I would agree to that myself, but a vote may be in order. PAK, what do you say. Also I would like to present a Name for our group. I would like to name us : Sarracenia National Collection and Preservation Society. "Conservation through Stewardship." It will give us a start and a place to work from. Any objections?
TerraForums Venus Flytrap, Nepenthes, Drosera and more talk
Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
U.S. National Sarracenia Collection
- Thread starter PlantAKiss
- Start date
Greetings Forum
I’ve (Carl Mazur) have been very quiet on this topic publicly and have only spoken privately only with Mr. Rice, Mr. Dawnstar, Mr Garcia, and Mr. Millar. Today I took the time to take a serious read of the National Collection Thread. I feel it is time comment publicly. I hope y’all take the time to read this posting carefully and not just skim through it. It has taken me a long time to prepare this.
As I tried to say in my first mail Mr. Dawnstar, there are two ways to do something, what I called the “right way” and what I called “the wrong way”. Let me clarify that for all of you. I think what I meant to say is that there is a right way and a “more right” way. What y’all are proposing is very noble, and completely excellent, and does has my COMPLETE support. I support it fully as a both a CP hobbyist enthusiasts and 20 year grower of Sarracenia. So, please don’t think I’m trying to kybosh things or stop your momentum. As Mr. Rice, as a “rogue group” y’all can do as you like, me included! The more right way, is in my opinion the more politically correct way. A way that would make this a fully supported and sanctioned project with key players like USFW, ICPS, State Natural Heritage programs, ABG and other. This would give more access to “legally” collected plant material as well as a wider range of rare plant material from rare populations, as well as hopefully, the ability to LEGALLY share and disseminate Appendix 1 plants.
However, y’all have to understand I have two hats to wear here. Hat 1, Sarracenia grower, and a person who will do anything he can to help out with this project!!!! I have lots of plants with lots of accurate provenance data, all of which I want to share. Hat 2, ICPS president. In that capacity I have to take into account many other things. The most important thing is legalities. One of the most important species to have in this conservancy project are the appendix 1 plants, jonesii, oreophila and alabamensis. These plants are both illegal to collect and send between states in the US without proper paperwork (In Canada we can send appendix 1 anywhere within the boarders…Barry Correct me if I’m wrong about the US laws.) The ICPS and ABG have worked very hard over the years promoting stewardship and population enhancement of appendix 1 and other rare sarracenia populations. The Alabamensis Distribution project is just one example.
In my “more right” approach, it is my hope to get LEGAL appendix 1 plants from all known and extinct populations and make it legal to share them with other growers throughout the US. This will be a very difficult task. Mr. Rice knows what sort of headache that caused with the alabamensis project. Regardless of that happening or not, my concern is the ICPS PUBLICLY endorsing a group who will be illegally collecting plant and seed material and quite possibly collecting and illegally shipping Appendix 1 material. That would look very bad. It’s a thin line between conscience and legality. What is right and what is legal are sometimes two different things. This clearly seems to be one of those cases. I was hoping, in my role as ICPS president to bridge that gap.
That is why I was hoping to follow the “more right approach”. By coming up with a proposal and gaining the support of the proper authorities, I would be able make this a very credible group, one supported both financially and legally by hopefully the ICPS and the appropriate Government agencies.
Maybe my vision is far too pie in the sky!
Anyway, I want y’all to know that as a grower and fellow sarracenia lover, I fully endorse your work, and support the project. There are some very enthusiastic people on this forum and now that a group is forming and organizing, I see great things happening, and lend my “unofficial” services. I like the idea of the seed repository idea as way of getting the project started. A database of growers and a uniform coding system is great too. I truly solute all of you for your work, dedication and enthusiasm. I will continue to read this forum and add my 2 cents when possible.
However, I need y’all to understand, that in my role as ICPS president, there are legal, ethical and political implications of what you are proposing. Because of these reasons, I don’t think it will fly with ICPS and other groups like the USFW, Natural heritage etc. there I don’t think it will gain support of the government agencies… not that that’s a bad thing, great things can still be done!
