Live Plant Collection

[BarryRice]

Hey Folks,

You've heard it a bazillion times. Live plant collection is not justified about 99% of the time. But what constitutes 1%? And why do people say you shouldn't field collect, but have no problem doing so if they're collecting for an herbarium?

The reality is that sometimes, people do field collect, and I think with validity. I've thought about writing up ICPS policy to act as guidance in such situations, but every time I've considered the possible political backlash, I decided to do something safer, like stick my hand in a blender. Any thoughts or suggestions on what should go in such a policy statement?

I'm thinking I'd use the seed collection policy as a starting point...
www.carnivorousplants.org/statements/seedcollect.html

[Michael Catalani]

It may not be a bad idea to split the field collection into at least two categories with a policy on each:

A) Scientific Collection
B) Rescue Operations

I feel both are merited. As far as rescue operations are concerned, noone wants to see a field of CP asphalted over. But neither do we want to see a perfectly viable field stripped of CP because someone unfamilar with an area forms an incorrect opinion of the future viability of a site.

[pinglover]

This is a subject that interests me.

[pthiel]

I agree with Michael, this area probably needs to be divided into different classifications of field collection. I would be interested in a consensus of opinions on what situationally is required before a rescue should be considered. Also plants that are considered endangered by the government - what are their regulations on the legality of rescuing plants?

Cheers
Pete

[BarryRice]

I'm wondering, though, about the third category. This is the HARD category, but a very real one.

C)Collecting for horticulture

This is sometimes done upon first discovery (or rediscovery of a species)----Drosera meristocaulis or various pygmy/tuberous Drosera, for examples. But it is also done when a sport is detected of even a commonly cultivated species. I know I'd be thinking of my legal and ethical options if I found a red-flowered U. subulata!

To be really helpful, such a set of guidelines would cover these sorts of situations.

[Michael Catalani]

barryrice said:

I'm wondering, though, about the third category. This is the HARD category, but a very real one.

C)Collecting for horticulture

Yes, just in case that perfect cultivar is spotted in the field.

[houstonherp]

Barry, Michael et al -

The North American Sarracenia Conservancy has come up with what we feel are some decent guidelines for the first two situations noted (Scientific (or Field) Collection and Rescue Collection). The NASC conservation policies and procedures can be viewed at www.nasarracenia.org/ConservationPandP.html. Please let me know what you think about these; all feedback is good feedback!

As for collection for horticulture, this really IS a touchy one. I guess a good example of a potential method of responsibly doing so would be the collection of S. 'Leah Wilkerson' by Brooks Garcia. From what I understand about this cultivar, it was a genet of well over 50 plants in the wild, and Brooks collected only a minimal number of divisions to establish this cultivar in horticulture. This to me sounds like a sound basis for any horticultural collections.

As for a case where someone sees a single plant in the wild that is unique, I say why not enjoy the plant in its natural setting? In the case of Sarracenia, there is the potential for vegetative propagation, resulting in multiple plants in the wild over time. But what about an annual Drosera? Is it really ethical to collect the only specimen from the wild?

Man, Barry, talk about a controversial subject...

Regards,

Mike Howlett
National Head Grower
North American Sarracenia Conservancy
www.nasarracenia.org
[e-mail]

[purpman]

Like everything else these days, there seems to be an overwhelming concern for political correctness and nobody being outspoken or speaking what they truely feel for fear of the Political Correct reaper coming to get you!

This PC world has even bled into the world of the hobbyist. There is no question that collection for herbarium or on private property by permission is all very black and white, but as Barry pointed out, collecting for horticultural reasons seems to be very gray and seems to clamp everybody up in fear that someone is going jump all over them.

Well let me start the fire. How do you think all the great variation in the carnivorous plant world came into collections in the first place? Someone had to dig them up! I don't think there's anything wrong with digging up a unique plant especially if you cannot find out who owns the land its on.

Many unique finds have come into horitculture because when someone found it they brought a piece home. Do you think the person who found the yellow flowered variant of rubra wherryii worked really hard to find out who owned the ditch it was found in? I doubt it. That was something that had to be done at the moment. Look at the all other unique sarracenia that have come into cultivation, especially flower variants, color variants and AF variants. Those plants are in cultivation because someone dug one up, brought it home, propped it like crazy and shared! That's the joy of horticulture.

