benign material that contains 
magnetic coded marking chips and color-coded fluorescent dye. Together 
these ingredients produce an easily detected signature that infiltrates 
ginseng tissue and reveals the exact location plants have grown. Diggers 
apprehended with contraband roots are cited, and dealers who purchase 
them may lose entire stocks worth thousands of dollars.

Teams of state and Park Service personnel blitz the Smokies annually, 
marking large numbers of plants in diverse locations, widening a 
protective barrier that is repelling poachers. "What we are doing is 
working," says Corbin. "When the program began, we started monitoring a 
stand of young ginseng located where poachers would plunder it-those 
plants have since tripled in size. In the past three years, we've also 
launched a serious crackdown on ginseng dealers [including use of 
canines trained to sniff out the roots], and all of them have been 
compliant."

Encouraged by this successful marking program, resource managers at Blue 
Ridge Parkway, Shenandoah, Mammoth Cave, Cumberland Gap, and several 
Canadian provincial parks are attaching similar signature markers to 
ginseng and other high-dollar poaching targets such as goldenseal, black 
cohosh, blue cohosh, bloodroot, lady's slipper orchids, lilies, 
trillium, and galax. Similar technology has been tested to deter theft 
of petrified wood from preserves in Arizona.

=============

9. The U.S. Forest Service in North Carolina has implemented a marking 
program, similar to that used by the National Park Service, to curtail 
the illegal poaching of ginseng in wilderness and other protected areas 
(National Forest in North Carolina, August 29, 2000).

10. Recently, the Appalachian Ginseng Foundation of Kentucky identified 
American ginseng poaching to be a major threat to private landowners and 
public wooded lands (Appalachian Ginseng Foundation Newsletter, 2001, No.6).




snip----------

Ohio Ginseng Policy Work Update

By Chip Carroll

In 2003 the W.K. Kellogg Foundation funded Appalachian Ohio non-profit 
group Rural Action (www.ruralaction.org), to work on state ginseng 
policy. Through Rural Action Forestry’s experience in working with 
medicinal plant producers since 1998, it was clear that poaching was the 
biggest problem facing not only growers but also wild ginseng 
populations. Rural Action’s Forestry Program decided to focus on ginseng 
poaching and the current policies that govern ginseng harvesting in Ohio.

The Forestry Program at Rural Action had actually been working on the 
ginseng poaching issue since 1999, focusing primarily on getting the 
opening date of harvest season for ginseng moved back and working with 
growers on cultivation and security issues. A committee of local 
growers, harvesters and botanists has provided guidance along with way 
in developing a plan for pursuing this issue.

The committee has come up with several ideas. These include developing a 
stricter, more enforceable ginseng poaching law in Ohio, generating 
income from ginseng harvesting to help the state enforce the laws via 
licensing for harvesters, and doing educational outreach to growers, 
harvesters, judges, prosecutors and law enforcement personnel. We have 
been able to meet with and garner some support from the Ohio Division of 
Natural Resources (ODNR), who in 2003 moved the opening of harvest 
season from August 15th to September 1st. We have begun an educational 
campaign including the development of a website dedicated to ginseng 
poaching issues (www.growginseng.org), development of educational 
materials and handouts, and a new “Grow it, don’t poach it – Protect 
Appalachian Heritage” ginseng t-shirt.

Currently we are trying to collect stories from individuals who have 
been poached and do some interviews with anyone willing to share a story 
about ginseng growing, harvesting and poaching. We are going to be 
producing an educational video in 2004 that will be aimed at educating 
the judges, prosecutors and law enforcement personnel about the 
importance of combating the poaching problem here in Ohio.

If you would like to get involved or have a story to share, please 
contact Chip Carroll at (740) 742-4401 or chipc at ruralaction.org 
<mailto:chipc at ruralaction.org>

-----------------------------------

snip-------http://www.wvu.edu/~agexten/forestry/ginseng.htm
*John A. Scott, Jr., Sam Rogers, and David Cooke 
<mailto:David.Cooke at mail.wvu.edu>
WVU Cooperative Extension Service Agents
Bobbi Lynn Fry Research Assistant, Mercer County *June 1995


      *Predator Control*

Predators, both animal and human, are one of the two main limitations to 
growing ginseng. In areas where deer, wild turkey, and livestock are a 
problem, fencing may be required. Use a low, woven-wire fence topped 
with a strand or two of electric fence. Leave alleys every 100 feet to 
allow deer and turkey passageways. Fencing also may help keep human 
predators from digging the crop.

In seed production, watch the seeds when they begin to turn red. If you 
have squirrels in the area, they can rapidly destroy your seed crop. 
Look for seed hulls on the ground and entire seed heads destroyed. You 
may have to eliminate the squirrels. Also, wild turkeys can be a real 
problem during seed production. Woven-wire fence will eliminate most 
turkey problems.

In areas where livestock graze or could graze by accident, make sure to 
fence your patches. Livestock damage comes from the animals eating the 
ginseng and trampling the plants.


      *Security*

Security is very important. A major problem with security from humans in 
West Virginia is the attitude that many people have concerning the 
ownership of ginseng. Many feel that since ginseng is a wild plant, they 
have the right to hunt and dig it on anyone's land. Even law enforcement 
officers are reluctant to arrest trespassers or thieves in ginseng 
territory. With this prevalent attitude, security is a real problem.

First, tell no one you are raising ginseng. Also, you may want to cut 
the leaves and stems off in the fall before hunting season. This may 
help keep people from accidentally finding your patch.

Some growers are experimenting with video cameras, alarm systems, guard 
dogs, and high tensile electric fencing. Most rely on being around the 
premises. However, this is false hope. Ginseng has been stolen from 
patches on the edges of home lawns.Another strategy is to give roots to 
neighbors to plant so they also will be alert to strangers or suspicious 
people in the area. This places everyone in the area as growers of 
ginseng, no matter how small the patch.

One big problem with security is the time required to grow ginseng. 
Other people can watch your patch develop and dig it before you do. 
Therefore, when the patch is of harvest age, you must dig it first.As 
you develop your ginseng, check with your Farm Service Center or 
insurance company to see if crop insurance is available. Also, a grower 
can call all dealers when a significant amount of roots are stolen and 
ask them to contact him or her when the roots show up. Most diggers will 
try to sell roots for wild. This tactic is very easy to detect. 
Wild-simulated roots are all the same age, and woods-cultivated roots 
can be easily identified by characteristics and a soil test. Some buyers 
can tell who produced the roots by just looking at them.

Also, remember that law enforcement officials will do very little if 
your land is not posted. Make sure you place the posted signs correctly, 
that they have the necessary information, and that they are spaced at 
proper distances.Many growers are planting totally in the wild situation 
in order not to disturb the forest; this may conceal the location 
better. Others are planting a large area and are willing to allow some 
to be stolen.There is no miracle security cure-all. One must deal with 
the problems associated with security.


      *Pest Control*

Mice are a real problem in growing ginseng. They use mole holes for 
runways and eat the ginseng roots. The mulch makes an ideal home for 
them. Use mouse baits and check ginseng patches frequently. Mouse traps 
placed in blocks or other hiding places may help.

Voles, also known as field mice or orchard mice, are small rodents that 
cause serious damage to ginseng. Voles burrow into a ginseng bed and eat 
the roots. There are no repellents available for controlling voles; 
however, the use of rodenticide and baits is effective. Baits seem to be 
the best method. An example of a bait is to place a poison in the holes 
of a brick, cover the brick with a plastic bucket, and then cut holes in 
the rim of the bucket for access on all sides. This way, the poison is 
kept dry and away from larger animals. Growers report fish-flavored Rami 
Green to be the vole bait of choice. Some growers use plastic tubing, 
rodent barriers, and traps; others simply have cats or owls around. 
These methods will work for mice, too. Study your environment and 
determine what tactic works best for you.


========================================
As far as digging for ginseng on other sources........

snip--------http://www.wvforestry.com/ginseng.cfm?menucall=ginseng
Collection of Ginseng in West Virginia is regulated by State law. 
Ginseng roots are to be dug only between August 15 and November 30 each 
year. Ginseng diggers, often called "sangers," are required to sow the 
seeds from harvested plants at the site of the digging, thereby 
perpetuating the species in its native habitat. During the digging 
season landowners may dig Ginseng on their own land or give written 
permission to others to dig on their land. Digging without written 
permission on posted or enclosed land is a criminal act and subject to 
fines and imprisonment. Ginseng buyers must obtain a permit from the WV 
Division of Forestry. Possession of uncertified Ginseng between April 1 
and August 14 is illegal and substantial penalties are imposed on 
violators.
Ginseng has been harvested as a cash crop in West Virginia for at least 
200 years. In 2002, more than 6,400 pounds of Ginseng, worth more than 
$2 million, were dug in West Virginia. Ginseng Harvest records from 1978 
to 1999 for wild and cultivated plants are available by clicking Wild 
Ginseng Harvest History and Cultivated Ginseng Harvest History.
================================
Ginseng Findings 2000 Fish and Wildlife Services
http://international.fws.gov/animals/gingfind.html

snip-----------

10. The Service agrees with claims that economic factors (such as the 
Asian economic crisis in the late 1990s, price of roots, and the current 
low unemployment rate in the United States) may have influenced demand 
for and harvest of American ginseng in the last few years. In fact, 
research conducted at West Virginia University found a correlation 
between harvest levels and unemployment (personal communication with Mr. 
Brent Bailey). However, no correlation was found between price and 
harvest amounts. Biotic and abiotic factors (such as deer browsing and 
drought), as well as habitat destruction, also have a negative impact on 
wild ginseng populations.

11. However, based on all of the information detailed above, we continue 
to believe that recent declines in many States in the amount of wild 
American ginseng harvested are greatly related to population declines 
associated with overharvest, particularly of young individuals that have 
not reached reproductive age. We are seriously concerned that this 
overharvest, in addition to the other factors affecting the species, 
threatens wild populations of this species and the livelihoods of those 
citizens who depend on this plant as a source of income.

15. In addition to monitoring, the Service is also funding research at 
West Virginia University to examine, among other things, the status of 
wild ginseng in West Virginia; the utility of some population indices 
currently being used by OSA to assess the status of wild populations of 
ginseng; the importance of timing of harvest season; and the possible 
effects of deer browsing and dispersal of seeds by deer and turkey. 
Preliminary results indicate that:

    a. Current harvest seasons in many States are unrelated to plant
    phenology and may be detrimental to the long-term survival of the
    species. Specifically, many States allow harvest of plants before
    seeds ripen, thus reducing the chances of seed germination, even if
    these are planted as required by most States. *OSA encourages the
    States to review their harvest seasons (Table 1) to address this
    problem. States should also coordinate with neighboring States to
    establish similar harvest seasons to discourage unscrupulous diggers
    from harvesting roots before the start of the harvest season in
    their State and selling the roots in neighboring States where the
    harvest season already has started.*

    b. Germination rates are affected by the depth at which seeds are
    buried: low at 0 cm, highest at 2 cm, decreasing thereafter. *OSA
    encourages States to share these findings with diggers and dealers
    to increase germination rates of planted seeds.*

    c. There is a negative correlation between densities of deer and
    ginseng plants.


