# Attention Everyone: this will impact you all



## northtexasfossilguy

http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/newsmedia/releases/?req=20100218b&nrtype=wildlife&nrspan=&nrsearch=

TPWD Seeks Input on Prospective List of Approved Exotic Aquatic Plants

AUSTIN - Attractive as ornamentals and functional in some applications, invasive aquatic plants can also pose a threat to the state's natural resources. To provide appropriate opportunities for use of certain non-native aquatic plants and algae without risking impacts to the state's natural resources, the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department is looking for help compiling a prospective list of exotics that could be allowed for sale in Texas.

The department has been directed by the Texas Legislature to finalize an approved list of exotic aquatic plant species by the end of the year. Currently, TPWD maintains a prohibited list to restrict importation and possession of aquatic exotic plants in Texas. This requires continued monitoring and revision of the list as new species are introduced.

In addition to gathering input on commercially traded species from stakeholders who buy and sell exotic aquatic plants, TPWD is looking to get input from the public during a series of open meetings in March (see schedule below). A draft listing of exotic aquatic plants under consideration for sale in Texas can be found at http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/business/feedback/public_comment/proposals/exotic_aquatic_plants/.

TPWD plans to conduct a risk analysis of prospective plant species to determine which ones might be included in an acceptable list. By creating an approved plant list, the department and plant enthusiasts can work collectively to protect the state's natural resources by allowing only those species that pose minimal or no threat to the environment.

"We believe this approach is the most efficient way to prevent the introduction of invasive exotics into the ecosystem," said Dr. Earl Chilton, TPWD's exotic vegetation program manager. "Most folks want to do what's right for the environment and knowing which exotic aquatics are acceptable will hopefully eliminate inadvertent introduction."

The introduction of harmful exotic (invasive) plant species into Texas and throughout the U.S. has been on the increase in recent years. Collectively, these species can and do have tremendous negative impacts on our environment and our economy. Costs associated with control and eradication of invasive species (terrestrial and aquatic) in the United States has been estimated at more than $100 billion annually.

Anyone interested in this issue can contact Dr. Earl Chilton at 512-389-4652; [email protected] or Ken Kurzawski 512-389-4591; [email protected].
Exotic Aquatic Plant Public Meeting Schedule - All meetings begin at 7 p.m. City Date Location
Corpus Christi March 1, 2010 TPWD Law Enforcement Office, 5541 Bear Lane, Suite 232
Fort Worth March 1, 2010 Cabela's, 12901 Cabela's Drive
Houston March 3, 2010 TPWD Law Enforcement Office, 10101 Southwest Freeway #206
San Antonio March 3, 2010 TPWD Law Enforcement Office, 858 W. Rhapsody
Austin March 4, 2010 TPWD Headquarters, Commissioners Hearing Room, 4200 Smith School Road
Brownsville March 4, 2010 TPWD Law Enforcement Office, 5460 Paredes Line Road, Suite 201
El Paso March 8, 2010 TPWD Law Enforcement Office, 401 E. Franklin, Room 179


----------



## northtexasfossilguy

Texgal, you and the other experts need to review this list and add to it anything you can possibly think of:

http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/business/feedback/public_comment/proposals/exotic_aquatic_plants/

I personally feel that educating people is a program that will have better effects than sitting there banning plants, but that is my personal opinion. It makes me furious when governments ban plants of any kind, for one thing I don't think prohibition ever works to any effectiveness.

I think its people who buy a 10 gallon from Petsmart or Petco and release it all a week later when their fish die, I really don't think it is educated people. Handing pamphlets at stores, in fact requiring them to do so when people are clearly new to the hobby and uninformed, would be a better approach in my opinion.

Please attend the meetings to have your voices heard, and email any plants you can possibly think of to the emails on the page.

Thanks guys.


