The abundance of scientists subscribing to this server probably explains
the unrepresentative quantity of people who wish to keep locality
information hidden. That doesn't mean their arguments are wrong - there
are no absolutes in this sort of context, but their arguments will have
less general applicability.
There was an article on this server last week from a scientist who
favoured withholding location information. Unfortunately this included
an example where the withholding of locality data had catastrophic
results.
There are a lot of areas where improvements could be made - I have made
a few suggestions below. It would be interesting to know from other
members which of these could be undetaken by the ICPS.
Educating the natives - if there are no plants to show visitors, they are out
of a job.
Lobbying governments to protect their biodiversity - there are international
funds available to help, and there will be even more when the Americans
ratify the Biodiversity Convention.
Publishing the names of the guilty collectors, so that nobody buys material
from them.
Bring endangered species into mass cultivation so that there is no need for
wild collection.
Reseeding or replanting the overcollected sites.
Informing the authorities of the guilty collectors - a particularly notorious
German cactus nursery was raided last year after a tip-off, and a substantial
number of wild-collected CITES I plants found.
Good Growing, Nigel Hurneyman