<html><body bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><div>For better or worse, the arrival of the first Europeans to American shores, if not others before them, initiated trans-oceanic </div><div>movement of plants en masse<span class="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.296875); -webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(175, 192, 227, 0.230469); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(77, 128, 180, 0.230469); "> by humans. A little late to legislate it. Plants don't stop at borders or carry passports. This action only</span></div><div>results from rabid lobbying, and officials and legislators saying, ya, ya, whatever you want, can we please get on with our day?</div><div>Fine with me, if we ban the exportation of manipulated genetic material with the same stroke of the regulatory pen. Where is rational thought?</div><div><br>Sent from my iPhone</div><div><br>On Oct 24, 2010, at 6:08 PM, Robert Layton Beyfuss <<a href="mailto:rlb14@cornell.edu">rlb14@cornell.edu</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><div></div><blockquote type="cite"><div>
<div style="FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma; DIRECTION: ltr; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 13px">
<div>Hi All</div>
<div>According to <a href="http://www.physorg.com/news204438872.html"><a href="http://www.physorg.com/news204438872.html">http://www.physorg.com/news204438872.html</a></a> there are over 400,000 named flowering plant species worldwide, according to
<a href="http://www.invasive.org/"><a href="http://www.invasive.org/">http://www.invasive.org/</a></a> there are 218 invasive plant species in the US. So, the roughly 399,800 non invasive plants should be listed and must be checked before someone can bring it one in or out? A wonderful and efficient
use of our resources. The customs and border patrols must be thrilled by this.</div>
<div>This is insane.</div>
<div><font size="2" face="tahoma">Bob</font></div>
<div> </div>
<div dir="ltr"><font color="#000000" size="2" face="Tahoma"></font> </div>
<div style="DIRECTION: ltr" id="divRpF379152">
<hr tabindex="-1">
<font color="#000000" size="2" face="Tahoma"><b>From:</b> <a href="mailto:mpwg-bounces@lists.plantconservation.org">mpwg-bounces@lists.plantconservation.org</a> [<a href="mailto:mpwg-bounces@lists.plantconservation.org">mpwg-bounces@lists.plantconservation.org</a>] On Behalf Of MoonBranch Botanicals [<a href="mailto:moonbranch@earthlink.net">moonbranch@earthlink.net</a>]<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Sunday, October 24, 2010 1:01 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Conrad Richter; <a href="mailto:mpwg@lists.plantconservation.org"><a href="mailto:mpwg@lists.plantconservation.org">mpwg@lists.plantconservation.org</a></a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [MPWG] Fwd:<br>
</font><br>
</div>
<div></div>
<div>While I understand the concern regarding the introduction of new problem plants, this approach seems a bit bizarre. More puzzling is the attention paid to this issue regarding the movement of living things across geopolitical (meaningless from the standpoint
of the natural world) boundaries, while these same governments pay little attention to the equivalent biological "weapons of mass destruction" like the introduction of GE salmon and other genetically modified organisms into our biosphere.<br>
<br>
These governments seem far more interested in the bottom line of multinational corporations than the common good. We see this agenda played out daily in policies that are enacted and that while sounding beneficial, often upon deeper investigation we see that
they play into the financial goals and bottom line of these same corporations.<br>
<br>
It is not my intent here to place blame or to paint all of those vested with the authority of overseeing our interests with the same broad brush. However we must remember that these same entities were often the very ones responsible for the introduction of
many of our greatest plant pests today such as kudzu and multiflora rose. The bottom line here is that agencies are staffed by people and people make mistakes.<br>
<br>
Once again, I believe the focus of those charged with protecting our interests should go after real and imminent threats instead of potential or even imaginary ones. USDA, FDA, and the EPA should be looking at those organisms that have no track record outside
the laboratory and as such have to potential to unleash unimaginable consequences.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
Robin A. Suggs<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote style="BORDER-LEFT: rgb(0,0,255) 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 0px">
-----Original Message----- <br>
From: Conrad Richter <br>
Sent: Oct 24, 2010 3:53 AM <br>
To: <a href="mailto:mpwg@lists.plantconservation.org">mpwg@lists.plantconservation.org</a> <br>