----------



## Phil Edwards

Let them ban all they want, it keeps me in work! lol.:flock:

Truth be told, that looks like a pretty comprehensive list as far as commercial sales go. Let's be honest with ourselves here, how many of us really, and I mean *really*, pay attention to the legality of all the species we keep; and we're the informed minority. This list will go a long way to keeping the idiots who dump plants and fish from buying the really nasty stuff in stores.


----------



## alexopolus

I guess I will soon have a illegal tank lol. All my plants are in that list...


----------



## niko

Long gone are the days when I knew all aquatic plants in the hobby by their Latin name. Now all I know is what plant does well in certain conditions. And not for all the new plants.

But I remember the time when I had 60+ species of plants in a tank at 68F. None of them grew. Just the Java Moss, but really really slow. I guess you can say that most of the tropical aquatic plants will die when winter comes. Excluding San Marcos river that stays at 72 or so year round. And probably excluding some other bodies of water.

I also guess that all it takes is a single invasive species to make good it here in Texas and we will have a problem.


----------



## Tex Gal

How absurd! SO instead of deciding what to ban they have decided what to approve??!! That seems so stupid to me. Their list only contains 96 plants!! There are thousands (millions?) that they've never heard of. Just a blanket ban?

I hesitate to add anything to the list. It's probably just a way to make sure plants don't get on the list. That way they take stock of what we have access to. And... why the concentration on water plants? Why so narrow a vision? The state hasn't taken this approach on land plants.

I get so sick of big government trying to regulate everything!


----------



## Tex Gal

I just spoke with Representative Rob Orr's office. They don't know why it was an acceptable list vs a banned list. They don't know why the federal noxious weed list isn't enough. (They didn't even know there was a federal noxious weed list!) It's the blind leading the blind. They don't care if it makes sense. They just know there is a problem so they want to throw legislation at it. It's so frustrating to me.


----------



## northtexasfossilguy

I think you are probably 100% right that its trying to find out what we have access to.

The ones on the list are the ones approved for sale, not ones they are trying to ban or anything. I'd like to hear what the two guys compiling the list have to say.

And Texgal you are absolutely right, but I would have to admit that personally I am in favor of banning some of the Asian and otherwise foreign land plants for planting outdoors. If somebody wants them in a greenhouse that would be fine, but like the Kudzu vine, some of these plants are literally destroying ecosystems or rather (more scientifically) drastically changing them. There are a bunch of plants like that; Privet, etc.

There have been cases of people putting aquatic plants in ponds and stuff. We all know about San Marcos with Cryptocoryne and Elephant Ears and Lake Caddo area with its awful frog bit problem.

This is a story from Brett Johnson, TPWD rep for Dallas County:
One of the Parks and Wildlife people thought it would be a good idea to put "Parrot's feather" (I believe he is referring to _Myriophyllum aquaticum_) in a pond near one of their offices. It took over like crazy and during the summer when the pond hits 80 or so it dies and causes anoxia, killing everything in the pond. Somehow it keeps coming back, and has spread to a nearby pond.

Blind leading the blind may be more accurate than you think if this is any indication of their own actions.

The difference for us, I believe, is that we keep this indoors and they aren't affecting the environment as long as we dispose of them properly (ie let them rot a bit and put them in the trash or let them rot in your compost pile, you know the drill.)

I fear much more for the release of BBA into the water system personally. It wreaks havoc on our own tanks, so there is no telling what it would do to wild plants if given the opportunity. There is no turning up the CO2 and turning off the lights in nature, and I personally believe that algaes, diseases, and bacterias released on accident with water changes are a similar, if not completely uncontrollable threat, more so than releasing non-native plants and fish.

Like I had said, I am going to advocate the TPWD make pamphlets to inform people that they should not dump aquarium organisms into the environment and have them keep it at all pet stores. Most people get started that way I think, and if they advocated people join clubs and groups they would certainly become more informed faster and be less apt to make catastrophically bad decisions.