========================================


http://international.fws.gov/ginseng/2003-2004ginsengfinding.htm
August 5, 2003

To:
Chief, Division of Management Authority

From:
Chief, Division of Scientific Authority

Subject:
Convention Permit Applications for Wild Ginseng (Panax quinquefolius) 
Harvested in 2003 and 2004


This document constitutes our finding on the export of wild American 
ginseng, Panax quinquefolius, for the 2003 and 2004 harvest seasons.

Please, be advised that, based on our analysis of available information, 
we find that the export of wild American ginseng roots of 5 years of age 
or older (i.e., with five or more bud-scale scars on the rhizome) 
harvested during the 2003-2004 seasons in the following States will not 
be detrimental to the survival of the species: Alabama, Arkansas, 
Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maryland, Minnesota, 
Missouri, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, 
Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wisconsin.

We will continue to monitor the status of American ginseng in the wild, 
with the understanding that the above finding and associated 
restrictions may be modified for exports of American ginseng harvested 
in 2004 if deemed necessary based on any new information that we may 
receive. In 2005, we will re-evaluate the status of this species, 
including the outcome of various actions being taken at the State and 
Federal levels, as described in this finding.

BASIS FOR ADVICE

To ensure that American ginseng (Panax quinquefolius L.) remains viable 
throughout its range in the United States and to determine whether the 
export of American ginseng will not be detrimental to the survival of 
the species, DSA annually reviews available information from various 
sources (other Federal agencies, State regulatory agencies, industry and 
associations, non-governmental organizations, and researchers) on the 
status and biology of the species, and specifically for each State from 
which American ginseng roots are exported.

Biology, ecology, and range of the species

1. American ginseng (hereafter referred to as “ginseng”) is a 
slow-growing, long-lived (50 plus years) herbaceous perennial of the 
Araliaceae family (Lewis and Zenger 1982). The species is endemic to 
Eastern North America, occurring in southern Canada (Ontario and Quebec) 
west to South Dakota and Oklahoma and south to Georgia (Small and 
Catling 1999; NatureServe 2001).

2. Ginseng is a species of stable habitats, such as the understory of 
mid-successional to late-successional deciduous forests (Charron and 
Gagnon 1991). Plants emerge after the leaf canopy has partially or fully 
developed (Lewis and Zenger 1982).

3. Although ginseng can grow on a wide variety of soil textures and 
topographic conditions, it requires moist soils and sites of low 
evapotranspiration loss (Anderson et al. 1993).

4. Below ground, ginseng forms a thick taproot, a special underground 
stem known as a vertical rhizome sits on top of the main root and sends 
up the above-ground stem each year. The rhizome is characterized by 
large scars that form as a result of the annual abscission or accidental 
loss of the single subterminal aerial stem. These annual scars are 
well-marked on the rhizome and can be counted to determine the age of 
the plant (Lewis and Zenger 1982). Growth rate varies among individuals, 
so plants with the same number of leaves and leaflets may be close but 
not identical in age (Anderson 2002).

5. Ginseng leaves are whorled, palmately compound, with three to five 
leaflets (Radford et al. 1981). An individual whorled leaf with a 
petiole is referred to as a “prong,” and is commonly used to indicate 
the size-class or age of individual ginseng plant (Lewis and Zenger 
1983; Lockard and Swanson 1998).

6. Typically, ginseng has been divided into four size-classes based on 
the number of leaves or prongs. Generally, one-prong plants (with 3-5 
leaflets) are 2 years of age, two-prong plants (with 10 leaflets) ranged 
from 3 to 6 years of age, three-prong plants (with 15 leaflets) ranged 
from 7 to 9 years of age, and four-prong plants (with 20 leaflets) 
ranged from 10 to 11 years of age (Anderson et al. 1993). Four- and 
five-prong plants represent the oldest individuals of a population 
(Lewis and Zenger 1983).

7. Wild ginseng plants do not reproduce until they are at least 4 years 
of age (Carpenter and Cottam1982; Anderson et al. 1993; Dunwiddie and 
Anderson 1999).

8. Ginseng has perfect flowers (bisexual flowers): an individual flower 
has both stamens (male) and carpels (female) (Carpenter and Cottam 1982; 
Lewis and Zenger 1982; Schlessman 1985). Although ginseng does have a 
high natural rate of self-fertilization (Schlessman 1985), outcrossing 
(cross-pollination) between plants has been reported (Carpenter and 
Cottam 1982; Lewis and Zenger 1983). However, ginseng is not apomictic: 
capable of producing seed without any form of fertilization (Carpenter 
and Cottam 1982).

9. Ginseng is not an obligate outcrosser (Carpenter and Cottam 1982). 
Ginseng flowers have been observed to be pollinated with and without 
pollinator assistance (Carpenter and Cottam 1982; Lewis and Zenger 1983; 
Schlessman 1985). Small bees in the family Halictidae and flies in the 
family Syrphidae appear to be the major pollinators of ginseng 
(Carpenter and Cottam 1982; Lewis and Zenger 1983; Schlessman 1985). 
However, these pollinators probably do not transfer pollen between 
distant individuals (Carpenter and Cottam 1982).

10.Ginseng fruits turn red at maturity and typically are two-seeded in 
each berry-like fruit (Lewis and Zenger 1983). Although very infrequent, 
ginseng fruit can yield three and four seeds (Anderson et al. 1984; 
Schlessman 1985). A typical flowering 4-year-old wild ginseng plant may 
produce 30-40 fruits on each inflorescence (Proctor and Bailey 1987).

11.The fecundity (number of offspring) of ginseng is low, and seed 
production is positively correlated with age and size of the population 
(Carpenter and Cottam 1982; Lewis and Zenger 1983; Schlessman 1985). 
Seed mortality is high, and is the most precarious portion of ginseng’s 
life cycle (Lewis and Zenger 1982). Ginseng does not form a long-term 
seed bank (Anderson et al. 1984; Charron and Gagnon 1991).

12.To germinate, seeds require an after-ripening process (warm-cold 
sequence of temperature changes) that averages 18-22 months (Lewis and 
Zenger 1982; Proctor and Bailey 1987). The embryo is inactive during the 
first winter, matures during the next growing season, and then endures a 
second winter before it is able to germinate (Hu et al. 1980). Asexual 
(vegetative) reproduction of ginseng due to rhizome or root 
fragmentation is very rare and unknown in most populations (Lewis 1988).

13.Ginseng is physiologically adapted to low light levels, reaching 
light saturation (the intensity at which an increase in light does not 
increase photosynthesis) at levels as low as 10% of full sunlight, 
whereas maximum growth occurs up to 30% of full sunlight (Proctor 1980). 
At moderate high light levels, ginseng can experience leaf chlorosis, 
(yellowing caused by loss of or reduced development of chlorophyll) 
(Gagnon 1999), early leaf senescence, or depressed growth (Anderson 2002).

14.Ginseng plants can senesce (a natural die-back of the plant) during 
the summer, after the new terminal bud has formed, and can appear 
“dormant” at the time of fall harvesting (Carpenter and Cottam 1982). 
More often, it is the largest plants that are likely to senesce early in 
the summer and as a result do not produce any seed in that year 
(Carpenter and Cottam 1982).

15.True dormancy in ginseng (failure to produce a vegetative stem) is 
far less common than early leaf senescence, and can result when there 
has been physical damage to the plant (e.g., animal damage) (Carpenter 
and Cottam 1982).

16. Figure 1 (page 28) shows the range of ginseng in North America and 
its conservation status according to NatureServe, a non-profit 
organization that compiles and assesses data on plants, animals, and 
ecological communities collected by the 50 State Natural Heritage 
Programs, and Canada (NatureServe: An online encyclopedia of life [web 
application]. 2001. Version 1.4. Arlington, Virginia, USA. URL: 
http://www.natureserve.org/. Accessed June 2, 2003).

Research and monitoring of American ginseng

1. Field studies of ginseng have found that ginseng is highly 
self-fertile (Schluter and Punja 2000), and pollination can occur 
between flowers on a single flower head (umbel) or between flower heads. 
Furthermore, self-pollinated flowers produce the same proportion of 
seeds as outcrossed (cross-fertilized) flowers (Carpenter and Cottam 
1982; Schlessman 1985). Schlessman (1985) suggested that the high 
pollen-to-ovule ratio of ginseng inflorescences promotes adequate 
pollination even though pollinator visits are infrequent. The author 
speculated that female reproductive success of ginseng is probably 
governed by the amount of photosynthate allocated to reproduction, 
rather than by abundance or efficiency of pollinators (Schlessman 1985).

2. Schluter and Punja (2000) confirmed Schlessman and other researchers’ 
observations that ginseng’s ability to produce flowers that mature into 
fruit increases with the age and size of the plant, and is regulated by 
the availability of site resources, such as nutrients, water, sunlight 
(Carpenter and Cottam 1982; Lewis and Zenger 1983; Schlessman 1985).

4. A 10-year (1986-1996) demographic study conducted by Dunwiddie and 
Anderson (1999) on two wild populations of ginseng in Massachusetts 
found that the number of individual plants that produced fruit varied 
considerably among years, ranging from 0.5% to 33% (Dunwiddie and 
Anderson 1999).

5. Field research conducted by Lewis and Zenger (1983) found that only 
0.6% of wild ginseng seeds germinated after 20 months. Although the 
researchers found that the ginseng seeds that did germinate had a high 
probability (97%) of developing to adulthood (Lewis and Zenger 1983). In 
contrast in experimental field tests where seeds were sown by humans, 
germination rates were 55-75%.

6. Monitoring results of 10 wild ginseng populations in West Virginia 
found that 90% of ginseng seeds remain within 2 meters of the parental 
plant (Van der Voot cited in McGraw 2003).

7. Researchers in Canada have determined that the minimum viable 
population (MVP) size for ginseng in Canada is 172 plants, including 
reproductive and non-reproductive individuals (Nantel et al. 1996). This 
number was based on the large quantity of fruits (seeds) produced, no 
large plant dormancy or senescence of individuals, and an average 
population growth rate of 1.04 (D. Gagnon, University of Quebec, pers. 
comm.).