Subject: [MPWG] Fwd: <br>
<br>
<br>
<span class="item"><span class="item"><b><span class="ZZZhead">"WHITE LIST" OF AUTHORIZED PLANTS (Canada and U.S.)</span></b></span></span>
<p class="item">The U.S. and Canadian governments are planning to introduce a "white list" of plants that are allowed entry into each country under a joint Canada-USA greenhouse certification program. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the
Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) are requesting comments from stakeholders on a proposal to replace the current list of prohibited plants with this new list of allowed plants. What this means is that if a plant is not on the allowed list it cannot enter
the U.S. from Canada or vice versa. Many thousands of plants including many herbs will be barred entry under the proposal.</p>
<p class="item">This change is highly significant for both countries because it appears to be a first attempt to implement a controversal "white list" approach to the control of cross-border plant movement. The proposed "white list" is far more restrictive
than the current "black list" of prohibited plants that has been in place since the inception of the binational Greenhouse Certification Program in 1996. The proposed "white list" of allowed plants includes less than 1000 plant genera, out of over 12,600 genera
of flowering plants known to man. The current "black list" of prohibited plants has fewer than 100 genera.</p>
<p class="item">Some suggest that the powerful anti-invasives movement in the U.S. is behind the push to introduce "white lists" of plants that are allowed into the country. While invasives are a problem for both countries, the new list will affect thousands
of plants already in the horticultural trade, and will limit the introduction of new plants to gardeners.</p>
<p class="item">For gardeners, it is worth reflecting a moment on how many new plants that you have enjoyed growing over the past 10-20 years, and how many of them might not have been available to you had this "white list" been in place.</p>
<p class="item">Gardeners, herbalists, commercial growers, and the gardening and herbal media are encouraged to submit comments.</p>
<p class="note"><b><font color="#cc0033">The deadline for comments is October 31, 2010.</font></b></p>
<p class="item"><b>United States</b>: Email your comments to Michael D. Ward, Senior Accreditation Projects Manager, USDA-APHIS-PPQ (<a href="mailto:michael.d.ward@aphis.usda.gov?Subject=GCP%20Comments"><a href="mailto:michael.d.ward@aphis.usda.gov">michael.d.ward@aphis.usda.gov</a>)</a></p>
<p class="item"><b>Canada</b>: Email your comments to the CFIA (<a href="mailto:horticulture@inspection.gc.ca?Subject=comments"><a href="mailto:horticulture@inspection.gc.ca">horticulture@inspection.gc.ca</a></a>)</p>
<p class="item">The relevant documents, including the proposed lists of authorized genera and families, are available
<a href="http://www.richters.com/newdisplay.cgi?page=Issues/documents.html" target="_blank">
here</a>.</p>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
\_\ RICHTERS HERBS
/ / Goodwood, ON, L0C 1A0, Canada
\_\ Tel +1.905.640.6677 Fax +1.905.640.6641
/_/ <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.richters.com" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.richters.com">http://www.richters.com</a></a></pre>
</blockquote>
<pre>Robin Alton Suggs
MoonBranch Botanicals
5294 Yellow Creek Road
Robbinsville, North Carolina 28771
USA
Telephone: 828.479.2788
Email: <a href="mailto:moonbranch@earthlink.net">moonbranch@earthlink.net</a>
<a href="http://www.moonbranch.com">www.moonbranch.com</a>
&
<a href="http://www.localharvest.org/store/M16074">www.localharvest.org/store/M16074</a>
Member:
Appalachian Sustainable Agriculture Project; Farm Partner
Green Products Alliance
North Carolina Consortium on Natural Medicines
North Carolina Goodness Grows/NCDA&CS
Southwestern North Carolina RC&D Council
United Plant Savers
"Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it"
- Matthew 7:13 </pre>
</div>
</div>
</div></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><div><span></span><br><span>_______________________________________________</span><br><span>PCA's Medicinal Plant Working Group mailing list</span><br><span><a href="mailto:MPWG@lists.plantconservation.org">MPWG@lists.plantconservation.org</a></span><br><span><a href="http://lists.plantconservation.org/mailman/listinfo/mpwg_lists.plantconservation.org">http://lists.plantconservation.org/mailman/listinfo/mpwg_lists.plantconservation.org</a></span><br><span></span><br><span>To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to <a href="mailto:MPWG-request@lists.plantconservation.org">MPWG-request@lists.plantconservation.org</a> with the word "unsubscribe" in the subject line.</span><br><span></span><br><span>Disclaimer</span><br><span>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. </span></div></blockquote></body></html>