Before I ramble farther, I just want to kick this idea out for discussion. What if this group is responsible for all Sarracenia species, sub species forms etc, other than ones specifically under the control of the Federal authorities, namely appendix 1 sarracenia species. I would hate to see people here going out to appendix 1 sites collecting seed and or plants for this project… it can only lead to disaster!
So those are my thoughts. I hope y’all look at these carefully and truly try to understand the position I’m in. I support y’all 100% on a personal basis, but cannot support y’all on an official basis with modification to the plans.
In closing I’d like to say thanks to Mr. Garcia and Mr. Millar for bringing this proposal to me. As previously stated, I’d like to be part of this on a personal basis, but at this point in time would like to keep my “official” hat uninvolved.
------
Just a note for those who do not know. Mr. Garcia is Brooks..."SarraceniaObsessed"; Mr. Millar is "Bugweed"
I’ve (Carl Mazur) have been very quiet on this topic publicly and have only spoken privately only with Mr. Rice, Mr. Dawnstar, Mr Garcia, and Mr. Millar. Today I took the time to take a serious read of the National Collection Thread. I feel it is time comment publicly. I hope y’all take the time to read this posting carefully and not just skim through it. It has taken me a long time to prepare this.
As I tried to say in my first mail Mr. Dawnstar, there are two ways to do something, what I called the “right way” and what I called “the wrong way”. Let me clarify that for all of you. I think what I meant to say is that there is a right way and a “more right” way. What y’all are proposing is very noble, and completely excellent, and does has my COMPLETE support. I support it fully as a both a CP hobbyist enthusiasts and 20 year grower of Sarracenia. So, please don’t think I’m trying to kybosh things or stop your momentum. As Mr. Rice, as a “rogue group” y’all can do as you like, me included! The more right way, is in my opinion the more politically correct way. A way that would make this a fully supported and sanctioned project with key players like USFW, ICPS, State Natural Heritage programs, ABG and other. This would give more access to “legally” collected plant material as well as a wider range of rare plant material from rare populations, as well as hopefully, the ability to LEGALLY share and disseminate Appendix 1 plants.
However, y’all have to understand I have two hats to wear here. Hat 1, Sarracenia grower, and a person who will do anything he can to help out with this project!!!! I have lots of plants with lots of accurate provenance data, all of which I want to share. Hat 2, ICPS president. In that capacity I have to take into account many other things. The most important thing is legalities. One of the most important species to have in this conservancy project are the appendix 1 plants, jonesii, oreophila and alabamensis. These plants are both illegal to collect and send between states in the US without proper paperwork (In Canada we can send appendix 1 anywhere within the boarders…Barry Correct me if I’m wrong about the US laws.) The ICPS and ABG have worked very hard over the years promoting stewardship and population enhancement of appendix 1 and other rare sarracenia populations. The Alabamensis Distribution project is just one example.
In my “more right” approach, it is my hope to get LEGAL appendix 1 plants from all known and extinct populations and make it legal to share them with other growers throughout the US. This will be a very difficult task. Mr. Rice knows what sort of headache that caused with the alabamensis project. Regardless of that happening or not, my concern is the ICPS PUBLICLY endorsing a group who will be illegally collecting plant and seed material and quite possibly collecting and illegally shipping Appendix 1 material. That would look very bad. It’s a thin line between conscience and legality. What is right and what is legal are sometimes two different things. This clearly seems to be one of those cases. I was hoping, in my role as ICPS president to bridge that gap.
That is why I was hoping to follow the “more right approach”. By coming up with a proposal and gaining the support of the proper authorities, I would be able make this a very credible group, one supported both financially and legally by hopefully the ICPS and the appropriate Government agencies.
Maybe my vision is far too pie in the sky!
Anyway, I want y’all to know that as a grower and fellow sarracenia lover, I fully endorse your work, and support the project. There are some very enthusiastic people on this forum and now that a group is forming and organizing, I see great things happening, and lend my “unofficial” services. I like the idea of the seed repository idea as way of getting the project started. A database of growers and a uniform coding system is great too. I truly solute all of you for your work, dedication and enthusiasm. I will continue to read this forum and add my 2 cents when possible.
However, I need y’all to understand, that in my role as ICPS president, there are legal, ethical and political implications of what you are proposing. Because of these reasons, I don’t think it will fly with ICPS and other groups like the USFW, Natural heritage etc. there I don’t think it will gain support of the government agencies… not that that’s a bad thing, great things can still be done!