8. Based on a data set from 1998 to 2001, Dr. Gagnon calculated the MVP 
size for ginseng in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park (GSMNP) to 
be 510 individuals. The estimated size for the GSMNP is much larger than 
the 172 MVP size for Canada, because, in the GSMNP, populations have a 
low average growth rate, plants produced fewer fruits (seeds), and some 
large plants remain dormant or senesce (Gagnon 2003). Dr. Gagnon 
speculated that a MVP of 510 in the GSMNP may also be related to 
droughts during the third and fourth years of the study, and that that 
the remaining populations of ginseng in the park are located on marginal 
sites because poachers have extirpated ginseng from its preferred 
habitat (D. Gagnon, University of Quebec, pers. comm.).

9. A demographic study of six ginseng populations (501 plants) in the 
GSMNP found that 45% of all plants had three prongs and only 8.6% had 
four prongs. The population growth rates were close to 1.0 (i.e., a 
stable population), which indicated that, for the populations to remain 
viable, no harvesting could occur (J. Rock et al. 1999).

10.According to Dr. Gagnon, in general, populations that are growing 
(even slowly) will have a smaller MVP size than populations that are 
stable or declining (D. Gagnon, University of Quebec, pers. comm.).

11.Wild-harvesting of ginseng removes the largest reproductive 
individuals from populations (Charron and Gagnon 1991), which reduces 
population sizes and the ability of populations to recover (Hackney and 
McGraw 2001). Research by Hackney and McGraw (2001) shows that small 
populations of ginseng may be particularly vulnerable to the Allee 
effect. The Allee effect is when the fertility and survival of 
individuals of small populations may be diminished once population size 
descends below a critical threshold (Lande 1987; Caswell 1989; Veit and 
Lewis 1996; Groom 1998).

12.Hackney and McGraw (2001) tested for reproductive limitations due to 
small population size (a form of the Allee effect) by experimentally 
planting 453 individuals of 4-year-old cultivated ginseng plants in 
small groups. Plant size traits, reproductive traits, and pollinator 
visits were recorded. According to the researchers, their findings 
demonstrate that the reduced number of fruits per flower and the reduced 
number of fruits per plant are consistent with the operation of an Allee 
effect. They concluded that, for ginseng, knowledge of the presence as 
well as the mechanism underlying this Allee effect may be especially 
useful for the management and determination of minimum viable population 
size of the species in the wild.

13. Charron and Gagnon (1991) found that the maximum sustainable rate of 
harvest of ginseng is the rate at which mean growth rate exceeds from 
the equilibrium value of 1.00 (population stability or maintenance).

14. Nantel (1996) and other researchers have calculated that the 
percentage of sustainable harvest for many native plants, including 
ginseng, is between 5% and 8% of a population, spread over each 
size-class of plants. For example, a wild population of 172 plants 
consisting of individuals in all size-classes (0=seedlings to 4=four 
leaved plants) would have approximately 55 plants of size-classes 3 and 
4. A harvest of 5% of the larger-sized plants would yield 2.9 or 3 
plants per year, therefore leaving approximately 52 plants of the 
larger-size classes (Nantel et al. 1996).

15. Research by Dr. McGraw, of the University of West Virginia, found 
that the annual sustainable harvest rate for ginseng should be no more 
than 5% in West Virginia, Kentucky, and Tennessee (the top three leading 
exporters of wild ginseng in the United States). A harvest rate of 5% 
would mean that only 5% of plants within a size-class should be 
harvested. However, a harvester will usually harvest all plants (100%) 
of the larger plants (three-leaved plants and larger), and may 
occasionally leave the smaller-sized plants (Nantel et al. 1996; Gagnon 
1999).

16. Researchers have concluded that low seed production, slow growth, 
and poor seed dispersal have prevented historically harvested ginseng 
populations from expanding to occupy other suitable sites, or from 
recolonizing habitats where it use to grow (Dunwiddie and Anderson 1999; 
Rosser and Haywood 2002). As a result, populations may become restricted 
and isolated as suitable habitat is fragmented by logging (Rosser and 
Haywood 2002).

17. Examination by West Virginia University researchers of 915 herbarium 
specimens of ginseng, deposited in 17 herbaria across the country and 
collected randomly over a period of 186 years, revealed a significant 
decrease in the height of wild plants, most of which were collected 
since 1900 (McGraw 2001). This reduction in plant size was 
region-specific, with specimens from the northern portion of the 
species’ range in North America remaining the same size, whereas 
specimens from the core of the species’ range (the midwestern, 
Appalachian, and southern populations) declined in size. Dr. McGraw 
speculated that the change in the physical size of the specimens was a 
direct consequence of harvest pressure. Additionally, other researchers 
have found that the number of ginseng specimens collected for herbaria 
also declined during the 20th Century, whereas the number of specimens 
of other closely related species remained the same or increased (K. 
Flinn, The College of William and Mary, pers. comm.).

18. Anderson (2002) studied 950 commercially harvested wild ginseng 
roots from 11 States and found no significant relationship between age 
and root weight for individual states. However, there was a tendency for 
harvested roots from southern states to have younger mean ages than 
those harvested from northern states. Furthermore, there was a linear 
increase in root weight with an increase in latitude for the 11 States. 
Dr. Anderson’s work supports similar findings by McGraw (2001) that 
suggest harvest pressure is greater in the southern States than in the 
northern States.

19. Several researchers have suggested that local ginseng populations 
are highly adapted to local conditions, and that artificial seeding 
(with non-local seed) may lead to local loss of fitness, which could 
lead to an erosion of the gene pool (H. Grubbs and Dr. M. Case Ginseng 
Conference, Louisville, Kentucky, 2000).

20. Holly Grubbs and Dr. Case of the College of William and Mary found 
that there is high genetic variability among wild ginseng populations, 
and low genetic variability within populations (Ginseng Conference, 
Louisville, Kentucky, 2000).

21. Using random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) genetic analysis, 
researchers found that sampled wild populations of ginseng in North 
Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, and several cultivated specimens 
were genetically diverse and different from each other (Boehm et al. 
1999). Furthermore, the researchers found that specimens of ginseng from 
the GSMNP appeared to have a unique genetic integrity, which may 
represent a distinct center of genetic diversity, as displayed with the 
coordination of genetic values calculated with RAPD bands. However, the 
researchers also found that wild specimens of ginseng collected in 
Pennsylvania displayed low genetic diversity and were similar to 
cultivated specimens of ginseng. They concluded that, in areas with a 
history of ginseng harvest, wild ecotypes may be mixed with cultivated 
varieties (Boehm et al. 1999).

Status, Protection, Harvest, and Trade

1. Ginseng (Panax quinquefolius L.) was listed in Appendix II of CITES 
in 1975. In 1983, we required that all ginseng to be exported had to be 
certified as either wild or cultivated [artificially propagated] 
(Carlson 1986). In 1999, to further protect wild populations, we 
determined that only wild ginseng roots of 5 years of age or older may 
be exported.

2. The primary cause of decline for ginseng is that of exploitation by 
harvesters in response to consumer demand (NatureServe 2001). The 
species is designated as “Endangered” in Canada; the export of 
wild-harvested ginseng roots is prohibited by law (COSEWIC 2001). In the 
United States, wild-collection of ginseng is not permitted or is 
discouraged in Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, 
and Rhode Island due to declines in populations. Under State laws, 
ginseng is listed as “endangered” in Maine and as “threatened” in 
Michigan. Declines have been documented on National Park (NP) lands, 
U.S. Forest Service (USFS) lands, and throughout many other areas within 
the species’ range, including in Arkansas, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, 
Kentucky, Minnesota, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West 
Virginia, and Wisconsin.

3. Table 1 (pages 22-23) shows the conservation status of ginseng in the 
United States according to NatureServe (2001). Based on the conservation 
status ranking system developed by NatureServe, none of the States that 
currently allow the harvest of wild ginseng received a rating of secure 
(S5), which would indicate that wild populations of the species are 
stable (typically more than 100 occurrences, and more than 10,000 
individuals). Table 1 also shows the estimated number of populations of 
ginseng, the percentage of counties from which ginseng is exported, and 
the estimated number of plants harvested in 2001 (Kauffman 2003).

4. The National Park Service (NPS) prohibits the harvest of native 
plants from national parks. However, poaching of ginseng continues to 
occur and takes place not only in major national parks (such as Great 
Smoky Mountains National Park, Tennessee-North Carolina; Mammoth Cave 
National Park, Kentucky; and Shenandoah National Park, Virginia), but 
also in smaller ones (such as Blue Ridge Parkway, North Carolina and 
Virginia; Little River Canyon National Preserve, Alabama).

5. Between 1991 and 2001, 11,654 pounds of illegally harvested ginseng 
roots (an estimated 3,496,200 plants) were seized in the GSMNP, which 
encompasses 800 square miles (512,000 acres) within the core of the 
species’ range (J. Rock, GSMNP, pers. comm.). In 2002, at Mammoth Cave 
National Park (MCNP), a poacher was apprehended with 19 pounds of green 
ginseng roots (an estimated 5,700 plants) (M. DePoy, MCNP, pers. comm.). 
(An average of 300 roots per pound at a one-to-one ratio of root to plant).

6. To combat the illegal harvest of ginseng in national parks, the NPS 
has implemented several preventive strategies, such as permanently 
marking ginseng roots which cause the roots to be unacceptable for sale.

7. Ginseng poaching is not restricted to Federal and State lands; it 
also affects private land owners (Ginseng Workshop, St. Louis, Missouri, 
February 19-21, 2003).

8. Historical harvest records indicate that, from 1821 to 1899, an 
average of 381,000 pounds of wild ginseng root were exported annually 
from the United States (Anderson 1986). Exports for 1992-2001 have 
averaged 104,261 pounds (an estimated 31,278,300 plants) annually. 
Although the total weight of exported ginseng has declined, it is 
believed to represent a greater number of individual plants than in the 
1800s because smaller plants (roots) are being harvested (Haber 1990). 
This is due to a general decline in the number of older plants available 
for harvest.

9. In the late 1970s, ginseng roots of wild origin accounted for 
approximately 30% of the roots exported from North America, primarily to 
Asian markets. Today, only 3.5% of ginseng exports are wild-harvested 
roots. To meet the international demand for ginseng, the difference is 
derived from cultivated plants (Schippman 2001). Nevertheless, the 
demand for wild ginseng roots remains high due to the preference by 
Asian consumers for wild roots over cultivated ones.

10. With the exception of Maryland, all of the States that currently 
have a wild ginseng export program have USFS National Forest lands 
within their State boundaries (Figure 2, page 29).

