[MPWG] Electronic Public Discussion: Evaluating the InvasivePotential of Imported Plants

[Sara Eisenberg]

Returned form travel to find this lively discussion. In The Extra American 
Pharmacopoeia (in Gladstar's Planting the Future), herbalist David Winston 
suggested that some of these "invasives" have a history and potential future 
for medicinal use - converting their profusion from a problem to an 
opportunity, and opening up the current American use of herbs to a broader 
numberof  medicines. See the spring '06 issue of the Journal of the American 
Herbalists Guild for a literature review exploring these premises that I did 
on Lythrum salicaria - from research on the introduction of "natural 
predator" beetles, to efforts to organize teams of volunteers to eradicate 
the plant, to research into its potential as a food preservative!

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jean Giblette/High Falls Gardens" <hfg at capital.net>
To: <mpwg at lists.plantconservation.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2006 9:30 AM
Subject: Re: [MPWG] Electronic Public Discussion: Evaluating the 
InvasivePotential of Imported Plants


> No matter how "aggressive," plants cannot "invade" an intact
> ecosystem that's in balance.  Any experienced organic farmer knows
> the resilience of a neglected hay meadow, for example, and has to
> plant successive cover crops in order to break the cycles of the
> existing species before planting his/her preferred crop.  It's no
> coincidence that "invasives" line the roadways, railways, cover the
> South where the nutrients were mined out of the soil for cotton and
> tobacco, and infest wetlands, rivers and creeksides where the nitrate
> fertilizers used in conventional agriculture are accumulating.
> Naturally, dumping more chemicals on these plants just aggravates the
> imbalance.
>
> Biologists of my acquaintance were horrified to see "invasives"
> covering the area where a mountaintop had been blown off for coal
> mining.  Well, thank Mother Earth that something was growing over
> such an atrocity!  She knows how to heal herself.  Also -- hello
> there -- she's sending us a message:  stop polluting the earth!
>
> Can we please, please get over the germ theory of disease?  It's so
> 19th century!
>
> Happy Solstice,
> Jean
>
> On Dec 19, 2006, at 6:02 PM, Melinda Mohrman wrote:
>
>> When plants are transported to areas outside of their native habitat,
>> they are exposed to areas where they may not have any natural
>> population
>> control.  If they reproduce more aggressively than the native species,
>> they are invasive.  Many exotic plants are not considered invasive
>> because they do not react this way to their new environments.  Banning
>> invasive plants is not a "knee jerk" reaction, this is something that
>> only happens after a plant has proven itself to be detrimental to its
>> new environment.  It is not bureaucrats who are making these
>> decisions,
>> it is the plant science professionals who are urging them to take
>> action.  You mentioned groups which save native plants so that
>> highways
>> can be installed and exotic plants used on the roadsides- one of the
>> reasons this legislation matters is because it does not allow exotic
>> plants to be used in these ways.  In an effort to correct past
>> mistakes,
>> many states are enacting programs to establish native plants along
>> roadsides in order to stop the spread of these invasive plants.  I'm
>> dismayed at the thought that their might be people out there who are
>> fighting for invasive plants, when so many of us are fighting against
>> them.
>>
>>>>> Bob Beyfuss <rlb14 at cornell.edu> 12/19/2006 4:40 PM >>>
>> The concept of plants in themselves being capable of being "invasive"
>> is
>> silly. It is attributing human qualities (implying malice in this
>> case)
>> to
>> unthinking organisms. Plants live, grow, reproduce (some are very
>> efficient
>> at this) and die. New or different plants do not displace established
>> existing plants in healthy, undisturbed  ecosystems. Plants do not
>> appear
>> anywhere due to "spontaneous generation". They are brought in by
>> humans
>> or
>> animals. They may colonize or become naturalized in (neither colonize
>> nor
>> naturalize  imply malice) areas less suited to so called "native"
>> species
>> because human activity has allowed this to happen.