Before I ramble farther, I just want to kick this idea out for discussion. What if this group is responsible for all Sarracenia species, sub species forms etc, other than ones specifically under the control of the Federal authorities, namely appendix 1 sarracenia species. I would hate to see people here going out to appendix 1 sites collecting seed and or plants for this project… it can only lead to disaster!
So those are my thoughts. I hope y’all look at these carefully and truly try to understand the position I’m in. I support y’all 100% on a personal basis, but cannot support y’all on an official basis with modification to the plans.
In closing I’d like to say thanks to Mr. Garcia and Mr. Millar for bringing this proposal to me. As previously stated, I’d like to be part of this on a personal basis, but at this point in time would like to keep my “official” hat uninvolved.
------
Just a note for those who do not know. Mr. Garcia is Brooks..."SarraceniaObsessed"; Mr. Millar is "Bugweed"
Group, I have alredy responded to Carl's worries on the collecting issues he brought up here. I have assusred Carl that no field collecting will be done without permission (rescues an exception), and no one touches appendix 1 plants until all legalities are taken care of. We would like the ICPS to assist us, not be breathing down our necks. I informed Carl that we are after collected locale species first, then we will get down to business and collect with all permits and permission necessary to do the job we ache to do; preserving our plants, getting them back into the wild via our seedling and seed program, and into the hands of loving growers in the US. Carl will handle Canada as we discussed with him months ago, and I am sure there is no shortage of willing people to help out in Canada. This is for us all, and we must take great pains to let our Government Agencies know, we are serious, law abiding people, and we have a job to do to the benefit of our land and our country.
PlantAKiss
Moderator Schmoderator Fluorescent fluorite, Engl
Well spoken bugweed,and Mr. mazur,
Now I feel we need to get to drafting our preamble.We do not have to have a president in place for this as it makes more sence for the P. of the FNSC to first know the goals and desires of the people.Any takers? I would attempt a draft myself ,but I dont really have any legal advise to draw from. However, this may need to be discussed in open forum so we are all agreed.
I have not read any post suggesting a "rogue" unit. I for one find the support of the USFW
,and ICPS very benifical to our cause. Even if the support slows our inital progress what it cannot effect is our recording of known legitimate plants in cultivation,our election,and the legal documents needing to be prepared. The issues that may be impeaded by an endorsement from USFW or ICPS need to be stated very soon so work to resolve these issues can begin.If this is accomplished while at a beginning stage any hold ups we would normally face
can be resolved quickly. Again this is why I feel our preamble/mission statement
is a top priority.After the initial phase I believe support,and/or endorsements
from these orgs. will supplement our speed for the simple fact that while operating within there guidelines(I have read nothing to the contrary here)we are not constrained by their timetable.
Barry it was a pleasure ,and relief to hear from you.Thanks for all the great advise.
I am here still waiting(read: chomping at the bit)for any work I can do.I understand this may take some time.Until them I will be acting as a bullhorn emailing new listserve members as well as the ones I see have'nt made it to this thread.There is a CP lecture here in the Houston area May 22nd I will certanly be there representing the FNSC as I would hope this org. will have considerable structure by then.This so far is what I know to do.I am open to suggestions, so please feel free to contact me.
Now I feel we need to get to drafting our preamble.We do not have to have a president in place for this as it makes more sence for the P. of the FNSC to first know the goals and desires of the people.Any takers? I would attempt a draft myself ,but I dont really have any legal advise to draw from. However, this may need to be discussed in open forum so we are all agreed.
I have not read any post suggesting a "rogue" unit. I for one find the support of the USFW
,and ICPS very benifical to our cause. Even if the support slows our inital progress what it cannot effect is our recording of known legitimate plants in cultivation,our election,and the legal documents needing to be prepared. The issues that may be impeaded by an endorsement from USFW or ICPS need to be stated very soon so work to resolve these issues can begin.If this is accomplished while at a beginning stage any hold ups we would normally face
can be resolved quickly. Again this is why I feel our preamble/mission statement
is a top priority.After the initial phase I believe support,and/or endorsements
from these orgs. will supplement our speed for the simple fact that while operating within there guidelines(I have read nothing to the contrary here)we are not constrained by their timetable.