11. Due to concerns of over-harvest and the decline of ginseng on USFS 
lands in the Eastern Region (R-9), in 1999 the Region designated ginseng 
(Panax quinquefolius) as a Regional Forester Sensitive Species on the 
following National Forests (NF): Shawnee NF, Illinois; Hoosier NF, 
Indiana; White Mountain NF, Maine and New Hampshire; Ottawa and Huron 
Manistee NF, Michigan; Green Mountain NF, Vermont; and 
Chequamegon/Nicolet NF, Wisconsin (Figure 2, page 29) 
(URL:http://www.fs.fed.us/r9/wildlife/tes/docs/america ginseng.pdf. 
Accessed June 17, 2003). Ginseng cannot be harvested on these NFs except 
as provided for in tribal agreements or research collection permits 
(URL: http://www.fs.fed.us/r9/wildlife/tes/docs/america ginseng.pdf. 
Accessed June 17, 2003).

12. The purpose of designating species as a USFS Regional Forester 
Sensitive Species is to protect rare species and their habitats before 
there is a need to list species as “threatened” or “endangered” under 
the U.S. Endangered Species Act. Species designated as Sensitive Species 
are vulnerable due to low populations and other risk factors. By 
designating ginseng as a Sensitive Species, USFS policy mandates the 
completion of a conservation assessment of the species. The conservation 
assessment will provide a review of known information regarding the 
species’ distribution, habitat, ecology, and population biology. Upon 
completion, the USFS will develop a conservation strategy for ginseng on 
NFs in the Eastern Region. Once a conservation strategy is developed, 
the USFS may choose to work with cooperating agencies or organizations 
to draft a formal conservation agreement that will identify how the 
multiple entities can work together to conserve the species 
(URL:http://www.fs.fed.us/r9/wildlife/tes/ca-overview/index.htm. 
Accessed June 17, 2003). The completion date for the conservation 
assessment is scheduled for 2004 (G. Kauffman, USFS, pers. comm.).

13. Only two NFs within the Eastern Region continue to issue harvest 
permits for ginseng roots: Monongahela NF (West Virginia) and Wayne NF 
(Ohio). In 2002, the Monongahela NF issued 21 permits (E. Ash, USFS, 
pers. comm.). The Wayne NF issued 180 permits in 2002, compared to113 
permits issued in 2001 (E. Larson, USFS, pers. comm.).

14.Field studies conducted on the Monongahela NF suggest that ginseng 
has been reduced in some locations to populations of one to a few dozen 
individuals (Van der Voort 1998).

15. Allegheny NF (Pennsylvania) and Mark Twain NF (Missouri) in the 
Eastern Region do not have a formal policy on the issuance of ginseng 
harvest permits (USFS personnel, pers. comm.). However, the issuance of 
such permits is discouraged on these two NFs. The Chippewa NF and 
Superior NF (Minnesota), Finger Lakes NF (New York), and Hiawatha NF 
(Wisconsin) are within the range of ginseng; however, the species is not 
currently known to be present within the boundaries of these National 
Forests 
(URL:http://www.fs.fed.us/r9/wildlife/tes/docs/rfss_plants_083002.pdf. 
Accessed June 17, 2003).

16. The majority of the USFS Southern Region (R-8) NFs (except NFs in 
Texas, Florida, and Puerto Rico) are within the range of ginseng (Figure 
2, page 29). Results from field monitoring of ginseng in the Southern 
Region NFs indicated viability concerns with the continued harvest of 
ginseng (USFS 2000). According to FS personnel, ginseng on NF lands in 
the Southern Region has been completely extirpated from one-third of its 
historic sites, and the remaining ginseng patches are smaller and 
composed of younger individuals. USFS field data indicated that 95% of 
the ginseng populations on the NFs in the Southern Region had 
significant persistence risks (USFS 2000a) and are heading toward 
conditions in which ginseng will no longer be economically or 
ecologically viable (Sutter and Kauffman 2000).

17. In 2000, the Southern Region considered a temporary moratorium on 
the issuance of harvest permits for ginseng due to concerns that 
collection rates may be exceeding sustainable levels. However, the 
moratorium was not imposed.

18. However, within the USFS Southern Region, several individual NFs 
have implemented harvest restrictions. In 2000, the Ozark-St. Francis 
and the Ouachita NFs in Arkansas established a 5-year moratorium on the 
harvest of ginseng to prevent further decline in ginseng abundance and 
until monitoring data indicate that wild populations can sustain 
harvesting (URL:http://www.fs.fed.us/oonf/ozark/new/ginseng-letter.html. 
Accessed June 17, 2003).

19.Table 2 (page 24) shows the number of permits issued on NFs in the 
Southern Region from 1999 to 2002 (F. Huber, C. Wentworth, D. Taylor, M. 
Pistrang, G. Kauffman, USFS, pers. comm.). Harvest permits are issued 
for either one or two pounds each, and are counted as wet (green) or dry 
root weight, depending on the particular NF. The high number of permits 
(787) issued in 2001 on the Nantahala and Pisgah NFs in North Carolina 
may have been a result of double-counting the number of permits issued 
for that year. The actual number is most likely similar to the number of 
permits (600) issued in 2000 (G. Kauffman, USFS, pers. comm.).

20. To curtail the illegal poaching of ginseng in wilderness areas and 
other protected areas, the USFS in North Carolina has implemented a 
marking program similar to that used by the NPS (G. Kauffman, USFS, 
pers. comm.).

21. In 1979, eight permanent plots (50 x 50 meters) were established on 
NF lands in the Southern Region to monitor ginseng. The plots were 
surveyed at various times throughout 1979-1983. The eight plots were 
re-visited in 1999 and 2000; however, no individuals were located in 
three of the plots. Population data from the five plots showed a 
statistically significant declined in the mean population size, from 
29.8 plants/plot in 1979 to 5.7 plants/plot in 1999. Results from field 
surveys in 2000, indicated that 29% of the populations were extirpated, 
and that within 10 years 43% of the populations would not be viable.

22. Our analysis of the harvest reports submitted by the States for the 
2000 and 2001 harvest seasons identified a strong relationship between 
State counties and NFs lands in the Southern Region and the harvest 
amounts reported. Most of the ginseng harvested in several States is 
reported from counties that have large percentages of USFS lands. For 
example, based on data from the 2000 and 2001 harvest reports from North 
Carolina, we found that 18 counties with USFS lands accounted for 92% 
and 93%, respectively, of the total amount of wild ginseng harvested in 
the State in these years. In Virginia, the percentages of wild ginseng 
originating from 30 counties with USFS lands are 64% and 75% for the 
2000 and 2001 harvest seasons, respectively; and in Georgia, the 
percentages are 65% and 89% for the 2000 and 2001 harvest seasons, 
respectively. Figure 3 (page 30) shows ginseng amounts harvested by 
State counties in 1999 and 2000 (data provided by G. Kauffman, USFS).

23.As reported in our last four findings (1999-2002) for the export of 
ginseng, the quantity of wild-simulated and woods-grown ginseng has 
increased in the last decade. However, most States do not report 
wild-simulated and woods-grown ginseng separately from “wild,” thereby 
potentially affecting the harvest trend data for those States. The 
effects of reporting these quantities together may indicate erroneously 
that wild populations within a particular State have remained stable or 
have increased, allowing a greater harvest.

24. It is possible that the amount of truly wild ginseng being harvested 
has decreased, potentially due to a host of factors (decrease in 
abundance, increase in herbivory, habitat destruction), whereas the 
amount of wild-simulated and woods-grown ginseng have increased, thus 
compensating for and masking a decline in truly wild ginseng.

25.We are also concerned that small-size ginseng roots (less than 5 
years old) are being harvested from the wild to be replanted in other 
areas, or sold domestically as “green” roots. The removal of these young 
plants from wild populations reduces the number of seeds produced and, 
therefore, future recruitment of individuals into those wild populations.

New Information and Research

1. The Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), the ginseng export States, 
industry, academic researchers, and others are working together to 
improve our understanding and knowledge of wild ginseng, and to better 
assess the impact of harvest on wild ginseng populations. To this end, 
the Service held a workshop with scientific researchers, the States, 
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), and the USFS during 
February 19-21, 2003, in St. Louis, Missouri. Current and ongoing 
research presented at the workshop is included in this finding.

2. In 2003, we initiated a research study, to be conducted by the U.S. 
Geological Survey/Biological Resources Division (USGS/BRD) and with 
assistance from the USFS, to develop a predictive habitat modeling 
database for ginseng within the core range of ginseng in the southern 
Appalachians. Completion of this project is expected in the fall of 
2004. The second phase of the project will be to verify and inventory 
identified habitat locations for ginseng.

3. In 2001, Dr. McGraw (2003) established 27 long-term monitoring plots 
for ginseng in Kentucky, Virginia, and West Virginia, with one 
additional site in Indiana. Results from two field seasons (2001 and 
2002) show that many of the populations are small, with only a few 
individuals, and that older three- and four-pronged plants were absent 
from most of the 27 populations (Table 3, page 24). Nine populations in 
Kentucky (the State with the largest amount of ginseng harvested) were 
found to be expanding slightly, whereas the 12 populations in West 
Virginia (the State with the second largest annual harvest) were 
declining slightly. Although these rates are only based on two season’s 
worth of data, Dr. McGraw speculated that the differences between the 
populations in the two States may be due to higher rates of seed 
production for ginseng in Kentucky (although lower germination rates), 
compared to populations in West Virginia. The West Virginia populations 
may have been also affected by deer browse (McGraw 2003).

4. Jones et al. (2003) analyzed 25 years of field data, collected from 
115 one-acre ginseng sites throughout the State of Kentucky, to 
determine if the ginseng populations had increased, remained stable, or 
decreased at these sites. Using correlation analysis, Dr. Jones 
determined that 39 sites (34%) had a high positive correlation 
coefficient, indicating an increase of populations over time, whereas 16 
sites (14%) showed populations were declining over time. Analysis of the 
remaining 60 sites indicated that populations have remained relatively 
stable (slightly positive or slightly negative) over time.

5. The Missouri Department of Natural Resources monitored an average of 
370 ginseng plants for 6 years (Drees 2003). A significant finding from 
the field study was that, when the white-tailed deer (Odocoileus 
virginianus) population peaked, at least 41% of all ginseng reproduction 
was aborted due to deer herbivory (Drees 2003). Repeated grazing of 
ginseng by deer resulted in a substantial decline in the percentage of 
mature plants that produce inflorescences. However, when the deer 
population was reduced, the reproductive success of ginseng improved. 
The author concluded that repeated deer browse can stress ginseng 
populations and result in a substantial decline in the percentage of 
mature plants that produce fruit (Drees 2003).