>>
>> I am offended at the concept that "exotic" plants are somehow inferior
>> to
>> "native" plants. Especially since 90% of my diet and that of most
>> of us
>> is
>> derived from"exotic" plants. Demonizing "exotic" plants as "invasive
>> exotic" is inherently offensive .  Which term is less offensive to you
>>
>> "Invasive exotic" or "opportunistic colonizer"? Now try to answer that
>>
>> question if you happen to be from the Middle east (maybe Iraq),
>> Asia or
>>
>> Africa or Europe and you hear or read an American talking about
>> "invasive
>> exotic species". I am sure the people in the middle east or anywhere
>> else
>> in the world must enjoy reading about our efforts to "combat" (another
>>
>> wonderful term)  "invasive, exotic species".
>>
>> Personally I like the term "noxious weed" in which a weed is
>> defined as
>> "an
>> unwanted plant". By this definition a "volunteer" (i.e. unplanted)
>> soybean
>> plant growing in a corn field is a weed.  A "noxious weed" is a
>> particularly undesirable weed. Why do we have to invent new terms that
>> are
>> as offensive as "exotic invasive" or even worse "alien, invasive"?
>>
>> What I find even more troubling is the knee jerk reaction to their
>> presence. Lets just kill all the bad plants we don't like anymore and
>> everything will be fine. First we gather all their names up and put
>> them on
>> a list. Target these for extermination. Next we will make up more
>> lists
>> of
>> plants that "might" be "invasive" in the future and ban them too. Here
>> in
>> NY State we already have county executives issuing "executive decrees"
>>
>> banning the use of any but "native" species in any future plantings on
>>
>> county property. How dare they do this? Yet, this is a logical
>> extension of
>> the current polices we are formulating. Why should we be denied
>> daffodils,
>> daylillies, tulips or apple trees or Kentucky bluegrass (another
>> exotic
>>
>> import) because someone has decided that they are evil?
>>
>> In the long run, and I must emphasize looking at the long run or the
>> big
>> picture, every single environment on this planet will ultimately
>> determine
>> what plant and animal species survives there, not some bureaucrat in
>> Washington with a pen making up lists of good versus bad plants based
>> on
>> his or her opinion. This process is called natural selection and it is
>>
>> constant. Black locust is OK in PA because it is "native" but bad
>> in NY
>>
>> because it is exotic? This is crazy. The same species of Magnolias
>> growing
>> in China are identical to some of those growing here. At one time
>> there
>> was
>> one continent so what exactly is "native" and why are "native" plants
>> superior to Non native? Are "native people, i.e. blue blooded
>> Americans
>>
>> inherently superior to immigrants because they were born here? How
>> long
>>
>> must one be here to be considered a "native"?
>>
>> Global warming will have a far more profound effect on plant species
>> and
>> their distribution than some group of people spraying herbicides on
>> plants
>> they don't like.
>>
>> An interesting research project along that line might be to study
>> exactly
>> how plants are distributed and become established within any given
>> community.  While highly paid administrators are forming invasive
>> plant
>>
>> councils, attending countless meetings and making regulations, the
>> local
>> highway department employee (@ $10 per hour) is transplanting garlic
>> mustard and Japanese knotweed every time they move the Grade-all
>> machine
>> from one place to another. The people picking up garbage along the
>> highway
>> are also picking up weed seeds and moving them down the road. All the
>> campers, mountain bikers, hikers, 4 wheelers, skiers, and other
>> outdoor
>>
>> recreationist constantly introduce exotic stuff into the environment.
>> Should we pass regulations banning these activities? No, it is much
>> easier
>> to blame the plants for the problems and spray them with
>> herbicides. Or
>> is it?