Barry it was a pleasure ,and relief to hear from you.Thanks for all the great advise.
I am here still waiting(read: chomping at the bit)for any work I can do.I understand this may take some time.Until them I will be acting as a bullhorn emailing new listserve members as well as the ones I see have'nt made it to this thread.There is a CP lecture here in the Houston area May 22nd I will certanly be there representing the FNSC as I would hope this org. will have considerable structure by then.This so far is what I know to do.I am open to suggestions, so please feel free to contact me.
Below you will find some prelimary thoughts. I started thinking in my head of a mission statement and a justification for having a National Collection. These two items are very important This may serve as starting point for someone to writeup some proposal. There needs to be a "plan" as barry pointed out! or this is sure to fail. Also in the mission, I think something should be said about this organization adhearing to all federal and/or state laws with regards to collection and dissemination of plant/seed material.
Might I also suggest that someone host a website to post updates on the status of the project and things of the like. Its quite difficult sifting through all this stuff on the forum to find definititve statements of what has been agree on, or who is doing what etc, etc. I can volunteer for this. But in order to do it, I would like to have direct emails from the "president" or whoever is organizing this. That way I'll post factual, accurate information. So when a mission is decided on, whoever is in charge, please let me know and I'll post it. When official positions are determined and board members, organization etc is determined, let me know.
Best
Carl
Mission
The mission of the National Sarracenia Collection is to serve as a living record of the taxonomic, morphological and genetic diversity of the genus Sarracenia . Furthermore, surplus seed/plant material from this collection shall be made available to carnivorous plant enthusiasts so that every interested grower has access to specimen material within the collection.
Rationale
Sarracenia is an endemic genus of carnivorous pitcher plants native to North America. With the exception of one species, all are confined to the south eastern region of the United States from southern Virginia to eastern Texas. Sarracenia are wetland species primarily inhabiting long leaf pine savannahs, seepage bogs, pocosins and other wetland habitats. It follows, that because the genus Sarracenia is almost entirely located within the US, a national collection should be located in the United States.
Sarracenia are rapidly disappearing from the wild. Currently, three of the ten species are listed as federally endangered and protected by federal law and state laws. In many states, the remaining species are also protected and considered threatened. In some states, populations of particular species are limited to single sites.
There are a number of factors that are contributing to the slow and steady demise of this genus. Of greatest concern is habitat destruction. It is estimated that as little as 2-3 % of the original pitcher plant habitats of the south eastern US are still extant. The pressures of urban expansion and drainage of land for agriculture are by far the greatest threats facing these plants. The destruction of Sarracenia habitat is happening at an alarming rate as the demand for land increases. Fire suppression is another contributing factor. Sarracenia are a fire dependant genus, requiring open, regularly burned habitats in order to thrive. Fire kills off competitive growth and over time. The suppression of fire allows habitats become overgrown and inhospitable to Sarracenia. A third factor is illegal collection or poaching by individuals for personal collections, or on a large scale for commercial gain. All these factors combined are painting a bleak future for the genus as a whole. Given the dismal future for these plants, a National Collection of Sarracenia is paramount.
It is becoming increasingly apparent that we are loosing countless specimens of Sarracenia in the wild due to the above factors. In the case of the endangered species of jonesii, alabamensis and oreophila, the National Collection would serve as a depository to save representatives of given populations. A living record of an extinct populations. Aside from the endangered species, there are many forms and mutations that are very rare in the wild. In some cases, some of these rarities have already been extirpated. For instance the anthocyanin free rubra jonesii, and rubra gulfensis exist only in private collections; their habitats destroyed or poached. The same may hold true for other anthocyanin free specimens as well as other unique gentic mutations or forms of Sarracenia. A national collection, would allow for a centralized depository for representative of these specimens. Should a particular specimen become extirpated in the wild, documented representatives will be held safely in the National Collection, to be viewed, shared and enjoyed for generations to come.