----------



## Phil Edwards

What I read from the website was this is a list of species that will be approved for sale within Texas, not a comprehensive list of species that are allowed to be kept in the state. As hobbyists we'll still have access to all the online vendors, mail order houses, and person to person trade resources we've always had. We'll get the plants we want one way or the other.

On the bright side, it'll keep the stupid people from getting a hold of the really bad species and dumping them into a waterway. 

Regarding the control of aquatics vs. terrestrials, it's much harder to control aquatics once they get loose. Herbicides get diluted or washed downstream, fragments get loose during dredging and start new colonies elsewhere, birds eat the plants and seeds get distributed widely etc. The major issue with invasive aquatics isn't fragmentation or clonal growth as much as it is SEED and TUBER. As soon as a seed bank of these species gets established there's hell to pay. Seeds, tubers, rhizomes, etc can easily overwinter here in TX. Hell, we've got ponds at LAERF that we can't use for much except Hydrilla studies because the sediment's rife with tubers and that's on a very carefully monitored research facility. 

As for the thoughts of the blind leading the blind, the state and nation have their own professional environmental agencies. It's not up to our elected officials to know all of the ins and outs of environmental law or whatnot. Politicians get advised by professionals and experts in their field. I like the example of that office tossing Myriophyllum into their pond and killing it. That's a perfect picture of what's going on all over the state.

I agree with you NTXFG, advocacy and awareness are key. It's easier to add than subtract. If this thing gets passed it's up to us, as informed and concerned citizens, to work on getting the list expanded in the future.


----------



## Tex Gal

You can't outlaw stupid. I understand that this is a list of "acceptable sales" in Texas. 96 plants out of 1,000s! How reasonable is that? Has anyone thought of the impact this might have on the businesses? There are so many common names for plants - and mis-Id's that I still think this isn't going to get them what they want. Can you imagine them trying to flower the plants for correct ID to bring a case or fine? The vendors buy according to whatever name is put on the plant. 

Yes, I understand the problem of plants corrupting water ways and such. But, at the same time, they have laws now that are for this very thing (noxious weed lists). Has that stopped it? No! Just because there is a problem doesn't mean throwing legislation at it will fix it.

We have people buying terrestrial plants for aquatic now. Will this increase the offering of them to unsuspecting buyers? I wager to say that it will. People that want a variety will get them some way or another. They are the responsible ones anyway. It just makes it more difficult. I'd much rather they educate "stupid" as opposed to legislate it. Legislation hasn't worked yet.

Nature has always been survival of the fittest. Who's to say what is actually "native" to Texas anyway? Plants have migrated to islands in the middle of the ocean with no help from humans. We just think we are more powerful than we are. Native species have been reintroduced to nature because someone cared enough to collect and care for them. The only side of an issue isn't just the down side of it. There's always an up side too. We just don't have enough foresight or knowledge to consider or even recognize all the aspects. 

If they took that money and used it for education it would make more sense; ...like requiring the vendors to supply a warning about spreading plants in the wild. That makes much more sense to me. 

We are fast loosing our freedoms. It irks me![smilie=c:


----------



## Phil Edwards

Here's a big ol :grouphug: for all of y'all getting irked along with our beloved Tex Gal. We may not all be able to agree on politics, but damn, we can all agree that we should be able to put a ban on stupid. :banplease:banplease:banplease:banplease:banplease:banplease:banplease:banplease:banplease:banplease:banplease:banplease:banplease:banplease:banplease:banplease:banplease:banplease:banplease:banplease:banplease:banplease:banplease:banplease:banplease:banplease


----------



## Tex Gal

The meeting is TONIGHT, March 1, n Fort Worth,at Cabela’s, 12901 Cabela’s Drive. I'm gonna try to go. I hope others of you will be there. I'm bringing a list with me. Bring your lists too.


----------



## northtexasfossilguy

You ought to voice your concerns about the approved list instead of a banned list as well Texgal, I'll be there I guess. Long night since I'm campaigning also.. ahh..


