Ethics of sending native seeds overseas

[Rimbaud]

this issue seems to be resolved and not controversial - i.e. most ppl i have talked to have come to the conclusion, whether they've thought about it carefully or not, that it is generally not ethical to send aussie seeds overseas. They generally cite two reasons:

1- ecological responsibility - i.e. fear of introducing "invasive species"
2- patriotic feelings - the feeling that aussies (including White australians, not only Aboriginals) should be the ones to develop aust native crops

so when i tell ppl i am one of the scorned few who hold the opposite opinion, i.e. i believe that (generally) sending our seeds overseas is good, i get flamed to buggery!

i came to this opinion after reading Theodoropoulos' "Invasion Biology - Critique of a Pseudoscience", but really it just confirmed what i thought to start with (i.e. i am biased, and it confirmed myh bias). it is especially relevant to aussies because many of the examples cited are aussie species (eucalypts, etc)

I encourage ppl to see an alternate view of this particular controversy, by reading this book. It's written by the famous & mysterious "J.L. Hudson, Seedsman", who likes to maintain his privacy (and has an awesome ethnobotanical catalogue!) http://www.jlhudsonseeds.net

The gist of his argument (after you've waded through the pages of examples) is that the main threat to the environment is not from stuff that's green ("invasive" foreign plants) but from humans and our activities. (i.e. destruction of habitat). What Theodoropoulos claims is that when you look closely at examples of "invasive alien species", the cause of the havoc wreaked is almost always due not to these exotics, but to the impact of human "development" on the land and sea, which weakens the resilience of the endemic plants, making them vulnerable to competition.

However i admit that those limited examples i have read about have all been filtered through some degree of bias, and i have done no original research in this area myself at all. So i don't claim that Theodoropoulos is demonstrably correct in his examples.

Even more controversially, he offers a psychological profile of the people who are most against exotics, comparing them to ideas promoted in Nazi Germany in the 1930s. You can take this bit or leave it. But his criticism is that many of these people are concerned about maintaing "racial purity" in plant populations, even though plants have an awkward habit of spreading when convenient. See they have these little things called "seeds", and when the wind blows, or when a bird eats a fruit.... well you get the idea. They spread.

Anyhow it's a controversial issue, always worth a debate.

[eataust]

All plants can become invasive weeds outside of their ideal environment ... plants aren't aware of human ethical dilemmas. Australian natives have been exported overseas for some considerable time and, being the adaptable things they have to be to survive here, have an interesting tendency to thrive wherever you dump them. Ti-tree (or is it paperbark?) is now, like the Aussie possum, a pest in NZ, and I think southern Africa has a problem with a variety of wattle that was deliberately imported there for its wood. There are gum trees all over the planet now - I've seen them in Italy and of course California. Personally, I kinda regards it as tit-for-tat, but I'm a bit strange in that regard.

As for the exclusive claim of the first inhabitants of this continent to the bushfoods - there, I do have a very personal ethical issue. I don't have Aboriginal background. I haven't even consulted extensively with Aboriginal people on the topic, although I did raise it at the excellent Umbarra Cultural Centre at Narooma, as that's local to one of the areas we're considering settling in. For the record, the mob there thought it was a fabulous idea and gave me contact names to take the issue further.

It's an issue that I think about long and hard, and very frequently. I've come to the conclusion that as long as information flow is two-way - that it's a proper trade, not a one-way vampiric suck - and that information is referenced suitably, then there's no reason why I can't use that knowledge to try and ensure that Australia's future actually holds some of its past.

For a start, Aboriginal use of bushfoods is small-scale. It's certainly appropriate for personal/small community purposes. But the Aboriginal people never needed to know how to grow crops to feed thousands at a time. We do; and we have the CSIRO and RIRDC and so on to work out how to do it. They build on that invaluable past knowledge to feed and sustain, as best and as ecologically as possible, all the future generations - regardless of what their cultural background might be.

Sitting on the sidelines wringing my hands because whitefella cultural sensitivities prevent me from using the information that's right there in front of me is just plain DAFT. Aboriginal people don't want that. What they want is for their knowledge, information, culture, past, traditions, and so on to be respected and disseminated appropriately. The same as any human wants, but what is so often withheld because of our tainted history.

This concept of trade - of swapping information between the cultural gap, rather than just handing down pronouncements saying "you WILL do it this way because our research says it's the way to be done" - is one I've been tentatively trying out on the Aboriginal Health section at my workplace after rather a lot of related research on the topic. Currently, the concept is sound. After all, Northern Aboriginal people were trading with the Macassans for centuries - trepang that went to the Indonesians and thence to the Chinese. Kakadu and New Guinean culture is heavily cross-influenced by this trade.

So why can't I trade knowledge to grow bushfoods?

[Bluetongue]

Hmm at times my permaculture and landcare selves argue vigorously amongst themselves on the subject of weeds.. and during my new age hippy stage I'm sure I was guilty of a fair amount of cultural appropriation.