Plants within the genus of Sarracenia are prized among carnivorous plant enthusiasts. Their sheer beauty and natural variation make them one of the most popular carnivorous plants in cultivation. As previously noted, one of the pressures put on wild sarracenia populations is poaching and the illegal collection of plants. The impact may be as small as collecting a couple of plants for a personal collection or as large as extirpating an entire site (as in a rubra jonesii site) to sell for profit. Regardless of the magnitude, collection of wild plants can have a significant impact on remaining population. In the case of S. jonesii, S. alabamensis, S. oreophila, and rare populations of other species, illegal collection may have a long term effect on the populations long term viability and in extreme cases, lead to demise of the population. The more rare a plant specimen is, the more desireable it becomes to collectors, the more pressure there is poach, or for professional poachers to make these plants available to collectors. By making specimens of the national collection available to growers, especially rare specimens, the demand for poached plants will drop, thus alleviating that pressure on given populations.
Might I also suggest that someone host a website to post updates on the status of the project and things of the like. Its quite difficult sifting through all this stuff on the forum to find definititve statements of what has been agree on, or who is doing what etc, etc. I can volunteer for this. But in order to do it, I would like to have direct emails from the "president" or whoever is organizing this. That way I'll post factual, accurate information. So when a mission is decided on, whoever is in charge, please let me know and I'll post it. When official positions are determined and board members, organization etc is determined, let me know.
Best
Carl
Mission
The mission of the National Sarracenia Collection is to serve as a living record of the taxonomic, morphological and genetic diversity of the genus Sarracenia . Furthermore, surplus seed/plant material from this collection shall be made available to carnivorous plant enthusiasts so that every interested grower has access to specimen material within the collection.
Rationale
Sarracenia is an endemic genus of carnivorous pitcher plants native to North America. With the exception of one species, all are confined to the south eastern region of the United States from southern Virginia to eastern Texas. Sarracenia are wetland species primarily inhabiting long leaf pine savannahs, seepage bogs, pocosins and other wetland habitats. It follows, that because the genus Sarracenia is almost entirely located within the US, a national collection should be located in the United States.
Sarracenia are rapidly disappearing from the wild. Currently, three of the ten species are listed as federally endangered and protected by federal law and state laws. In many states, the remaining species are also protected and considered threatened. In some states, populations of particular species are limited to single sites.
There are a number of factors that are contributing to the slow and steady demise of this genus. Of greatest concern is habitat destruction. It is estimated that as little as 2-3 % of the original pitcher plant habitats of the south eastern US are still extant. The pressures of urban expansion and drainage of land for agriculture are by far the greatest threats facing these plants. The destruction of Sarracenia habitat is happening at an alarming rate as the demand for land increases. Fire suppression is another contributing factor. Sarracenia are a fire dependant genus, requiring open, regularly burned habitats in order to thrive. Fire kills off competitive growth and over time. The suppression of fire allows habitats become overgrown and inhospitable to Sarracenia. A third factor is illegal collection or poaching by individuals for personal collections, or on a large scale for commercial gain. All these factors combined are painting a bleak future for the genus as a whole. Given the dismal future for these plants, a National Collection of Sarracenia is paramount.
It is becoming increasingly apparent that we are loosing countless specimens of Sarracenia in the wild due to the above factors. In the case of the endangered species of jonesii, alabamensis and oreophila, the National Collection would serve as a depository to save representatives of given populations. A living record of an extinct populations. Aside from the endangered species, there are many forms and mutations that are very rare in the wild. In some cases, some of these rarities have already been extirpated. For instance the anthocyanin free rubra jonesii, and rubra gulfensis exist only in private collections; their habitats destroyed or poached. The same may hold true for other anthocyanin free specimens as well as other unique gentic mutations or forms of Sarracenia. A national collection, would allow for a centralized depository for representative of these specimens. Should a particular specimen become extirpated in the wild, documented representatives will be held safely in the National Collection, to be viewed, shared and enjoyed for generations to come.
