> I almost hate to add to the volume of mail under this heading, but
> then I thought I should!
>
> First, I see real risk in publishing PRECISE plant locations. Anyone
> who has been on plant hunting expeditions knows that the evidence of
> plant theft from the wild is irrefutable.
>
> Publicising locations aids the theives but doesn't impact conservation
> in a beneficial way. To benefit conservation you need the
> conservationists to know
> the locations and everyone else to understand the need for conservation and
> value of specifically threatened plants.
>
Right, I hope you agree, Paul, with the 'solution' Jan, Rick and I have
come up with to limit th info available. comments please!!!
> Having dispensed with my opinion, I have a possible solution.
>
> Clearly it is a good idea to centralise knowledge to some degree. The
question
> is where. Those who read my earlier mails when I first joined might recall I
> own a collection afforded National collection status under a UK inspired
> conservation programme. This programme recognises nationally important
> collections of specific genera. Thus I own the Pinguicula National Collection
> and some hundereds more exist including at least one Sarracenia
> national collection. This scheme is now expanding into Europe, the
> USA, Australia and possibly elsewhere (i can find out). To me, it is
> a clear objective of each National Collection to collate all valuable
> information about a genus and this
> would include known and suspected locations for the plants. Each National
> Collection holder is charged with being conservation minded and must
demonstrate
> this in their application to become recognised. Therefore they are a good
> gamble as a safe repository of sensitive information (such as locations).
Agreed. If this info was centralized (i.e. donated to our database idea) this
would serve as policing of some kind.
>
> Anyone could request location information from a collection holder. But, for
> example, if I was asked for a very sensitive location I might control my
> response. Thus, if asked where to find P. jackii, first I might refuse some
> people unless they could gain a reference from those I know and trust.
Second,
> I might tell them the location in exchange for details of when they expected
to
> visit the site. I would then advise my colleagues in the relevant country
that
> this person would be visiting an endangered site. This would guard against
> theft as any damage during the time of the visit would be easy to investigate.
Hmm. I don't like the idea of collection holders just giving out
sensitive info, like you say.
>
>
> I don't want to be a policeman but in this day and age I feel all of
> us have
to
> be and my National Collection Holder status seems to oblige me to be
> active in
> this way. If we had at least one National Collection holder for each
> genus (where doesn't matter, any country can start to participate),
> then this could form a distributed database of locations and all other
> requireddata, collated
by
> genus. Obviously it would help if such collection holders were also
> on the Internet. It would also help if we could begin to standardise
> how information
> was stored (I am about to offer a solution to that too! but not today).
Oh yes - I can see that last bit coming...
>
> (By the way, it is acceptable for there to be duplicate National Collections
or
> two or more similar collections. Any such could be duplicate holders of
> relevant data.)
>
> One word of caution. In this day and age, collectios cost money and data
> management adds to the proble, It is possible that anyone holding such a
> database might choose to sell information, though probably at a nominal
charge.
> This tends to put off enquiries that would waste time, and limit info to those
> who really do want it.)
>
> If required, I can supply limited details of countries with equivalent
> schemes
> to national collections, including the local administrating bodies in
> some cases. In the UK the organisation acting as the authority,
> administrators and
> overseers is the National Council for the Conservation of Plants and
> gardens, located at The Pines, Wisley Gardens, Wisley, england (the
> home of the Royal Horticultural society gardens).
>
>
>
> And if it isn't obvious by now, I for one would not log locations for
> certain very endangered species on a publicly accessible database.
> I'm not worried about thoughtful introduction of rare species by aware
> and concerned individuals, especially where they endeavour to collect
> seed, not plants. I
am
> worried about an inconsiderate few who would have no inhibitions in
> stripping
a
> site for financial gain. I can name a few nurseries that do it (or
> have done
-
> e.g. a US based company is well known for stripping VFTs from the
> wild) and I know or have heard of individuals too.
Again, we have addressed that in our 'solution'. another idea: National
collection holders could have access to the precise database (???). I
think this would be a good idea, even though I say so myself...
As for individuals who strip a site, I believe that the identity of
these people and these companies should be revealed, so a boycott can be
carried out.
Regards,
Toby Marsden