6. Based on field monitoring data, the maturity of ginseng fruit at the 
time of root harvest can significantly affect seed viability and 
germination (McGraw 2003). Ginseng monitoring in West Virginia revealed 
that 75% of ginseng fruits were still green on August 15, the start of 
the harvest season in that State. The field data also showed that the 
harvest of ginseng roots prior to full fruit ripening (red fruit) can 
drive a population’s growth rate below an equilibrium value of 1.00 
(declining population) (McGraw 2003).

7. Furthermore, the depth at which ginseng seeds are planted directly 
affects the germination of seed. Based on field studies the lowest seed 
germination was recorded at 0 cm (on the soil surface) and the largest 
amount of germination was at a depth of 2.5 cm (1 inch), with rates 
decreasing thereafter (McGraw 2003a).

8. In 2004, the results of a demographic study of six ginseng 
populations (510 plants total) in the GSMNP will be published in a 
scientific journal (D. Gagnon, University of Quebec, pers. comm.). The 
study consisted of monitoring two populations for 4 years (1998-2001) 
and four populations for 3 years (1999-2001). According Dr. Gagnon, a 
significant finding of the study was that large plant dormancy in 
ginseng was confirmed for the first time. Within the six populations, an 
average of 8% of the plants were dormant in any year. Most plants 
emerged after 1 year (with decrease in size); however, 12% remained 
dormant for 2 years. Overall, seed production was very low, declining 
from 1998 to 2000, and averaged 10 seeds per four-pronged plant. 
Population growth rates calculated from matrices average 0.997 
(declining populations). Stochastic projections indicated that these 
populations are barely maintaining themselves and can not tolerate any 
harvesting. According to Dr. Gagnon, large plant dormancy, low seed 
production, and low population growth rates appear to be related to 
droughts during the third and fourth years of the study (D. Gagnon, 
University of Quebec, pers. comm.).

9. The genetic diversity of 21 ginseng populations (1,317 plants) 
consisting of 8 protected sites and 13 unprotected sites in four states 
(Georgia, Maryland, North Carolina, and West Virginia) was analyzed 
(Cruse-Sanders and Hamrick 2003). The genetic diversity of 21 ginseng 
populations (1,317 plants) consisting of 8 protected sites and 13 
unprotected sites in four states (Georgia, Maryland, North Carolina, and 
West Virginia) was analyzed (Cruse-Sanders and Hamrick 2003). The 
researchers found significantly greater genetic diversity (higher 
heterozygosity), greater portion of older plants, and larger stage-class 
of individuals within protected populations than within populations in 
which harvesting had occurred. Genetic structure was significantly 
greater among unprotected populations (GST= 0.491) than among protected 
populations (GST= 0.167). According to the researchers, the differences 
in the level and distribution of genetic diversity in these populations 
indicate that harvesting reduces genetic diversity and may have 
significant evolutionary implications for this species (Cruse-Sanders 
and Hamrick 2003).

Alternative ginseng growing methods

Although this finding primarily covers truly wild ginseng, it also 
includes ginseng derived from other growing methods used to produce 
harvestable roots for export. Unfortunately, consistent terminology for 
different growing methods used are not universally applied, and not all 
States track these methods or separately report ginseng harvested from 
such methods (e.g., wild-simulated and woods-grown are often included in 
State harvest data sheets as wild). We are therefore unable to 
categorically determine that any of these alternative methods would 
qualify as artificial propagation according to the CITES definition. 
Without clarification from individual States, we currently consider 
ginseng from these alternative growing methods to be wild when they are 
from the States covered by this finding, although we could take a 
different approach in the future if we can resolve the inconsistencies 
involved in the application of these terms.

The two most popular growing methods used for ginseng are 
“wild-simulated” and “woods-grown.” We have reviewed available 
information on these methods from various sources, including State 
Cooperative Extension programs, universities, non-profit organizations, 
and public literature. Although we recognized that there may be 
variation in the application of these methods, the following information 
is a brief summary of these two alternative growing methods.

Wild-simulated ginseng

1. Much of the ginseng harvested as wild-simulated comes from natural 
woods in the Appalachian-Allegheny Mountains in parts of Kentucky, New 
York, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and West Virginia, and a lesser amount 
from the Ozark Plateau of Arkansas and Missouri (URL: 
http://attra.ncat.org/attra-pub/ginsgold.html Accessed January 22, 2003).

2. Wild-simulated ginseng is grown in a natural forest environment with 
70%-80% shade, and with minimal site preparation and maintenance (URL: 
http://www.ext.vt.edu/pubs/forestry/354-312/354-312.html Accessed 
January 22, 2003). Although non-stratified ginseng seed can be planted, 
most references recommend planting stratified seed in the fall, after 
trees drop their leaves (URL: 
http://www.ext.vt.edu/pubs/forestry/354-312/354-312.html Accessed 
January 22, 2003). Typically, the ground layer of mulch is pulled back 
by hand or raked back; the seed is then broadcasted, and covered with 
soil and mulch (Beyfuss 1999). Small ginseng transplant roots have also 
been reported to be planted under wild-simulated production method.

3. The ginseng plants are usually left to grow naturally, with 
occasional vegetation control as necessary (Beyfuss 1999). Pesticides 
and fertilizers are applied at the owner’s discretion (Beyfuss 1999).

4. Wild-simulated ginseng grown from seed is typically harvested at 6-15 
years of age (average 9-12 years) (URL: 
http://www.conservation.state.mo.us/nathis/plantpage/flora/ginseng/;
http://www.uky.edu/Ag/NewCrops/introsheets/ginsengintro.pdf Accessed 
June 23, 2003). In general, harvested roots closely approximate the 
appearance of truly wild ginseng roots, such as in color, texture, and 
shape of root (URL:http://www.unl.edu/nac/afnotes/ff-4/index.html ; 
http://www.uky.edu/Ag/NewCrops/introsheets/ginsengintro.pdf Accessed 
January 22, 2003).

Woods-grown ginseng

1. Woods-grown or “woods-cultivated” ginseng often refers to ginseng 
grown under a forest canopy with a range in the amount of human 
intervention. Typically, large continuous forested areas that provide 
70%-80% natural shade are selected for woods-grown ginseng (Scott et al. 
1995; Beyfuss 1999; URL: 
http://www.conservation.state.mo.us/nathis/plantpage/flora/ginseng/ ; 
http://www.uky.edu/Ag/NewCrops/introsheets/ginsengintro.pdf ; 
http://www.hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/newcropsnews/94-4-1/ginseng.html 
Accessed January 22, 2003).

2. Much of the literature available on cultivation of woods-grown 
ginseng recommend using intensive management techniques, as described 
below (Scott et al. 1995; Beyfuss 1999; URL: 
http://www.conservation.state.mo.us/nathis/plantpage/flora/ginseng/ ; 
http://www.hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/newcropsnews/94-4-1/ginseng.html 
Accessed January 22, 2003).

3. Site preparation for woods-grown ginseng begins with clearing the 
understory vegetation and undesirable trees, shrubs, and large rocks 
(Scott et al. 1995; Beyfuss 1999; URL: 
http://www.hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/newcropsnews/94-4-1/ginseng.html ; 
http://www.uky.edu/Ag/NewCrops/introsheets/ginsengintro.pdf ; 
http://www.sfp.forprod.vt.edu/factsheets/ginseng.pdf Accessed January 
22, 2003). The soil is tilled usually 4-8 inches either by a rototiller 
or by hand (Beyfuss 1999; 
http://www.sfp.forprod.vt.edu/factsheets/ginseng.pdf Accessed January 
22, 2003). Depending on the location, soil amendments such as limestone, 
gypsum, and chemical or organic fertilizers may be added to the soil as 
necessary (Davis 1997; Beyfuss 1999; Das et al. 2001; 
URL:http://www.ext.vt.edu/pubs/forestry/354-312/354-312.html Accessed 
January 22, 2003).

4. Although non-stratified ginseng seed can be planted, most references 
recommend planting stratified seed in the late summer or fall. A typical 
application rate is 40-50 pounds per acre (Scott et al. 1995; Beyfuss 
1999). There are approximately 7,000 to 8,000 ginseng seeds per pound 
(Beyfuss 1999; URL: 
http://www.hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/newcropsnews/94-4-1/ginseng.html ; 
Accessed June 23, 2003). To ensure a more uniform stand of plants and to 
reduce the time from planting to harvest of roots, some references 
recommend planting cultivated seedlings or cultivated transplant roots 
(rootlets) (Davis 1997; Beyfuss 1999; Das et al. 2001).

5. Typically, ginseng seed is planted in beds, which are routinely 
manually cleaned of competing vegetation (URL: 
http://www.ext.vt.edu/pubs/forestry/354-312/354-312.html Accessed 
January 22, 2003). Pesticides are applied for insect, disease, and 
rodent control, as necessary (Beyfuss 1999).

6. Typically, woods-grown ginseng from seed requires 6-8 years to obtain 
a size suitable for harvesting (Scott et al. 1995; Davis 1997; Beyfuss 
1999; URL:http://www.uky.edu/Ag/NewCrops/introsheets/ginsengintro.pdf 
Accessed June 23, 2003). A general “rule of thumb” is that from 100 to 
300 dried ginseng roots yield one dried pound of roots (Beyfuss 1999).

New Information on State Regulation of Harvest

1. As of April 1, 2003, the State of North Carolina will require 
wild-collected ginseng plants to be at least 5 years old and have three 
prongs (leaves) or, in the absence of leaves, have at least four 
discernible bud scars plus a bud on the rhizome. The new State 
regulation requires harvesters to plant the seeds of harvested plants 
within 100 feet of where ginseng is located in the wild (Rules on 
Ginseng Collection and Trade in North Carolina. NC Administration Code 
Title 2 48F. As submitted to DMA in 2003).

2. The Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR) will implement the 
following changes in their State regulations for the 2003 ginseng 
harvest season: the harvest season will start September 1 (instead of 
August 15) and no harvest will be allowed on State lands (S. Zook, ODNR, 
pers. comm.).

3. The Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources 
(PDCNR) is in the process of amending their current ginseng harvest 
season start date of August 1 to September 1. According to PDCNR, the 
new harvest start date should be in effect for the 2004 harvest season 
(C. Rohrbach, PDCNR, pers. comm.).

Fish and Wildlife Service outreach efforts in 2003

1. We and the Division of Management Authority held a workshop with 
State ginseng program representatives, and other Federal agencies (USFS 
and APHIS), February 19-21, 2003, in St. Louis, Missouri. Over the 
course of 3 days, new and ongoing ginseng research was presented by 
State, Federal, and university researchers; the status, management, and 
conservation of the species was discussed; and general recommendations 
were developed by the group. Table 4 (page 25) lists the management 
issues and general recommendations, and Table 5 (page 26) contains the 
trade and export issues and general recommendations from the workshop.