Plants within the genus of Sarracenia are prized among carnivorous plant enthusiasts. Their sheer beauty and natural variation make them one of the most popular carnivorous plants in cultivation. As previously noted, one of the pressures put on wild sarracenia populations is poaching and the illegal collection of plants. The impact may be as small as collecting a couple of plants for a personal collection or as large as extirpating an entire site (as in a rubra jonesii site) to sell for profit. Regardless of the magnitude, collection of wild plants can have a significant impact on remaining population. In the case of S. jonesii, S. alabamensis, S. oreophila, and rare populations of other species, illegal collection may have a long term effect on the populations long term viability and in extreme cases, lead to demise of the population. The more rare a plant specimen is, the more desireable it becomes to collectors, the more pressure there is poach, or for professional poachers to make these plants available to collectors. By making specimens of the national collection available to growers, especially rare specimens, the demand for poached plants will drop, thus alleviating that pressure on given populations.
I don't want to sound like a broken record but, we need someone to draft a business plan. I believe this is a critical next step!
I would love to help but I am very busy at work. I live in Detroit/Flint, MI and work in Chicago. Ten hour days and some weekends. I'm sure there are many others in this position. I guess my point is I will help but my progress will be slow due to my work schedule.
Once we have a leader I suppose this can be worked out.
I am told there is a poll somewhere on the forum. I am going to try and find it.
At your service.
Glenn
I would love to help but I am very busy at work. I live in Detroit/Flint, MI and work in Chicago. Ten hour days and some weekends. I'm sure there are many others in this position. I guess my point is I will help but my progress will be slow due to my work schedule.
Once we have a leader I suppose this can be worked out.
I am told there is a poll somewhere on the forum. I am going to try and find it.
At your service.
Glenn
Carl, that is a great help, you definatly took a little weight off of my shoulders and stated it much better than I could have. For the time being, untill we can have a proper vote I am heading up the project. I am working on delegating resposibilty as we speak.
I just took this thing over, so I am un-sure of what everyone is currently working on. So if you are working on a project, could you please send me a pm stating what you are working on and your progress. That way I don't ask someone else to do something that is already being worked on.
PAK: Would you like to add anything or ammend the current mission statement as Carl has put it?
Paul
I just took this thing over, so I am un-sure of what everyone is currently working on. So if you are working on a project, could you please send me a pm stating what you are working on and your progress. That way I don't ask someone else to do something that is already being worked on.
PAK: Would you like to add anything or ammend the current mission statement as Carl has put it?
Paul
Hey All,
I've created a forum dedicated to this project. It's in general discussions just two below the conservation forum.
I'm going to move these to that location. If you need assistance in organization of the project when it comes to communications on here, let me know!
I have a few ideas... but I"ll just see how this works to start.
I've created a forum dedicated to this project. It's in general discussions just two below the conservation forum.
I'm going to move these to that location. If you need assistance in organization of the project when it comes to communications on here, let me know!
I have a few ideas... but I"ll just see how this works to start.
Moving to main topic, U.S. National Sarracenia Collection
http://www.petflytrap.com/cgi-bin/ib312/ikonboard.cgi?act=SF;f=30
http://www.petflytrap.com/cgi-bin/ib312/ikonboard.cgi?act=SF;f=30
nepenthes gracilis
Nepenthes Specialist
Quote:
"Sarracenia are rapidly disappearing from the wild. Currently, three of the ten species are listed as federally endangered and protected by federal law and state laws. In many states, the remaining species are also protected and considered threatened. In some states, populations of particular species are limited to single sites."
Then WHY are they disappearing. It seems the states don not enforce the laws or preservation quite well at all.
"Sarracenia are rapidly disappearing from the wild. Currently, three of the ten species are listed as federally endangered and protected by federal law and state laws. In many states, the remaining species are also protected and considered threatened. In some states, populations of particular species are limited to single sites."
Then WHY are they disappearing. It seems the states don not enforce the laws or preservation quite well at all.
If I can play devil's advocate:
While the goal of preserving Sarracenia is excellent, I'm not sure that a National Collection is the best way to do it.
Large collections are expensive and vulnerable: Funds run out. Caretakers become sick or die. Viruses spread among plants. Storms can destroy plants. Thieves or vandals can strike. Greenhouses burn down or freeze.
The record of ex-situ conservation is not good. Look at the great Victorian collections of Nepenthes and orchids. They were mostly gone in less than 100 years. The old clones that did survive were the ones that were widely distributed.