>>
>> I recently spoke with the local Executive Director of the Nature
>> Conservancy for the Catskill Mountain region and he estimated that he
>> could
>> easily spend 90% or more of their total annual operating budget trying
>> to
>> eradicate only garlic mustard and only from roadsides in this region
>> and
>> the net result would be that it would be required to do this every
>> year
>>
>> indefinitely with no chance of eradication at all. Is this a good use
>> of
>> our limited resources? Good organizations like Ohio's Rural Action
>> Network
>> are forced to rescue plants from proposed new highways which soon will
>> have
>> their shoulders colonized by "exotic, invasive plants". So, should we
>> ban
>> the building of new highways or prohibit logging or timber harvest
>> because
>> of the inevitable consequences? Maybe we should ban all imports of all
>>
>> exotic plants or better yet prohibit cultivation of all but native
>> plants!
>> Or do we proceed as carefully as possible with these projects and
>> realize
>> that there will surely be unwanted consequences as a result?.
>>
>> Most of the plants now considered as evil, invasive exotic species
>> were
>>
>> introduced for some very good reasons and many of them are still great
>>
>> choices for many situations. If not for Norway maple there would be no
>>
>> street trees in some stressed locations. Like the soybean plant in the
>>
>> cornfield, one situation's weed is another situations wildflower.
>> Black
>> locust is a wonderful alternative to CCA pressure treated wood, many,
>> many
>> species of songbirds feast on the berries of the exotic honeysuckles,
>> Autumn and Russian olive, bittersweet, barberry, multiflora rose, and
>> on
>> and on.
>>
>> I don't like the idea of banning books, banning plants or banning
>> anything
>> because it is politically correct. All this talk about "combating
>> invasive
>> exotics"  and the connotations of this language makes me very nervous.
>> We
>> are already engaged in far too many wars for our own good and for the
>> good
>> of our planet.
>>
>> Thanks for reading.
>> Bob Beyfuss
>>
>> At 11:20 AM 12/13/2006, Patricia_DeAngelis at fws.gov wrote:
>>
>>> Excuse the cross-postings but it looks like there is something in
>>> this
>> for
>>> everyone!
>>>
>>> This discussion is already underway!  A summary of the purpose and
>>> how
>> you
>>> can participate is below.  To see the full notice, see:
>>> http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20061800/
>>> edocket.access.gpo.gov/2006/E6-18768.htm
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>> - -
>>> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>>>
>>> SUMMARY: We are advising the public that the Animal and Plant Health
>>> Inspection Service (APHIS) is hosting an electronic public discussion
>>> on methods that can be used to evaluate the potential of imported
>>> plants to become invasive species if they are introduced into the
>>> United States. Any interested person can register for the electronic
>>> discussion, which will allow participants to upload files and
>> interact
>>> with other participants and with APHIS staff.
>>>
>>> DATES: The electronic public discussion will be held from November
>> 27,
>>> 2006 to January 26, 2007.
>>>
>>> FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Polly Lehtonen, Senior Staff
>>> Officer, Commodity Import Analysis and Operations, PPQ, APHIS, 4700
>>> River Road Unit 133, Riverdale, MD 20737-1236; (301) 734-8758.
>>>
>>> QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION: We would like participants in the
>>> electronic discussion to specifically address the following six
>> questions,
>>> although general comments on the issue of evaluating invasiveness
>> will
>>> be accepted as well.
>>>    1. What criteria, other than whether the plant has a history of
>>> invasiveness elsewhere, are most useful to determine the invasiveness
>>> of a plant introduced into the United States for the first time?
>>>    2. When there is little or no existing scientific literature or
>>> other information describing the invasiveness of a plant species, how
>>> much should we extrapolate from information on congeners (other
>> species
>>> within the same genus)?
>>>    3. What specific scientific experiments should be conducted to
>> best
>>> evaluate a plant's invasive potential? Should these experiments be
>>> conducted in a foreign area, in the United States, or both?
>>>    4. How should the results of such experiments be interpreted?
>>> Specifically, what results should be interpreted as providing
>>> conclusive information for a regulatory decision?
>>>    5. If field trials are necessary to determine the invasive
>>> potential of a plant, under what conditions should the research be
>>> conducted to prevent the escape of the plant into the environment?