2. We also held a public meeting on May 21, 2003, in Lexington, 
Kentucky. The purpose of the public meeting was to discuss U.S. 
obligations under CITES related to the export of ginseng, and to obtain 
new information on the biological and trade status of the species. To 
notify the public of the meeting we published a Federal Register notice 
(Vol. 68, No. 78) on April 23, 2003. All State programs were notified in 
advance of the meeting, and were encouraged to notify representatives of 
the ginseng industry in their States.

3. Attendees included growers, buyers and dealers, and exporters of 
ginseng from 12 States. In addition, representatives from State and 
other Federal agencies (USFS, and NPS) also participated. Among the 
ginseng growers and trade representatives that attended the meeting, a 
general consensus was voiced that the current age requirement (roots 
must be 5 years of age or older) for the export of ginseng may not be 
sufficient to ensure the long-term survival of the species. There was 
also acknowledgement amongst the group that many State harvest seasons 
start too early, before ginseng fruit is mature, and should be changed 
to when the fruit is mature (red). Additionally, there was a general 
recommendation that ginseng harvesters need to be better informed of 
when and how much to harvest, the correct planting depth for ginseng 
seeds, and the potential negative impacts from planting cultivated 
ginseng seeds in the wild, such as genetic erosion and introduction of 
diseases. Several participants recommended that the ginseng industry 
should play a greater role in the conservation and sustainable harvest 
of ginseng.

4. DSA met with USFS national resource program directors to discuss 
ginseng management, harvest, and conservation issues on National Forest 
lands.

Conclusions

1. There is a substantial amount of scientific literature on the concept 
of minimum viable population size of plant species needed to buffer the 
effects of various types of stochastic risk (demographic, genetic, 
environmental, habitat loss, etc.). Several researchers have suggested a 
minimum viable population size range for ginseng to be 172 individuals 
in the most northern portion of the species’ range (Canada) and up to 
500 individuals in the southern portion of its range (GSMNP) (Nantel et 
al. 1996; D. Gagnon, University of Quebec, pers. comm.).

2. Research has shown that harvesting of ginseng reduces population size 
and, as with most species, small population size reduces genetic 
diversity, which over time reduces the species’ ability to adapt to 
changing or variable environments (Hackney and McGraw 2000; Anderson 
2002; Cruse-Sanders and Hamrick 2003). Ginseng’s life history traits 
increase ginseng’s vulnerability to stochastic risk: small populations, 
relative long pre-reproductive period (reproductive plants are at least 
4 years), low fecundity and high seed mortality, and short-distance seed 
dispersal (seed stays within 2-3 meters of parent plant) (Carpenter and 
Cottam 1982; Lewis and Zenger 1982; Lewis and Zenger 1983; Anderson et 
al. 1984; Schlessman 1985; Charron and Gagnon 1991; Anderson et al. 
1993; Van der Voot 1998; Dunwiddie and Anderson 1999; Anderson 2002).

3. Regardless of the historical abundance of ginseng, populations have 
dramatically declined in the last century, and in some locations 
populations have been reduced to a few dozen individuals (Van der Voot 
1998). Field surveys of ginseng throughout portions of its range 
(Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio, 
Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia) have found that 
population sizes that would indicate a minimum viable population size of 
172-500 individuals are rarely encountered (Gagnon 1999; Drees 2003; 
Jones et al. 2003; Kauffman 2003; McGraw 2003).

4. In Canada, the species is listed as “endangered”; in Maine, it is 
listed as “endangered,” and it is listed as “threatened” in Michigan. 
Due to scarcity of the species, several other States within its range 
prohibit or discourage the wild-collection of ginseng (Connecticut, 
Delaware, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Rhode Island). National Forests 
in the States of Illinois, Indiana, Maine, Michigan, New Hampshire, 
Vermont, and Wisconsin have prohibited the issuance of harvest permits 
and have included the species on the USFS Regional Foresters Sensitive 
Species list. Several of the National Forests in the Southern Region 
have also restricted or reduced the number of harvest permits issued.

5. We are concerned that the amount of ginseng harvested may exceed the 
amount authorized under USFS collection permits. The USFS collection 
permits are limited to 1-2 pounds per permit and follow State harvest 
rules and regulations (harvest season, age of plants, and planting of 
seeds). However, once harvest permits are issued by a NF, there is 
little oversight or enforcement of these harvest restrictions. 
Furthermore, many State harvest seasons start before ginseng fruit is 
mature, thereby reducing the number of new recruits. Discussions with 
USFS botanists support our suspicion that the amount of wild ginseng 
harvested from NF lands most likely exceeds the 1-2 pounds allowed by 
the USFS. Additionally, there are concerns that ginseng poaching is 
occurring on USFS lands during and outside of State harvest seasons, and 
that State harvest season start before ginseng fruit is mature.

6. Harvest is prohibited on NPS lands; however, ginseng continues to be 
illegally poached from NPS (e.g., MCNP, GSMNP).

7.With the exception of six States (Alabama, Iowa, Maryland, Minnesota, 
Pennsylvania, Virginia), all of the other States with a wild ginseng 
export program do not allow harvest on State lands.

8. Most States continue to report that they do not have the resources 
(monetary, personnel, etc.) to survey State lands to assess the status 
of the species (e.g., abundance, distribution) within their respective 
States.

9. We are concerned that the Georgia, Kentucky, Maryland, Tennessee, 
Virginia, and West Virginia harvest seasons start in August before 
ginseng fruit is fully mature (red), which decreases future offspring 
and recruitment, even if seeds from harvested plants are planted as 
required by these States (except Virginia) (Table 6, page 27). As 
previously stated in this finding, this will affect the long-term 
survival of the species.

10.We are concerned that ginseng harvesters may not be planting seed at 
the recommended depth of 1 inch in the soil.

11. Recent genetic research on ginseng, as well as research discussed in 
this finding, has identified several factors, such as planting of 
non-local or commercial seed into natural woodlands and the effects of 
over-harvest of ginseng populations, which indicate that the species’ 
long-term genetic diversity and survival may be affected by such actions.

12. In 1999, under a study funded by DSA, Dr. Gagnon analyzed the 
long-term sustainability of ginseng harvested from the wild and reported 
that the wild-collection of ginseng is generally thought to be 
biologically unsustainable and offers no incentive for species or 
habitat conservation (Gagnon 1999).

13. In a recent IUCN assessment of the conservation and sustainability 
of ginseng, the paper concluded that the general consensus points to a 
reduction and continuing decline of ginseng populations, and the harvest 
of smaller wild roots than in previous years (Rosser and Haywood 2002). 
The study concluded that the likelihood that ginseng exports are 
sustainable may not be high and the system may require more oversight 
(Rosser and Haywood 2002).

14.Although the Service does not regulate harvest of ginseng, only the 
export, we continue to work with the States and other Federal agencies 
(USFS, NPS) that are responsible for managing the species and its 
habitat on their lands, and to ensure the long-term viability of the 
species.

15.Currently, and throughout the past several years, we have:

Initiated in 2003 with the USGS/BRD, the development of a habitat 
modeling database. The database will be used to estimate the potential 
distribution of ginseng based on habitat availability. Phase two of the 
project will be to verify and inventory probable ginseng locations.
Sponsored two ginseng workshops (Missouri, 2003, and Kentucky, 2000) and 
one public meeting (Kentucky, 2003).

Established a ginseng listserve for State ginseng coordinators and 
Federal agencies to share ginseng information and research.
Discussed with USFS and NPS personnel our concerns about the status of 
ginseng on National Forest and National Park Service lands.
Funded field inventories and monitor studies, and status assessment of 
ginseng. We have, and continue to share the results of these studies 
with Federal and State agencies, and the public.
In 1999, we implemented a minimum-age requirement (5 years or older) for 
the export of wild ginseng roots.

16. Our non-detriment finding is based on the best available biological 
information on the status of the species. We have assessed the status of 
ginseng by direct means, such as ongoing research studies, field 
inventories, population assessments, and scientific literature, and 
through indirect means, such as monitoring State harvest levels, reports 
by other Federal agencies of ginseng poaching on their lands, and State 
and Federal conservation and protection efforts.

17. However, we continue to believe that an increasing amount of ginseng 
exported as “wild” may actually be wild-simulated or woods-grown. 
Although ginseng harvested from these growing methods is not likely to 
be detrimental to truly wild ginseng, these amounts may inflate the 
harvest data for truly wild ginseng. This is compounded by the fact that 
these roots are often indistinguishable through visual inspection from 
truly wild ginseng roots.

18. Furthermore, many of the exporting States have Cooperative Extension 
programs that provide public educational information on growing 
wild-simulated and woods-grown ginseng (Arkansas, Indiana, Kentucky, 
Minnesota, Missouri, North Carolina, New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia, 
and West Virginia). We are concerned that the State regulatory agencies 
responsible for overseeing the ginseng program in their respective State 
may not be communicating with their State Cooperative Extension office 
about the use and extent of alternative growing methods used for ginseng 
in their State.

19. We have previously found that the export of wild ginseng from all of 
the States covered by this finding to be not detrimental to the survival 
of the species based on the regulation of wild ginseng harvest by those 
States.

20. Although we remain concerned about the impact of international trade 
on this species, we note that some improvements have occurred in the 
regulation of ginseng, and we have obtained information to show that, 
although harvest has adversely affected some ginseng populations, that 
is not necessarily the case. There is greater attention being directed 
toward the development of sustainable-harvest strategies for the 
species. State and Federal agencies are improving coordination on 
research, management, and regulation of harvest and enforcement, and 
increasing effort has been and will be directed toward outreach and 
education of the public on sustainable harvest methods and other 
activities to assist in the conservation of the species. Therefore, we 
have concluded that the exports of wild ginseng harvested in 2003 and 
2004 will not be detrimental to the survival of the species, provided 
the following CONDITION is met:

Ginseng (Panax quinquefolius) roots harvested in 2003 and 2004 and 
certified by the States as wild, may be exported provided that the roots 
are 5 years of age or older. (Age of ginseng roots at the time of 
harvest can be determined by counting the number of bud-scale scars on 
the rhizome. A single scar is produced after abscission of the plants’ 
aerial stem each year.)

Future Actions

In preparation for making our non-detriment finding on exports of 
ginseng in 2005, we will be assessing whether further progress has been 
made by Federal and State agencies involved in ginseng monitoring, 
conservation, and harvest regulation. We will seek up-to-date 
information on the status of the species, including any the results of 
any field surveys and additional protections afforded to it, and will 
discuss and recommend, as appropriate, specific additional measures that 
may contribute to the conservation of the species and sustainable 
harvest of ginseng for export.

We will also evaluate the following information for our finding in 2005:

1. Two reports: the long-term monitoring results of ginseng in the GSMNP 
and the USFS Conservation Assessment of ginseng. Upon completion of the 
USFS Conservation Assessment of ginseng, we will consult with the USFS 
to determine what effect their finding may have on the export of ginseng.

