[MPWG] eat the weeds

[pankaj oudhia]

Weeds create problems and its management is necessary, we all know .Instead of using other alternatives like chemical weed management  having proven impact on our ecosystem  we are in search of method that can manage the problem in ecofriendly way.Management through Utilization is one of these concepts. And in my region we are getting positive results. Managing one prblem through another problem is not advisable. Chemicals do the same. We are in process of collecting the potential uses of noxious as well as common weed around the world so that we can suggest the farmers of one part of the world to use the knowledge available in other parts. For example Kudzu is considered as a weed in many countries but in India it is a valuable herb.Kudzu uprooted by mechanical ways in these countries can be supplied to the Asian market as medicinal herb. By this way the farmers will recover the cost of uprooting and also earn additional income from it. Also this  use will avoid the chemical
 management.This will be the additional advantage of getting chemical free environment.
 
 I am aware that this is a dream impossible at this stage but I believe in try.
 
regards
Pankaj Oudhia   
  Virgil Dupuis <Virgil_Dupuis at skc.edu> wrote:
The past discussion ranging from “eat the weeds”, to “right to life for
all plants”, and the “sanctity of private land cannot be violated” appear
to be geared at the same old problem with noxious weeds. I have heard
many excuses for people and society in general not taking responsibility
for noxious weeds. Not my problem, nature abhors a vacuum, you can’t tell
me what to do on my land, and beauty is in the eye of the beholder are all
used to defend a no action alternative when it comes to managing weeds. 
Noxious weeds are proven to be serious costly invaders, whereas invasive
plants are less damaging and often times used. Ecologically, noxious
weeds are not merely nature’s band-aid on man’s misguided intrusions. 
Research is finding that some plants are capable of replacing entire
niches of native plants due to superior competitive abilities (noxious
weeds replacing shrubs in grassland sites, or making entirely new niches
like aquatic invaders can) either through alleopathy or pirating fungi and
other resources away from natives. Surely poor management helped
establish these plants, many which were intentionally introduced due to
their use in Europe (honey production, ornamental, keeping bad spirits
away, dyes). When entire plant biomes and associated energy cycles are
changed and degraded entirely from the natural system by noxious weeds, it
is everyone’s problem. Private land ownership in this country is based on
British common property law (invasive notion in itself), on a bundle of
rights and responsibilities, subject to the laws of the sovereign. The
sovereign represents society as a whole. So yes, someone can regulate
what you grow on your property, because it has been shown that some plants
can cause millions of dollars of damage to neighboring land, hence Noxious
Weed Law. These laws are largely ineffective in actual control, but can
be effective in helping groups work towards managing weeds, and leveraging
individuals not interested in controlling weeds on their property. 
Finally, an argument that all plants have some good use is probably
correct, but don’t use that as an excuse not to be responsible to nature
and your neighbors. Personally I am not worried about finding enough
knapweed to use as a blood tonic, toadflax to use as dye, or St. Johnswort
to chase the ghosts or depression away, there are lots of those plants. 
The plants in danger are the natives that create biodiversity, economic
opportunity, and ecosystem stability. Invasive plants do not do any of
those things. So, please do eat the dandelions and make wine too. 
virgil




Yahoo! India Matrimony: Find your life partneronline.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.plantconservation.org/pipermail/mpwg_lists.plantconservation.org/attachments/20050217/3d306e8d/attachment.html>