----------



## Tex Gal

Just got back from this meeting. Only 5 people attended. The person who presented and officiated was Dr. Earl Chilton. He said while the TWPD has been mandated by the legislature to compile this list of acceptable plants. When asked he said they are also the ones who suggested this list to the legislature. He is wanting input as to what should be on this list. I gave him a list of 145 plants. He's wanting plants sold in TX. The silly thing is that the hobby stores can order whatever the big growers have available. He already knows about the big growers. 

It seems so useless to me. Too many problems. Wrong plant ID's. Not enough people to police shipments. Too bad they didn't put the legislative focus on making the distributors educate along with their sales. That would have made so much more sense.


----------



## Phil Edwards

Oh man, I'm bummed I missed it. It sucks to see something like this potentially go bad because of lack of interest/participation on the part of sellers as well as the informed public. Thank you very much for going and voicing the concerns of responsible hobbyists Drinda!


----------



## northtexasfossilguy

They also have no distinction between people like us who attempt to know what we are doing and Joe Dirt who keeps goldfish and africans and dumps it all into the San Marcos river when he kills his favorite piece of coral (in the same tank).

It is ridiculous for people like us to have to fly under the radar when we are doing nothing wrong, and that seems like its going to have to be that way. From what I can tell they have no funding and all they want to do is shut down big producers of some of the invasives. The real problem comes in leaving such open legislation, meaning the Game Warden can just waltz in my home and say "thats illegal thats illegal thats illegal thats illegal... 500, 500, 500, 500, 500" and effectively screw us over. That is my personal fear with this, considering that I take every precaution to keep what is in my aquarium out of the watersheds, as do most of you.

Their biggest problem is salvinia and zebra mussels, neither of which are kept in the home aquarium.

I think their list is more "feel-good" legislation and I have no doubt the aquarium trade is unaffected in those other states currently, considering the number of forums out there and the way we all do business with each other via craigslist and the internet. The real threat of this goes against importers and bulk-growers. Right now the good thing is that they don't have the funding to support a staff that investigates this, but the problem is that they will be continually raking in money with tickets and fines.

My opinion is "stay the hell out of my home and go work on wildlife".

Another funny thing was that they were saying "we spent millions trying to clean up the San Marcos river" and they never ask people like us for help. They never say, "Okay everybody we are having a volunteer day to pull up Cryptocorynne" no they use government people instead of free volunteers.

Sorry I am ranting, I am just tired of wasteful spending and more taxes to cover it up, which is exactly what this is, an "Exotic Aquatic Plant tax." You have to apply for a permit to own each individual species, same with importing it. This is a financial barrier as it will likely cost you and me several hundred dollars _per species_ if we want to own it in our own homes. I hope you all really start to take this seriously and help fight against it.


----------



## northtexasfossilguy

http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PW/htm/PW.66.htm#66.007

Sec. 66.007. EXOTIC HARMFUL OR POTENTIALLY HARMFUL FISH, SHELLFISH, AND AQUATIC PLANTS. (a) No person may import, possess, sell, or place into water of this state exotic harmful or potentially harmful fish, shellfish, or aquatic plants except as authorized by rule or permit issued by the department.

(b) The department shall publish a list of:

(1) exotic fish and exotic shellfish for which a permit under Subsection (a) is required; and

(2) exotic aquatic plants, as provided by this section, that are approved for importation into or possession in this state without a permit.

(c) The department shall make rules to carry out the provisions of this section. In adopting rules that relate to exotic aquatic plants, the department shall strive to ensure that the rules are as permissive as possible without allowing the importation or possession of plants that pose environmental, economic, or health problems.

(d) A fish farmer may import, possess, or sell harmful or potentially harmful exotic fish species as provided by Section 134.020, Agriculture Code.