2. NatureServe will conduct a general re-assessment of the global 
(range-wide) status of ginseng in 2003-2004 (L. Morse, NatureServe, 
pers. comm.).

3. We will work with Federal, State, and private-sector partners to 
investigate other means for expanding efforts to monitor the status of 
ginseng in the wild and ensure that harvest levels are sustainable for 
both the short and long term.

4. To prevent the harvest of pre-reproductive ginseng plants and to 
ensure the long-term survival of ginseng in the wild, we will recommend 
that Illinois, the only State without a minimum-age or -size requirement 
for harvest, implement one that is consistent with the minimum-age 
requirement for export. We will also recommend that the States of 
Illinois and Virginia require harvesters to plant the seeds of harvested 
ginseng plants.

5. We will consult with Georgia, Kentucky, Maryland, Tennessee, 
Virginia, and West Virginia to encourage these States to revise their 
ginseng harvest season start dates to coincide with when ginseng fruits 
are actually known to be mature (red) in these States.

6. We will examine the possibility of holding additional public meetings 
and educational outreach workshops with State agencies. We will target 
outreach efforts to harvesters and dealers to promote good harvest 
practices.

7. We will also explore mechanisms to increase communication, 
cooperation, and coordination with States at a bioregional level.

8. To improve our analysis, we will continue to encourage all States to 
report values for dry roots per pound in their annual harvest reports, 
so that we can continue to evaluate these data as an indicator of the 
impact of harvest on wild ginseng populations.

9. We will continue to discuss with the States the use of non-local or 
“commercial” seed for replanting of ginseng. Although we support, in 
principle, the concept of species’ restoration as a conservation 
measure, we do not support the planting of “commercial” seed in native 
woodlands. We are greatly concerned about the origin of ginseng seed for 
restoration purposes and the impact of non-local ginseng seed on local 
gene pools of wild populations of ginseng. Moreover, we are especially 
concerned where the species is less common, particularly in those States 
where it is listed as endangered or threatened (i.e., Maine and 
Michigan), where random planting of non-local seed may have an even 
greater adverse effect on ginseng populations.

10. We will consider and discuss with the States and Federal land 
management agencies what other effective conservation measures can be 
implemented to ensure the long-term survival of ginseng.

Table 1. NatureServe status rank, State listing, estimated number of 
populations of ginseng, percent of counties with ginseng export, 
estimated plants harvested in 2001.

State
Status rank1
State listing
Estimated populations based on status rank or tracked data
Percent of counties with ginseng2
Estimated plants harvested in 20013

Alabama
S4
none
101-1000
37%
164,000

Arkansas
S4
none
101-1000
44%
188,000

Connecticut
S3
Species of Special concern
21-200
100%
harvest is not known to occur

Delaware
S2
Species of Conservation
6-20
33%
harvest is not known to occur

District of Columbia
SH
historical
historical
100%
na

Georgia
S3
none
21-100
61%
158,000

Illinois
S3?
none
21-75
100%
832,000

Indiana
S3
none
21-100
99%
2,361,000

Iowa
S3
none
21-100
85%
95,000

Kansas
SR
none
not available
harvest is not known to occur

Kentucky
S4
none
101-1000
100%
5,120,000

Louisiana
S1
Rare
1-6
2%
harvest is not known to occur

Maine
S2
Endangered
29
56%
no wild harvest allowed

Maryland
S3
Watch List
21-100
63%
18,500

Massachusetts
S3
Listed
47
36%
harvest is not known to occur

Michigan
S2/S3
Threatened
21-100
42%
no wild harvest allowed

Minnesota
S3
Watch List
21-100
45%
275,000

Mississippi
S3
Watch List
21-100
37%
harvest is not known to occur

Missouri
S4
none
101-1000
63%
338,000

Nebraska
S1
Threatened
1-6
11%
harvest is not known to occur

New Hampshire
S2
Threatened
28 extant, 13 historical
90%
harvest is not known to occur

New Jersey
S2
Species of Concern
6-20
5%
harvest is not known to occur

New York
S4
none
not available
68%
108,000

North Carolina
S4
Watch List
101-1000
48%
2,478,000

Ohio
SR
none
not available
100%
1,158,000

Oklahoma
S1
Watch List
1-6
1%
harvest is not known to occur

Pennsylvania
S4
none
101-1000
99%
275,000

Rhode Island
S1
Endangered
6-20
20%
harvest is not known to occur

South Carolina
none
harvest is not known to occur

South Dakota
S1
Rare
1-6
6%
harvest is not known to occur

Tennessee
S3
Watch List
21-100
85%
2,927,000

Vermont
S2/S3
Watch List
15-50
93%
20,500

Virginia
S4
Watch List
101-1000
70%
1,028,000

West Virginia
S3/S4
none
20-500
99%
1,304,000

Wisconsin
S4
none
101-1000
79%
281,000


1 Explanation of NatureServe ranking system is the following. Critically 
imperiled (S1): typically 5 or fewer occurrences, or fewer than 1,000 
individuals. Imperiled (S2): typically 6 to 20 occurrences with few 
remaining individuals (1,000 to 3,000). Vulnerable (S3): typically 21 to 
100 occurrences, with 3,000 to 10,000 individuals. Apparently secure 
(S4): typically 100 occurrences with more than 10,000 individuals; the 
species is considered uncommon but not rare. SR indicates that reports 
were received from the States, but without persuasive documentation to 
assign a ranking.

2 Percent of State counties with ginseng (Kauffman 2003).

3. Estimates based on 2001 State harvest amounts and average number of 
dry roots/pound.

Table 2. Permits issued on USFS National Forests in the Southern Region 
from 1999 to 2002.

Southern Region National Forests
Permits issued in 2002
Permits issued in 2001
Permits issued in 2000
Permits issued in 1999

The George Washington and Jefferson NF in Virginia, West Virginia, and 
Kentucky.
20
32
not available
not available

Chattahoochee NF in Georgia
8
11
not available
not available

Daniel Boone NF in Kentucky
56
22
not available
not available

Cherokee NF in Tennessee
not available
67.5
79
44

Nantahala and Pisgah NF in North Carolina
355
787
600
400


Table 3. McGraw (2003) monitoring results of 27 populations from two 
field seasons (2001 and 2002).

State
Populations Monitored
Number of Individuals
Growth Rate

Indiana
1
145
0.98

Kentucky
9
1460
1.08

Virginia
5
382
0.98

West Virginia
12
1533
0.98

Pooled
27
3520
1.04


Table 4. Results of the FWS-State Ginseng Workshop, St. Louis, Missouri, 
February 19-21, 2003.

Status and Management Issues
Recommendations

Monitoring - significant advances have made and were reported at the 
workshop, but remains ongoing priority.
Continue to advance monitoring efforts; review and implement 
low-intensity monitoring protocol; coordinate monitoring on a range-wide 
level.

Addressing biological issues - significant new research presented, but 
research gaps remain and new biological issues identified.
Undertake targeted research on issues, including: population dynamics 
and viability analysis, impact of different management regimes, and 
genetics and pollination biology.

Funding - acknowledgment among group members of the catalytic role of 
FWS and other seed money (including state-level) in research, but 
funding needs to continue and be expanded.
Identify funding sources; explore additional sources of funding at the 
Federal and State levels, and within the industry and the private sector.

Communication - increased communication required among and between 
Federal and State agencies, industry, and other non-governmental players.
Facilitate communication through Web site, listserve, and other 
appropriate means.

Age- and size-based restrictions on export of wild ginseng - discussion 
of whether there is a need for further restrictions, and if so, what 
options might be.
Further evaluate approaches to controlling and monitoring ginseng 
harvest and trade; considering different levels of the trade stream 
(e.g., digger, dealer, export), ginseng characteristics that could be 
monitored (e.g., prongs, roots/lb.) and authority at different levels of 
government.

Law enforcement - increasing the profile and importance of law 
enforcement in support of management efforts.
Educate, share information and engage law enforcement on the ginseng 
issue and involve them in future meetings; develop outreach materials 
aimed at this audience.


Table 5. Results of the FWS/State Ginseng Workshop, St. Louis Missouri, 
February 19-21, 2003.

Trade and Export Issues
Recommendations

Reporting requirements - consider the burden imposed on States and 
industry and the utility to the data required for CITES findings.
Continue to clarify, simplify and refine reporting requirements as 
appropriate.

Production system categories – clarify the production system categories 
and determine the utility of using them for export reports.
Further discussion within FWS and further input from stakeholders on 
definitions, reporting, and ability to implement production system 
categories.

Education and outreach - key to implementation of management and trade 
measures.
Facilitate sharing of already available education and outreach materials 
through improved communication mechanisms.

Regional coordination - agreement regarding the need for more direct 
State to State interaction in addition to FWS mediated consultation; 
discussion of the utility of identifying ginseng bioregions.
Explore mechanisms to increase inter-state, inter-agency (Federal) 
communication, cooperation and coordination at bioregional level, while 
maintaining FWS mediated consultation mechanisms; consider existing 
groups/associations which might serve as a home for such efforts. The 
group identified four possible regions for pilot efforts on information 
sharing, consultation and coordination on management and law enforcement.1

Future of USDA/APHIS - discussion on how the transfer of some APHIS 
personnel to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) will impact 
inspection of ginseng exports.
Clarify future role of APHIS and DHS in ginseng inspections.

Law enforcement at the State level - significant examples of ginseng 
enforcement highlighted at the meeting.
Raise profile of law enforcement efforts in future ginseng coordination 
meetings.


1 (AL, GA, KY, MD, NC, PA, SC, TN, VA, WV), (New England States, VT, NJ, 
NY, PA & MD), (AR, MO, OH), (IA, IL, IN, KY, MI, MN, OH, WI, WV)

Table 6. Current State ginseng regulations.