In no way am I condoning digging up a field of leucos because they're pretty! what I'm saying is that if you find a very very unique plant in a field of leuco's its worth taking out knife and cutting off a division. Its funny as I site this example, I was in the gulf a number of years ago and found an amazing leuco in a field of leucos. It was red with pink where the white should have been. I'd never seen a plant like that before, I took some great pics, but after long dileration (you should have seen me staring at it... like a trance) I opted not to take a division.... The PC reaper got the best of me at that point. Every time is see the picture of that plant I kick myself. It would surely have made an incredible addition to the fans of sarracenia. Oh well.... whatchya gonna do.

Anyway to sum up my view on the horticulture excuse to dig a plant here's what I think.

My reasoning only applies to unique finds, as explained above, in no way to I condone digging a plant when they are widely available in cultivation. Any, if you do find a unique new plant, try to find out who owns the land and get permission, failing that, grab a pocket knife and take a division, prop it like crazy and share!!!!

OK fire started....

purpman.

[Michael Catalani]

houstonherp said:

The North American Sarracenia Conservancy has come up with what we feel are some decent guidelines for the first two situations noted (Scientific (or Field) Collection and Rescue Collection). The NASC conservation policies and procedures can be viewed at www.nasarracenia.org/ConservationPandP.html. Please let me know what you think about these; all feedback is good feedback!

I'm going to go back and read this in more detail (when I dont have kids running around me), but I like the setup. If a person notifies a responsiible organization that they are about to undertake a rescue operation, then the more likely it is that there is a legitimate rescue that needs to be performed.

If a person simply drives by a location and forms the opinion that there are plants that need to be rescued, but doesnt want to notify anyone that he is about to take some plants, the more likely it is that the plants dont need to be rescued in the first place. Open communication with other responsible parties is absolutely key. The more a person is willing to contact an organization that a rescue needs to be made, then the more more likely it was that the person actually contacted the landowner, which ultimately results in finding out for certain that the plants needed to be rescued.

As for a case where someone sees a single plant in the wild that is unique, I say why not enjoy the plant in its natural setting?

Excellent point. At a very minimum, they should observe the plant for at least two growing seasons in the wild to ensure that the traits that make it unique are stable. If there is a field of plants with similar traits, then the traits are probably quite stable. But if there is only a single specimen with the unique trait(s), then there is the possibility that the traits arent stable, and there wouldnt be a reason to remove the plant.

[BarryRice]

Purpman makes an excellent point, when he asks "How do you think all the great variation in the carnivorous plant world came into collections in the first place." (Remember, though, we're specifically talking about plant collection, not seed collection.)

However, I think its also important to bear in mind that we're living in a changing world. I think---viewing from the lens of year 2007---that back in the 1970s, CP enthusiasts were having less impact when they were collecting plants. But in 2007, we face a different situation.

I do think that there is a place for appropriate collection of plants for horticultural purposes. (Is it shocking to hear me say this?) But such practices should be done in a way so as not to be harmful to wild populations of plants. For entities such as new species being discovered or not in cultivation, simple rules such as used in scientific work might be applicable, such as the 1-in-20 collection rule I use when collecting Utricularia for scientific purposes (and I don't collect if there are fewer than 20 plants).

But what does one do when a single clone that is encountered in the wild has special attributes? Collect a growth tip? But will that damage from your knife cause mortality of the plant? How do you ensure that six other people don't take cuttings from that plant, too?

So I restate my premise, that I think that there is a place for appropriate collection of plants for horticultural purposes. But what are those guidelines? I've never codified them in a way that I think is consistent and appropriate, so I've never collected live plants for horticulture. But I think that guidelines would be useful.

[sunbelle]

Purpman stated:

"I was in the gulf a number of years ago and found an amazing leuco in a field of leucos. It was red with pink where the white should have been. I'd never seen a plant like that before, I took some great pics, but after long dileration (you should have seen me staring at it... like a trance) I opted not to take a division.... The PC reaper got the best of me at that point. Every time is see the picture of that plant I kick myself."

Yep. And you go back two years later, and it's gone the way of the bulldozer blade. Now that exceptional clone is NOT in nature, AND is NOT in cultivation. Good post, purpman.