(e) In this section:

(1) "Approved list" means the list published by the department under Subsection (b)(2) of exotic aquatic plants that a person may import into or possess in this state without an exotic species permit issued by the department.

(2) "Exotic aquatic plant" means a nonindigenous aquatic plant that is not normally found in aquatic or riparian areas of this state.

(3) "Exotic fish" means a nonindigenous fish that is not normally found in the public water of this state.

(4) "Exotic shellfish" means a nonindigenous shellfish that is not normally found in the public water of this state.

(f) A fish farmer may not import, possess, propagate, or transport exotic shellfish unless the fish farmer furnishes evidence required by the department showing that the shellfish are free of disease.

(g) The commission may adopt rules to control a disease or agent of disease transmission that:

(1) may affect penaeid shrimp species; and

(2) has the potential to affect cultured species or other aquatic species.

(h) If one or more manifestations of disease is observed in any cultured marine penaeid shrimp species, the department shall immediately place the aquaculture facility under quarantine condition. The department shall determine, by rule, the meaning of "manifestation of disease" and "quarantine condition" under this section.

(i) The department may coordinate with the Texas Animal Health Commission regarding testing for diseases.

(j) Except as provided in Subsection (k), an operator of an aquaculture facility under quarantine condition may not discharge waste or another substance from the facility except with approval of the department and a wastewater discharge authorization from the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission.

(k) Even if under quarantine condition, an aquaculture facility shall discharge wastewater or another substance as necessary to comply with an emergency plan that has been submitted to and approved by the department and incorporated into a wastewater discharge authorization issued by the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission.

(l) On receiving notice from an owner of the observance of manifestations of disease, the department shall immediately:

(1) notify the Department of Agriculture, the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, and the Texas Animal Health Commission; and

(2) advise the Department of Agriculture, the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, and the Texas Animal Health Commission regarding the appropriate action to be taken.

(m) A person may not import into or possess in this state an exotic aquatic plant unless:

(1) the plant is on the approved list; or

(2) the person has an exotic species permit issued by the department.

 In compiling the approved list, the department shall develop a process to evaluate the potential harm that may be caused by the importation or possession of exotic aquatic plant species into this state. The process must include the use of:

(1) a risk assessment model to help determine the potential harm of a species to the aquatic environment;

(2) published scientific research findings;

(3) findings from regulatory agencies; or

(4) scientific analyses from third-party laboratories.

(o) The approved list must include an exotic aquatic plant that:

(1) is widespread in this state; and

(2) is not, as determined by the department, a cause of environmental, economic, or health problems.

(p) The department shall develop an expedited process for obtaining approval for inclusion on the approved list of a previously unknown exotic aquatic plant. The commission may remove an exotic aquatic plant from the approved list if the results of further analysis conducted under Subsection  indicate that the plant should not be on the list. The department may enact an emergency rule as provided by Chapter 2001, Government Code, to remove an exotic aquatic plant from the approved list if the plant is determined to cause environmental, economic, or health problems.

(q) The commission shall exercise final approval for the inclusion of each plant on the approved list.

(r) In accordance with commission rules, the department may issue an exotic species permit to a permit applicant for an exotic aquatic plant not on the approved list if the proposed use of the plant is:

(1) as an experimental organism in a medical or other scientific research program approved by the department;

(2) as part of an exhibit approved by the department in a public aquarium or public zoo; or

(3) for an appropriate use that will not result in potential environmental, economic, or health problems.

(s) Nothing in this subchapter regarding exotic aquatic plants restricts the department's authority under this code regarding exotic harmful or potentially harmful fish or shellfish.

Acts 1975, 64th Leg., p. 1405, ch. 545, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1975. Amended by Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 267, art. 3, Sec. 110, eff. Sept. 1, 1985; Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 637, Sec. 8, eff. Sept. 1, 1989; Acts 1991, 72nd Leg., ch. 586, Sec. 6, eff. Sept. 1, 1991; Acts 1999, 76th Leg., ch. 1239, Sec. 7, eff. Sept. 1, 1999.