>>>    6. What models or techniques are being used by the nursery
>>> industry, weed scientists, seed companies, botanical gardens, and
>>> others to screen plants that have not yet been widely introduced into
>>> the United States for invasiveness? What species have been rejected
>> by
>>> these evaluators as a result of the use of these evaluation methods?
>>>
>>> ACCESSING THE ELECTRONIC DISCUSSION:
>>>    While anyone can access the discussion and read the comments,
>>> registration is required in order to participate in the discussion.
>> You
>>> will be asked to register at the time you post your comment.
>> Participants
>>> will be required to enter their name and e-mail address. Affiliation
>> and
>>> mailing address are optional. Only the participant names will be
>> publicly
>>> displayed.
>>>
>>> The discussion will be accessible through a link on Plant Protection
>> and
>>> Quarantine's Web page for the nursery stock revision,
>>> <http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?
>>> from=leavingFR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.aphis.usda.gov/ppq/
>>> Q37/revision.html>http://www.aphis.usda.gov/ppq/Q37/revision.html.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> PCA's Medicinal Plant Working Group mailing list
>>> MPWG at lists.plantconservation.org
>>> http://lists.plantconservation.org/mailman/listinfo/
>>> mpwg_lists.plantconservation.org
>>
>>>
>>> To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to
>> MPWG-request at lists.plantconservation.org
>>> with the word "unsubscribe" in the subject line.
>>>
>>> Disclaimer
>>> Any advice given on this list regarding diagnosis or treatments etc.
>>> reflects ONLY the opinion of the individual who posts the message.
>>> The
>>
>>> information contained in posts is not intended nor implied to be a
>>> substitute for professional medical advice relative to your specific
>>> medical condition or question. All medical and other healthcare
>>> information that is discussed on this list should be carefully
>> reviewed by
>>> the individual reader and their qualified healthcare professional.
>> Posts
>>> do not reflect any official opinions or positions of the Plant
>>> Conservation Alliance.
>>
>> ***************************************************************
>> This email should be considered "unofficial communication"
>> and does not necessarily reflect the official position of
>> the City of Chesterfield. An "official position" of the
>> City shall only be communicated in letter form, using
>> City letterhead.
>> ***************************************************************
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> PCA's Medicinal Plant Working Group mailing list
>> MPWG at lists.plantconservation.org
>> http://lists.plantconservation.org/mailman/listinfo/
>> mpwg_lists.plantconservation.org
>>
>> To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to MPWG-
>> request at lists.plantconservation.org with the word "unsubscribe" in
>> the subject line.
>>
>> Disclaimer
>> Any advice given on this list regarding diagnosis or treatments
>> etc. reflects ONLY the opinion of the individual who posts the
>> message. The information contained in posts is not intended nor
>> implied to be a substitute for professional medical advice relative
>> to your specific medical condition or question. All medical and
>> other healthcare information that is discussed on this list should
>> be carefully reviewed by the individual reader and their qualified
>> healthcare professional. Posts do not reflect any official opinions
>> or positions of the Plant Conservation Alliance.
>>
>
> Jean Giblette, Director
> HIGH FALLS GARDENS
> Box 125 Philmont NY 12565 USA
> 518-672-7365
> hfg at capital.net
> www.highfallsgardens.net
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PCA's Medicinal Plant Working Group mailing list
> MPWG at lists.plantconservation.org
> http://lists.plantconservation.org/mailman/listinfo/mpwg_lists.plantconservation.org
>
> To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to MPWG-request at lists.plantconservation.org 
> with the word "unsubscribe" in the subject line.
>
> Disclaimer
> Any advice given on this list regarding diagnosis or treatments etc. 
> reflects ONLY the opinion of the individual who posts the message. The 
> information contained in posts is not intended nor implied to be a 
> substitute for professional medical advice relative to your specific 
> medical condition or question. All medical and other healthcare 
> information that is discussed on this list should be carefully reviewed by 
> the individual reader and their qualified healthcare professional. Posts 
> do not reflect any official opinions or positions of the Plant 
> Conservation Alliance.
>
>