Sorry folks for doing this, I know some people do not think that the CP
map is a good use of list time... but..
> > Hi All,
> > I am glad so much discussion is coming of this. Some people think
> > that
> > there *should* be a CP map, some people think there *shouldn't* and
> > some peo are being sensible and weighing up both sides.
> >
> >
> > Basically, I think we need to be totally open with everyone, and go
> > for education.
>
>
> I am sure everyone could agree on some type of map. The point of
> controversy lies with the degree of resolution of the map. This is
> also related to the purpose of the map.
>
> Are we talking about a map with a resolution roughly the size of a US
> state county? This would provide a good picture of the range of a
> species. It would give a "hint" of where these plants can be found,
> without disclosing precise localities. This kind of map could be
> compiled from existing references, and would not be overwhelmingly
> difficult to create.
Yes but would have little benefit, except to CPers, and this map (hopefully)
would be made in aid of helping the plants.
>
> Another kind of map is one that pinpoints precise localities. Many
> botanical distribution maps approximate this by placing "dots" on a
> map of a state or county (in contrast to a shaded area of range).
> Even these "dot maps" do not accurately pinpoint the exact
> localities. However, computer techknowledgy could bu utilized for a
> system where clicking on a dot could "zoom" in to a higher resolution
> street map, or to a text description of the precise locality.
This would also be, technologically, easy to produce.
>
> I favor the first kind of map, and strongly discourage the latter.
> I think the first sort of map would be sufficient to satisfy curiosity
> about a plant's range, and also gives some help to those who'd like
> to find the plants in habitat. I do not see the necessity of mapping
> precise localities as I've described in the second map. Those who
> support this kind of map have argued they want this so they may visit
> plants in habitat, and also the curious argument that if they "get
> anything less" this constitutes "concealment" by a "clique" of
> privileged botanists or conservationists. Truth is, compiling a map
> of exact locality data would be very difficut. It would require
> obtaining unpublished data from many conservation agencies. It would
> demand a lot of work on their part, time that could be better spent
> on conservation. These agenies are entrusted with protecting these
> plants and their habitat. It will take a very compelling argument to
> convince them to release localities for rare and collectible plants
> to a society of collectors of these plants--especially when the final
> map is to be presented on the internet. The mission of conservation
> is to protect habitats and the organisms that live there. Without a
> budget for guards and high fences, most rare plants in the wild are
> physically protected only by their isolation from human contact.
> I find it's more enjoyable to walk in the woods and find plants with
> a minimum of assistance. Precise maps would aid those who don't
> have the time, sure. But why rush it? Need to hit every Sarracenia
> species on a 5-day trip to the Southeast? Be supportive of conservation
> and those plants can be around for the next visit.
The map *should not* be used (I hope) by people from out of the sites
area for visting it. The map would be to aid people in the local area
realising where the plants are to be found, so that they would know when
the site is under threat from developement or drainage (or both). I am
not talking about highly protected sites, containing *extremely* rare
plants, looked after by conservation societies, this would be
self-defeating, but sites that are on farmland, etc, and have been
proposed to be drained or built upon. I know of sites near me (found
after many hours of research - there are undoubtedly many more nearby
which are not listed in books) that have been drained for grazing land.
This sort of destruction could be slowed at least by such a map.
Anyway, enough on this, back to what we are 'supposed' to be talking about -
Kind Regards,
Toby