[pthiel]

purpman said:

My reasoning only applies to unique finds,

What percentage of the ICPS membership would be able to make the judgment that a plant differing from those around it in the wild was unique and not a separate species or common hybrid? I think that this could be used to justify a lot of field collection by those of us without the experience to realize the difference that would truly make a plant unique.

cheers
Pete

[houstonherp]

I think there is a vast difference between taking a division of a mature plant with multiple growth points, and digging up an entire plant. If there are sufficient growth points to allow for a minimally impactful collection to take place, AND there is landowner permission (no gray area here!), then why not? What I was referring to above is the kind of person who sees a single plant with unique characteristics, in the wild, and digs up the whole thing. This I would not condone under any circumstances.

Using the scenario that Purpman shared with us, if this pink-spotted leuco plant had multiple growth points, and the collection of ONE of those growth points could be done in a sensitive manner, WITH LANDOWNER APPROVAL, then I would say this is acceptable. But if there were only one or two growth points, or if landowner approval were not possible, then I would not do it.

Barry brings up another good point: we are looking at any particular site at a single moment in time. Who's to say that this same 'pink-spotted leuco' trait hasn't been exhibited numerous times over the years, but died back? We can only see what is there at the moment, and must be cautious in our actions based on that.

Also, if this trait is morphologically evident at the site, then the genetics for that specific trait must be carried by other plants at the site. Why not just collect some seeds from various plants at the site, and see what grows?!? It's a gamble, but sometimes the rewards are REALLY neat! AND you haven't removed the only example of this trait being morphologically apparent from the population.

Trent/Sunbelle - This is where increasing awareness comes in. If the sites are documented well, and if enough people are out there checking the condition of these existing sites on a regular basis, then we stand a chance of knowing when development occurs. Then we can treat the site as a rescue collection.

I still think that education is the key...education of the public, of the politicians, of the landowners, and even of our own ranks, so that we can all work together to 1) reduce/eliminate the destruction of what few habitats exist, and 2) rescue plants when habitat preservation is not possible.

[purpman]

I've noticed people commenting on the division method VS digging up an entire unique plant. I have to to agree that its preferable to divide the plant. I've been growing Sarracenia for 25 years now and I've pulled plants out of pots and torn them up to share with people and they survive just fine. So I think using a knife and removing a piece won't damage the parent plant.

I don't remember who made the comment about returning to find a bulldozer had "collected" all the plants... but again a story from my travels, I found a very unique burkii many years ago, it was a veinless plant, red growth point and pinkish tinge to the leaves in spots, but veinless! There were a number of clones there all with the same coloration. I immediately figured I should dig up a couple plants, however, I regrouped, and got out my knife and removed a couple of crowns. One the progeny from this original plant was registered as a cultivar name in honour of my wife by a friend I sent seed to in the UK. He found this to be a striking plant and as it was me he sent him the seed, he named it Melissa Mazur. I guess he used her name because it sounds nicer than mine and the plant had a pinkish hue, I don't know. But regardless its now in cultivation and quite an amazing plant.

I returned to the site 4 years later to check on the "Melissa" population only to find that the ditch had been dreadged and all exhisting plant life scoured off the surfaces of the sides of the ditch. It was fresh too, probably that spring. Suffice it to say, that particular variant is gone... at least from that location!!!!

So again, I reiterate, I think there are valid times to collect wild plants.

Regardless of how you cut it though, Barry makes a good point, wild collecting now is a much different thing than in the 70's. You could dig plants then and not really have to worry as there was still a lot of habitat, but now, its a different story, if you're going to wild collect it better be for a good reason.

purpman

[sunbelle]

We have gone to numerous sites in the panhandle to find them bulldozed. We have collected with land owner's permission, and in fact, one guy and his wife encouraged that we take the plants because they knew that the part of the roadside where they grew was soon to be herbicided. We go along with the 'take a division of a selected clone' idea otherwise. Tomorrow (Saturday) we are driving up to a S. minor site we haven't seen in two years. It was slated to become part of a new Industrial Park, and some friends of ours were involved in moving as many of the minors as possible to another site. No way to move them all-way too many. What is interesting: these minors may be the southeastern most stand of Sarracenia in North America. They are located east of I-95 in southern St. Lucie County, a considerably warmer climate than Okeechobee. Anyway, if there's anything left, we'll take pictures.