Well I've sent some yam daisy seed overseas this week. Don't bother flaming me if you think that's devilish behaviour - please express your objections clearly and gently here

Why did I do it? Because I've advertised free seed in various places and have had very few nibbles from Australians. Because this seed is headed for a cattle raising area (just the sort of treatment that caused its demise locally) so isn't likely to become a weed in that location. And because I figure that endangered species deserve every opportunity to live.

[Rimbaud]

In my opinion there is simply nothing wrong with sending our seeds overseas to avid botanists and responsible folks.

Seeds disperse by bird poop, wind, sea currents, and other ways which are remarkably indifferent to the concerns of locals...

That's not to say that the wholesale flooding of exotic environments with our tough aussie plants is good... But that the small-scale planting of exotics, and the small-scale sending of native seeds to others like ourselves overseas, is fine, especially with the thoughtfulness that someone like BT has shown (thinking about its weed potential in the destination area, about its conservation status, etc.)

I feel righteous enough to say this since i would guess virtually every single forum member has planted a non-endemic/exotic plant (whether from another part of Oz or from overseas) at one time or another. And these are plants we've loved, too.

(where would i be today, without my Deadly Nightshade and poison Curare darts???????)

the issue of allowing foreigners to develop our native plants is different, i think, and revolves more around patriotism & economics.

[Lawrence]

As someone in the UK who would like to see if I could get bush plants to grow here.. I'd have to be a little more hopeful

Sharing plants seeds and information on bush life can only be positive, along with the growth in bush foods, not only does it introduce peoples in other countries to new experiences, it brings with it an interest in where it comes from, an interest in the conservation and an interest in the land.

[eataust]

i see no problem in sending stuff o/s if o/s wants it

why should we go getting precious now? after we imported everybody elses good stuff?

Well, because we know about environmental weeds and plant-borne diseases now ...

[Rimbaud]

ok i split the post into two, at Mulga's suggestion. The new thread relates to Knowledge and can be found in the pub, here

i know that some posts have stuff relating to BOTH topics so hopefully i havent stuffed everyone's train of thought up too much.

please continue this thread for "overseas seed sending"-type stuff.

[rev]

i see no problem in sending stuff o/s if o/s wants it

why should we go getting precious now? after we imported everybody elses good stuff?

Well, because we know about environmental weeds and plant-borne diseases now ...

true but doesnt the majority of the responsibility really lie with the reciever
in most cases a plant will not become a weed but when it looks to be you should take responsibility and eradicate it

there are a few notable excpetions in bushfood like sollya which is a real pest even within australia
but something like davidsonia pruriens jerseyana isnt going to go feral as its sterile

If the hawaian forestry dept hadnt collected the germplasm of macadamias for use trying to rehabilitate lava flows in hawaii - would we have a nut to praise today? seeing as how most of the original habitat was cleared

[rev]

my error its D johnsonii thats sterile

[tropicalbotanics]

Davidsonia johnsonii ISNT a sterile species AT ALL.
Where did you read that?

[boylesg]

this issue seems to be resolved and not controversial - i.e. most ppl i have talked to have come to the conclusion, whether they've thought about it carefully or not, that it is generally not ethical to send aussie seeds overseas. They generally cite two reasons:

1- ecological responsibility - i.e. fear of introducing "invasive species"
2- patriotic feelings - the feeling that aussies (including White australians, not only Aboriginals) should be the ones to develop aust native crops

so when i tell ppl i am one of the scorned few who hold the opposite opinion, i.e. i believe that (generally) sending our seeds overseas is good, i get flamed to buggery!

i came to this opinion after reading Theodoropoulos' "Invasion Biology - Critique of a Pseudoscience", but really it just confirmed what i thought to start with (i.e. i am biased, and it confirmed myh bias). it is especially relevant to aussies because many of the examples cited are aussie species (eucalypts, etc)

I encourage ppl to see an alternate view of this particular controversy, by reading this book. It's written by the famous & mysterious "J.L. Hudson, Seedsman", who likes to maintain his privacy (and has an awesome ethnobotanical catalogue!) http://www.jlhudsonseeds.net

The gist of his argument (after you've waded through the pages of examples) is that the main threat to the environment is not from stuff that's green ("invasive" foreign plants) but from humans and our activities. (i.e. destruction of habitat). What Theodoropoulos claims is that when you look closely at examples of "invasive alien species", the cause of the havoc wreaked is almost always due not to these exotics, but to the impact of human "development" on the land and sea, which weakens the resilience of the endemic plants, making them vulnerable to competition.

However i admit that those limited examples i have read about have all been filtered through some degree of bias, and i have done no original research in this area myself at all. So i don't claim that Theodoropoulos is demonstrably correct in his examples.

Even more controversially, he offers a psychological profile of the people who are most against exotics, comparing them to ideas promoted in Nazi Germany in the 1930s. You can take this bit or leave it. But his criticism is that many of these people are concerned about maintaing "racial purity" in plant populations, even though plants have an awkward habit of spreading when convenient. See they have these little things called "seeds", and when the wind blows, or when a bird eats a fruit.... well you get the idea. They spread.