So, to maintain plants in cultivation, distribution is vital. A seedbank and studbook would be much less expensive if it were not linked to a national collection. Does everyone carefully pollinate their plants and distribute them to the ICPS seedbank? If so, the only innovation required is a studbook. Participants could list their plants and contact information. That would facilitate the trading of pollen and help preserve as much genetic diversity as possible. There's no need for any one collection to contain all the varieties, but hopefully each variety would eventually be distributed to more than one grower. Money that would have been spent on maintaining a national collection could be donated to organizations like the Nature Conservancy that purchase land.
In the long term, I suspect that attempting to maintain geographically pure plants in cultivation is doomed to failure. The risk of virus from prologed cultivation and frequent vegetative division is high. Just ask the orchid growers. Ex-situ conservation should focus on growing from seed ,frequent outcrossing, and propagation of horticulturally interesting plants to alleviate pressure on the remaining wild populations.
While the goal of preserving Sarracenia is excellent, I'm not sure that a National Collection is the best way to do it.
Large collections are expensive and vulnerable: Funds run out. Caretakers become sick or die. Viruses spread among plants. Storms can destroy plants. Thieves or vandals can strike. Greenhouses burn down or freeze.
The record of ex-situ conservation is not good. Look at the great Victorian collections of Nepenthes and orchids. They were mostly gone in less than 100 years. The old clones that did survive were the ones that were widely distributed.
So, to maintain plants in cultivation, distribution is vital. A seedbank and studbook would be much less expensive if it were not linked to a national collection. Does everyone carefully pollinate their plants and distribute them to the ICPS seedbank? If so, the only innovation required is a studbook. Participants could list their plants and contact information. That would facilitate the trading of pollen and help preserve as much genetic diversity as possible. There's no need for any one collection to contain all the varieties, but hopefully each variety would eventually be distributed to more than one grower. Money that would have been spent on maintaining a national collection could be donated to organizations like the Nature Conservancy that purchase land.
In the long term, I suspect that attempting to maintain geographically pure plants in cultivation is doomed to failure. The risk of virus from prologed cultivation and frequent vegetative division is high. Just ask the orchid growers. Ex-situ conservation should focus on growing from seed ,frequent outcrossing, and propagation of horticulturally interesting plants to alleviate pressure on the remaining wild populations.
Thanks for your post, but these issues have been addressed and are still being addressed. And the collection will be housed in one place, but the cultivation of their offspring will be all over the country by experienced and trained growers. I am not worried. We plan on getting out as much locale material we can to as many sources as possible. The problem of only one place was addressed long ago, and is a moot point. Still, a devil's advocate is valuable, and I will be looking further for your input. Thank you.
Perhaps the issue of viruses (for example) in a national collection in one location has been addressed, although I haven't noticed it in this thread. My general point is that a national collection is not the only way of preserving these plants, and the value of gathering all these plants into a single collection is not worth the cost/effort. While distribution of plants from a central collection is fine, distributing seed and pollen without the central collection would work, too, and might be better in the long term. All that is required is a good database.
A central collection might be a place for the public to see Sarracenias, but several collections scattered in different parts of the country would be better (And they already exist -- botanical gardens). The 'evangelistic' value of a Sarracenia collection doesn't depend on it being an exhaustive collection of all the different localities. All that is required is a nice display of several species.
So, if the central collection isn't required for the distribution and preservation of the plants, and if it isn't required for education and CP evangelism, then what is it required for? Would cost and effort of maintaining the national collection draw attention away from habitat protection?
For an example of what can be done without a central collection check out The orchid seedbank Project (http://members.cox.net/ahicks51/osp/) and the Meyer's conservancy (http://www.troymeyers.com). These two organizations help to preserve a huge number of orchid species, but they do it by taking advantage of smaller, pre-existing collections scattered all over the country.
regards.
A central collection might be a place for the public to see Sarracenias, but several collections scattered in different parts of the country would be better (And they already exist -- botanical gardens). The 'evangelistic' value of a Sarracenia collection doesn't depend on it being an exhaustive collection of all the different localities. All that is required is a nice display of several species.
So, if the central collection isn't required for the distribution and preservation of the plants, and if it isn't required for education and CP evangelism, then what is it required for? Would cost and effort of maintaining the national collection draw attention away from habitat protection?