State
Harvest season
Require seeds to be planted at site
Minimum age (number of leaves/prongs) required for harvested plants

Alabama
Sept 1 - Dec 13
yes
3 prongs

Arkansas
Sept 1 - Dec 1
yes
5 years, 3 prongs

Georgia
Aug 15 - Dec 31
yes
3 prongs

Illinois
Last Saturday in August- Nov 1
encouraged
no requirement

Indiana
Sept 1 - Dec 31
yes
3 prongs, a flowering or fruiting stalk, or 4 internodes on root

Iowa
Sept 1- Oct 31
yes
3 prongs

Kentucky
Aug 15 - Dec 1
yes
5 years, 3 prongs

Maryland
Aug 20 - Dec 1
yes
5 years, 3 prongs

Minnesota
Sept 1 - Dec 31
yes
3 prongs

Missouri
Sept 1 - Dec 31
yes
3 prongs or plants with fruiting stems

New York
Sept 1 - Nov 30
yes
3 prongs

North Carolina
Sept 1 – April 1
yes
5 years, 3 prongs

Ohio
Sept 1 – Dec 31
yes
3 prongs

Pennsylvania
Aug 1 - Nov 30

For 2003 season;

Sept 1 - Nov 30

For 2004 season, and thereafter
yes
3 prongs

Tennessee
Aug 15 - Dec 31
yes
5 years, 3 prongs

Vermont
Aug 20 - Oct 10
yes
5 years, 3 prongs

Virginia
Aug 15 - Dec 31
no
3 prongs

West Virginia
Aug 15 - Nov 30
yes
3 prongs

Wisconsin
Sept 1 – Nov 1
yes
3 prongs and mature fruits


Figure 1. Map of American ginseng conservation status rank in the United 
States and Canada (NatureServe 2000).

Figure 2. Map of American ginseng range in the United States, the States 
that export wild ginseng, and USFS lands (Kauffman 2003).

Figure 3. American ginseng harvest data by county averaged for 1999 and 
2000. Coloring of individual counties is delineated by white (no 
harvest), grey (1-50 lbs), blue (51-100 lbs), green (101-200 lbs), 
yellow (201-400 lbs), red-brown (401-1000 lbs), and pink (> 1000 lbs) 
(Kauffman 2003).


*Literature Cited*

Anderson, A. W. 1986. Ginseng: America’s botanical drug connection to 
the Orient. Economic Botany, 40:233-249.

Anderson, R. C., J. S. Fralish, J. Armstrong, and P. K. Benjamin. 1983. 
The ecology and biology of /Panax quinquefolium/ L. (Araliaceae) in 
Illinois. American Midland Naturalist, 129:357-372.

Anderson, R. C., J. S. Fralish, J. Armstrong, and P. K. Benjamin. 1984. 
Biology of ginseng (/Panax quinquefolium/) in Illinois. Illinois 
Department of Conservation, Division of Forest Resources and Natural 
Heritage. Springfield, Illinois.

Anderson, R. C. 2002. Wild American ginseng. Native Plants Journal, 
3:93-105.

Beyfuss, R. L. 1999. Agroforestry Notes 14. USDA Forest Service and USDA 
Natural Resources Conservation Service.

Boehm, C. L., H. C. Harrison, G. Jung, and J. Nienhuis. 1999. 
Organization of American and Asian ginseng germplasm using randomly 
amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) markers. Journal American Society 
Horticulture Science 124:252-256.

Carlson, A. W. 1986. Ginseng: America’s botanical drug connection to the 
Orient. Economic Botany, 40:233-249.

Carpenter, S. G. and G. Cottam. 1982. Growth and reproduction of 
American Ginseng /Panax quinquefolius/ in Wisconsin, U.S.A. Canadian 
Journal of Botany, 60:2692-2696.

Caswell, H. 1989. Matrix Population Models. Sinauer Associates, 
Sunderland, Massachusetts.

Charron, D. and D. Gagnon. 1991. The demography of northern populations 
of /Panax quinquefolium/ (American ginseng). Journal of Ecology, 79:431-445.

COSEWIC 2001. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. 
Assessment and Update Status Report of the American ginseng (/Panax 
quinquefolius/) in Canada Endangered 2001.

Cruse-Sanders, J. M. and J.L. Hamrick. 2003. Conservation of genetic 
diversity in wild populations of /Panax quinquefolius/. Presented at the 
USFWS Ginseng Workshop, St. Louis, Missouri.

Das, S., L. Shillington, and T. Hammett. 2001. Ginseng. Fact sheet No. 
7. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. Blacksburg, 
Virginia.

Davis, J. M. 1997. North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service 
Bulletin: Ginseng a production guide for North Carolina. North Carolina 
Cooperative Extension Service.

Drees, D. 2003. Insights into wild ginseng ecology in Missouri, 
especially threats from deer. Presented at the USFWS Ginseng Workshop, 
St. Louis, Missouri.

Dunwiddie, P. W. and J. E. Anderson. 1999. Germination and survival of 
seed in wild populations of American ginseng (/Panax quinquefolium/ L.) 
Draft manuscript.

Gagnon, D. 1999. An analysis of the sustainability of American ginseng 
harvesting from the wild: The problem and possible solutions. Final 
report to USFWS.

Gagnon, D. 2003. Monitoring results of wild American ginseng populations 
in the Great Smoky MountainsNational Park . Manuscript abstract.

Groom, M. 1998. Allee effects limit population viability of an annual 
plant. The American Naturalist 151:487-496.

Hackney, E. E. and J. B. McGraw. 2001. Experimental demonstration of an 
Allee effect in American Ginseng. Conservation Biology, 15:129-136.

Haber. 1990. As cited in Rosser, A.R. and Haywood, M.J. (Compilers). 
2002. Guidance for CITES Scientific Authorities: Checklist to assist in 
making non-detriment findings for Appendix II exports. IUCN, Gland, 
Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. 146 pp.

Hu, S. Y., L. Rudenberg, and P. D. Tredici. 1980. Studies of American 
ginseng. Rhodora 82:627-636.

Jones, T., J. Wolf, and J. Snyder. 2003 Results of Field Monitoring Wild 
Populations of American Ginseng in Kentucky. Presented at the USFWS 
Ginseng Workshop, St. Louis, Missouri.

Kauffman, G. 2003. USFS Preliminary assessment of wild American ginseng. 
Unpublished document.

Lande, R. 1987. Extinction Thresholds in Demographic Models of 
Territorial Populations.

Oecologia 130:624-635.

Lewis, W. H. and V. E. Zenger. 1982. Population Dynamics of the American 
Ginseng /Panax quinquefolius /(Araliaceae). American Journal of Botany, 
69:483-1490.

Lewis, W. H. and V. E. Zenger. 1983. Breeding systems and fecundity in 
the ginseng, /Panax quinquefolium/ (Araliaceae). American Journal of 
Botany, 70:466-468.

Lewis, W. H. 1988. Regrowth of a Decimated Population of (/Panax 
quinquefolium /in a Missouri Climax Forest. Rhodora, Journal of the New 
England Botanical Club, 90:1-5.

Lockard, A. and A. Q. Swanson. 1998. A Digger’s Guide to Medicinal 
Plants. American Botanicals. Eolia, Missouri.

McGraw, J. B. 2001. Evidence for decline in stature of ginseng plants 
from herbarium specimens. Biological Conservation, 98:25-32.

McGraw, J. B. 2003. Evaluation of management options for wild American 
ginseng populations based on demographic consequences. Final report to 
USFWS.

McGraw, J. B. 2003a. Results of two years of field monitoring in 29 
populations in four leading exporting states. Presented at the USFWS 
Ginseng Workshop, St. Louis, Missouri.

Nantel, P., D. Gagnon, and A. Nautel. 1996. Population viability 
analysis of American ginseng and wild leek harvested in stochastic 
environments. Conservation Biology, 10(2):608-621.

NatureServe: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. 2001. 
Version 1.4. Arlington, Virginia, USA. URL: http://www.natureserve.org/ 
(accessed June 2, 2003).

Proctor, R. 1980. Some aspects of the Canadian culture of ginseng 
(/Panax quinquefolium/) particularly the growing environment Proceedings 
of the third national ginseng symposium. Korean Ginseng Institute. p. 
39-48 in, Seoul, Korean.

Proctor J. T. A. and W. G. Bailey. 1987. Ginseng: Industry, botany, and 
culture. Horticulture Review. 9:187-236.

Radford, A., E., H. E. Ahles, and C. R. Bell. 1981. Manual of the 
Vascular Flora of the Carolinas. The University of North Carolina Press, 
Chapel Hill, North Carolina.

Rock, J., J. H. Hornbeck, J. Tietjen, and E. Choberka. 1999. Habitat 
modeling and protection of American ginseng in Great Smoky Mountains 
National Park.

Rosser, A.R. and M. J. Haywood (Compilers). 2002. Guidance for CITES 
Scientific Authorities: Checklist to assist in making non-detriment 
findings for Appendix II exports. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and 
Cambridge, UK. 146 pp.

Schippman, U. 2001. CITES Medicinal Plants Significant Trade Study.

Schlessman, M. 1985. Flora biology of American ginseng (/Panax 
quinquefolium/. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club, 112: 29-133.

Schluter, C. and Z. K. Punja. 2000. Floral biology and seed production 
in cultivated North American ginseng (/Panax quinquefolius/). Journal of 
the American Society for Horticultural Science, 125:567-575.

Scott, J. A., S. Rogers, D. Cooke, B. L. Fry. 1995. Woods-grown ginseng. 
Center for Natural Resource and Community Development, West Virginia 
University Extension Service.

Small, E. and P. M. Catling. 1999. Canadian Medicinal Crops. Natural 
Research Council Research Press, Ottawa, Canada.

Sutter, R. D. and G. Kauffman. 2000. Ginseng’s fate: An assessment of 
the ecological and socio-economic viability of ginseng on U.S. Forest 
Service land in North Carolina. Unpublished draft report to the U.S. 
Forest Service in North Carolina.

Van der Voot, M. 1998. An Inventory of Wild-harvested Plants in the 
Otter Creek Wilderness Area of the Monongahela National Forest, West 
Virginia. M.S. thesis. University of West Virginia, Morgantown, West 
Virginia.

Van der Voot, M. as cited in J. McGraw. 2003. Evaluation of management 
options for wild American ginseng populations based on demographic 
consequences. Final report to FWS.

Veit, R. and M. Lewis. 1996. Dispersal, population growth, and the Allee 
effect: Dynamics of the house finch invasion of eastern North America. 
The American Naturalist 148:255-274.

U.S. Forest Service, Southern Region. 2000. Forest botanical products 
maintaining sustainability and responding to socio-economic needs in the 
southern Appalachians.

U.S. Forest Service, Southern Region. 2000a. Ginseng conservation needs 
in southern region.

======================

Decline in stature of American Ginseng plants over two centuries.

MCGRAW, J.B.* West Virginia University Morgantown WV 26506 USA ^1

^snip--- Assuming herbarium specimens are representative of a consistent 
portion of natural populations, either direct or indirect effects of 
environmental change or human harvest could explain the rapid change in 
ginseng 
stature.http://abstracts.co.allenpress.com/pweb/esa2000/abstracts/JAM-3-81-5.html







-----------------------
Sonya PLoS Medicine 
The open-access general medical journal from the Public Library of Science 
Inaugural issue: Autumn 2004   Share your discoveries with the world. 
http://www.plosmedicine.org 





More information about the MPWG mailing list