Anyhow it's a controversial issue, always worth a debate.

Five issues with this:

1) Environmental weeds are a natural part of ecosystems and have been for millions of years. No doubt migratory birds are the biggest culprits for introducing them. However environmental weeds are no doubt introduced via this sort of mechanism at a rate of the order of 1 per 1000 years. That is plenty of time for the ecosystem to absorb it and for control vectors to arise before the next one arrives. Humans are introducing them at a rate of several hundred per year which simply swamps most ecosystems and fundamentally alters them within decades. This is no where near enough time for native fauna to adapt to the changes.

2) For many weeds land disturbance is not always necessary for them to invade and destroy relatively intact native bushland, e.g. Cape Broom, Gorse, Boxthorn.

3) There is already massive loss of native flora through catastrophic agricultural related land disturbance. Therefore it makes little sense to turn a blind eye to continued introduction of environmental weeds that will make a bad situation far worse.

4) Sending seeds overseas is a breach of Australian quarentine regulations. By law you must meet the quarentine requirements of the destination country to legally export biological materials from Australia. If I found evidence that you were illegally exporting seeds from Australia I am afraid I would not hesitate to point the authorities in your direction just as I would those people who illegally import seeds into Australia.

5) Government land managers, private land holders and catchment authorities have a legal obligation to control noxious weeds on their land and the lists of noxious weeds are growing year in year out from the enormous pool of environmental weeds that have been imported into the country. Weed control is currently costing our economy several billion dollars annually. So it hardly makes economic sense to ignore the environmental weed issue.

[boylesg]

In my opinion there is simply nothing wrong with sending our seeds overseas to avid botanists and responsible folks.

Seeds disperse by bird poop, wind, sea currents, and other ways which are remarkably indifferent to the concerns of locals...

That's not to say that the wholesale flooding of exotic environments with our tough aussie plants is good... But that the small-scale planting of exotics, and the small-scale sending of native seeds to others like ourselves overseas, is fine, especially with the thoughtfulness that someone like BT has shown (thinking about its weed potential in the destination area, about its conservation status, etc.)

I feel righteous enough to say this since i would guess virtually every single forum member has planted a non-endemic/exotic plant (whether from another part of Oz or from overseas) at one time or another. And these are plants we've loved, too.

(where would i be today, without my Deadly Nightshade and poison Curare darts???????)

the issue of allowing foreigners to develop our native plants is different, i think, and revolves more around patriotism & economics.

The reason why we have such a problem with environmental weeds throughout Australia and the rest of the world because there are a hundred million other individuals thinking precisely this:

"But that the small-scale planting of exotics, and the small-scale sending of native seeds to others like ourselves overseas, is fine, "

What you folks are failing to acknowledge is that you are part of a vastly larger whole and that what you do as individual has an enormous environmental impact combined with the hundred million other individuals thinking exactly the same thing!

As Steve Irwin says "Quarentine matters, don't muck with it". And that goes for exports as well as imports.

[boylesg]

i see no problem in sending stuff o/s if o/s wants it

why should we go getting precious now? after we imported everybody elses good stuff?

Well, because we know about environmental weeds and plant-borne diseases now ...

true but doesnt the majority of the responsibility really lie with the reciever
in most cases a plant will not become a weed but when it looks to be you should take responsibility and eradicate it

there are a few notable excpetions in bushfood like sollya which is a real pest even within australia
but something like davidsonia pruriens jerseyana isnt going to go feral as its sterile

If the hawaian forestry dept hadnt collected the germplasm of macadamias for use trying to rehabilitate lava flows in hawaii - would we have a nut to praise today? seeing as how most of the original habitat was cleared

This is all well and fine but the average Australian / world citizen does not have an adequate botany/horticultural knowledge to make an accurate assessment.

Unfortunately we have to cater for the majority lowest common denominator.

[Bluetongue]

Glad that others care about quarantine matters. I know some people think that rules are there to make lives unnecessarily difficult, but I'm too aware of the potential biological risks to want to sneak things through.

For me, I check with the authorities and when they can't help me assess certain species, I make sure the seed is clean and label it clearly for its trip through Customs.

[boylesg]

Glad that others care about quarantine matters. I know some people think that rules are there to make lives unnecessarily difficult, but I'm too aware of the potential biological risks to want to sneak things through.

For me, I check with the authorities and when they can't help me assess certain species, I make sure the seed is clean and label it clearly for its trip through Customs.

Incidently I have Yams in my Melbourne garden and even in highly disturbed urban soils it has been remarkably agressive self seeding all over the place from a single self pollenated plant. It is clearly a primary coloniser and hardly surprising that it was a staple food for southern Aboriginals.

This is a classic Australian species that is likely to become a serious environmental weed outside Australia. And we have contributors to this thread who have taken it upon themselves to decide that it poses no threat overseas without any scientific backing and contrary to experience in their garden.

Given the very poor state of native flora in this country and the general awareness of the environmental weed issue among native enthusiests, I am very disappointed that contributors to this forum would behave in such an irresponsible manor!