For an example of what can be done without a central collection check out The orchid seedbank Project (http://members.cox.net/ahicks51/osp/) and the Meyer's conservancy (http://www.troymeyers.com). These two organizations help to preserve a huge number of orchid species, but they do it by taking advantage of smaller, pre-existing collections scattered all over the country.
regards.
Hi myrmecodia,
This is something I've thought a lot about as well and why I suggested such a decentralized collection. See my post toward the bottom of this page:
http://www.petflytrap.com/cgi-bin....5;st=40
for more on this.
Whatever way we choose will have to be the decision of whoever is involved, not one person. Everyone seems to have a different idea of what this is going to end up being, and most have valid points. Most likely we can work out a hybrid somewhere. However, individuals can do no more than suggest ideas until we get some kind of governing structure for this collection. Agreed? A goal and rationale we have - and Carl did a great job of outlining them. A specific plan has yet to be made. Could we elect or appoint a committe to form an official plan?
This is something I've thought a lot about as well and why I suggested such a decentralized collection. See my post toward the bottom of this page:
http://www.petflytrap.com/cgi-bin....5;st=40
for more on this.
Whatever way we choose will have to be the decision of whoever is involved, not one person. Everyone seems to have a different idea of what this is going to end up being, and most have valid points. Most likely we can work out a hybrid somewhere. However, individuals can do no more than suggest ideas until we get some kind of governing structure for this collection. Agreed? A goal and rationale we have - and Carl did a great job of outlining them. A specific plan has yet to be made. Could we elect or appoint a committe to form an official plan?
As acting President of this society, I would like to ask everyones input on our charter. This is our next step in this project getting off the ground. I am working with some great and knowledgable people in the community very closely. Now I want your ideas.
What do you think we should set for our 1 year goals? 3? 7?
What do you think our mission statement should say?
Any polocies that you think we should adopt? (besides the obvious legal ones)
Any other thoughts or ideas? Throw em out and lets discuss them. Thats what this Society is all about. Everyone has a voice to be heard.
I would also like to thank everyone for your support. Its amazing what has been acomplished in such a short time, but make no doubt about it, the hard part is yet to come. I feel we are a determined group and we shall prevail.
I have quoted it once, but it sticks in my head so much I feel I should quote it again.
"The only thing needed for evil to prevail, is for good men (people) to do nothing"
You have stood up and said "We will do something". Now it is time to act upon those words.
Feel free to contact me either by pm or e-mail at any time. I am here to serve.
Paul
What do you think we should set for our 1 year goals? 3? 7?
What do you think our mission statement should say?
Any polocies that you think we should adopt? (besides the obvious legal ones)
Any other thoughts or ideas? Throw em out and lets discuss them. Thats what this Society is all about. Everyone has a voice to be heard.
I would also like to thank everyone for your support. Its amazing what has been acomplished in such a short time, but make no doubt about it, the hard part is yet to come. I feel we are a determined group and we shall prevail.
I have quoted it once, but it sticks in my head so much I feel I should quote it again.
"The only thing needed for evil to prevail, is for good men (people) to do nothing"
You have stood up and said "We will do something". Now it is time to act upon those words.
Feel free to contact me either by pm or e-mail at any time. I am here to serve.
Paul
Finch
Whats it to ya?
[b said:
I want everyone to know that I beleive, in year 1, having plants in the cultivation in the orginazion is not a nessessety if many essential tasks have not been completed, altough it would be great if they were.
About the greenhouse where will it be placed, and how will we feed them? I have some suggestions, altough none without their drawbacks. Buying a prexisting greenouse would be cheaper than building one.
I think mybie a large opening in the sides or top of the greenhouse would alow insects to enter. It would also let pests in, tough. If there is a greenhouse, i think it should be in a place where these things grow naturally, thus to reduce cooling and heting costs. how will you keep them dormant? tempertures from where they are found would be sutible to overwinter them (it;s a little warmer in a greenhouse, so mayby a bit farther north?) A area with really clean tap water would also reduce costs, but, tap water chemestry is subject to changes. Also i suggest taking a close look at the ways commercial peopegators who mass produce plants solve the problems of sensetive plants with dormancy requierments, humidity, and pure water.
With these problems just remember
