[MPWG] sustainable Boswellia? - CITES and IUCN
Patricia_DeAngelis at fws.gov
Patricia_DeAngelis at fws.gov
Thu Dec 17 15:06:35 CST 2009
Kudos to Ms. Stanton for asking these questions and great to see MPWG
member responses that are informative and interesting!
I'd like to add some food for thought when it comes to CITES and IUCN
listings and what such listings (or lack thereof) mean about the
conservation status of a species.
I should preface this by saying that I am not trying to imply whether the
species should or should not be listed in CITES or IUCN, but just some
ideas on ways of thinking about what these designations imply (or don't
imply) about the conservation status of a species:
CITES:
The role of a CITES listing is to prevent over-exploitation of wild
populations of species that are in international trade.
An informative question would be whether or not the species has ever been
evaluated to be listed in CITES. In the case of Boswellia sacra, the
species was evaluated in 1997 as part of a review of the CITES criteria
(see: http://www.cites.org/eng/prog/criteria/1st_meeting/trees.shtml), and
it was concluded that the species did not qualify for inclusion in either
Appendix I or Appendix II of CITES. I also would ask, why did they decide
it did not merit listing (i.e., is most of the stuff in trade being
cultivated)? Have the circumstances surrounding the use and conservation
of the species changed in the last 12 years?
It appears that no other species of Boswellia have been evaluated for
CITES listing. But, lack of evaluation does not connote lack of
conservation need - it just indicates that the species have not been
evaluated. The conservation status of the species may be fine, or it may
not be on the "radar" screen.
IUCN:
The on-line IUCN database (http://www.redlist.org/) has 11 Boswellia
entries, all Vulnerable and all seem to be threatened by habitat issues
(i.e., small area of extent).
I don't see B. serrata on the list at all (perhaps it has a synonym?).
However, the on-line IUCN database is not complete; i.e., not all species
have been evaluated. Therefore, absence of species in the database does
not connote absence of threat or a secure status for the species.
A "Data Deficient" category does not connote that the species is not at
risk. It indicates there is not enough information to evaluate the species
against the current criteria. And since there are not oodles of money
laying around for assessments to be conducted, most species lay in wait
for a benevolent donor before they get evaluated or they get evaluated in
response to something that puts the species on the radar screen (i.e.,
huge amounts of poaching).
Not all species that have been evaluated by IUCN are in the on-line
database--because the IUCN Red List Criteria was changed (~in 2001) and
not all species have been re-evaluated against the new criteria. Because
of this, it's good to take a look at previous print versions of the Red
List as well. A quick look at the 1997 Red List (Walter and Gillett 1998)
shows only 4 Boswellia had been evaluated at that time (B. nana=E; B.
ogadensis=E; B. ovalifoliolata=I; B. pirottae=R), but not B. serrata. Some
of the info from previous print versions are being incorporated into the
on-line database (which you can see in the History section under
"Assessment Information" in the species entry).
(Walter, K. S. and H. J. Gillett 1998. 1997 IUCN Red List of
Threatened Plants. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.)
Another resource is the country-based Red Lists; this information is not
well coordinated with the on-line database although the IUCN is working to
address the situation. So, you might actually find info in the
country-based Red List that you wouldn't know about if you just looked
on-line. I'm not sure which of the African countries that are range
states to Boswellia species have country-based Red Lists. But some of the
country-based lists can be found on-line.
As much as I rely on CITES and IUCN to do my work, it's important to
understand what "lack of listing" does and does not mean, and that these
two resources should not be the end of your investigation into the
conservation status of a species. Resources such as those mentioned by
Ms. Burgess and Ms. Flaster are excellent. You might also be interested
in looking at the International Standard for Sustainable Wild Collection
of Medicinal and Aromatic Plants (ISSC-MAP) to learn more about how
different harvest practices might affect the status of the
species...(www.floraweb.de/proxy/floraweb/map-pro/Standard_Version1_0.pdf).
Hopefully, these thoughts will help as you research this or other species.
Thanks,
Patricia
Patricia S. De Angelis, Ph.D.
Botanist - Division of Scientific Authority
Chair - Plant Conservation Alliance - Medicinal Plant Working Group
US Fish & Wildlife Service
4401 N. Fairfax Dr., Suite 110
Arlington, VA 22203
703-358-1708 x1753
FAX: 703-358-2276
Promoting sustainable use and conservation of our native medicinal plants.
<www.nps.gov/plants/medicinal>
"Isla Burgess" <isla at herbcollege.com>
Sent by: mpwg-bounces at lists.plantconservation.org
12/17/2009 01:22 PM
To
<sesherbs at aol.com>, <MPWG at lists.plantconservation.org>
cc
Subject
Re: [MPWG] sustainable Boswellia?
Good Morning Susan,
Boswellia is not on a CITES Listing and the IUCN has a ?data deficient?
rating.
We do need to be concerned about the conservation status of this herb.
I recently developed as part of an MSc dissertation a Medicinal Plant
Rapid Assessment Tool (MPRAT) and am the interim convener for the
International Research Group for the Conservation of Medicinal Plants
www.irgcmp.org
We are hoping to attract funding to apply the MPRAT to a range of
medicinal plants available in over the counter and practitioner products.
The website is in the early stages of development but more information
will be added over time.
I wish all buyers were asking these questions.
Nga Mihi,
Isla
Isla Burgess (Interim Convenor for IRGCMP)
Director
International College of Herbal Medicine
18B Sirrah St
Wainui, Gisborne, New Zealand
#6468630048
#6468630046 Fax
www.HerbCollege.com
isla at HerbCollege.com
From: mpwg-bounces at lists.plantconservation.org
[mailto:mpwg-bounces at lists.plantconservation.org] On Behalf Of
sesherbs at aol.com
Sent: Friday, 18 December 2009 3:07 a.m.
To: MPWG at lists.plantconservation.org
Subject: [MPWG] sustainable Boswellia?
Hello-
I am a supplement retailer wondering whether I should be concerned about
sustainable harvesting of Boswellia serrata that is sold in the US. Is
the resin gathered from trees that are cultivated for commercial use or is
it gathered from wild trees? Is there a way to "sustainably" harvest
without threatening tree populations? Are Boswellia trees threatened or
endangered in some areas? If anyone could please shed some light I would
appreciate it greatly.
Sincerely,
Susan Stanton
Supplement Buyer
Brattleboro Food Coop
Brattleboro, VT
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
_______________________________________________
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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.plantconservation.org/pipermail/mpwg_lists.plantconservation.org/attachments/20091217/91adc83e/attachment.html>
More information about the MPWG
mailing list