Amended by:

Acts 2009, 81st Leg., R.S., Ch. 952, Sec. 14, eff. September 1, 2009.


----------



## northtexasfossilguy

http://www.sunset.state.tx.us/81streports/tpwd/tpwd_fr.pdf

Here is the Sunset review on the agency which explains the "Approved List" recommendation.


----------



## Tex Gal

Pretty horrid. Still makes me mad.


----------



## northtexasfossilguy

I talked with them and they said they are probably going to grandfather all of us in as being legal, they said they are primarily going to target large-scale distributors and visit their shops and inform them of the rules and the approved list before enforcement of it. 

They said they are not going to police peoples homes either, simply they lack the resources and really don't have the desire to do it. I still don't like policies that enable them to do so though...


----------



## Tex Gal

northtexasfossilguy said:


> I talked with them and they said they are probably going to grandfather all of us in as being legal, they said they are primarily going to target large-scale distributors and visit their shops and inform them of the rules and the approved list before enforcement of it.
> 
> They said they are not going to police peoples homes either, simply they lack the resources and really don't have the desire to do it. I still don't like policies that enable them to do so though...


Even that seems odd. It can't be the distributors that are releasing them in the wild. It's all so backwards! Glad to know we will be legal. Course I can hear it now... "Officer... they said we'd be grandfathered in!... Honest!"


----------



## Phil Edwards

Actually, yeah, growers are notoriously bad about letting things escape, if only inadvertently. Part of the problem with the San Marcos is that growers have used it as a water source in the past. Things simply escape sometimes. Even here at LAERF we have trouble with ducks getting into study ponds and carrying bits of the nasties out into adjacent areas. We've got to patrol around here to deal with nasties sometimes. Like NTXFG said, the growers and distributors are really the ones who most easily introduce nasties on a large scale. All it takes is one good flood and WHAM, bad mojo. 

I doubt any of us go dumping our cuttings and "trash" into local streams. Right? RIGHT?! :fencing: LOL.


~Cheers,
Phil


----------



## Phil Edwards

northtexasfossilguy said:


> I talked with them and they said they are probably going to grandfather all of us in as being legal, they said they are primarily going to target large-scale distributors and visit their shops and inform them of the rules and the approved list before enforcement of it.
> 
> They said they are not going to police peoples homes either, simply they lack the resources and really don't have the desire to do it. I still don't like policies that enable them to do so though...


Thank you for all the effort you're putting into this!

~Phil


----------



## Tex Gal

Well Phil, I guess I sit corrected. Course, even with your patrols, a flood would be a problem where you are too. You certainly can't police every duck. I guess I didn't understand that you guys have invasives outside. Don't really know what LAERF is all about. I guess at our April DFWAPC meeting that will change. Looking forward to it! Thanks for arranging it.

BTW - I have your jackets here from your visit. I'll bring them.


----------



## northtexasfossilguy

You're welcome. I was born in Texas, and like a good Texan I love my freedom and my guns.


----------



## Avalon

I may have to come out of hibernation for this one. We, as aquatic plants enthusiasts--dare I say specialists--should be the ones taking the responsibility if we wish to have the freedom. *They* are encroaching upon *our* freedom, and unless *we* do something, it will be taken away. This is only the first step.

We cannot continue to popularize the hobby without maintaining responsibility for it.

I, for one, also agree that education is the answer. Look at the war on drugs--yeah, that worked. I also see an opportunity here to create a solid foundation of responsibility. It's no longer a society of pamphlets. We are in the information age, and information can be transmitted en mass very quickly. Finally, legislation can affect corporations--build a solid foundation via proper legislation and others have no choice but to follow through.

I'm wondering if we may one day end up in Austin for the monthly meet.


----------



## fishyjoe24

I cried reading this, what ever happen to having a warrent to sure houses? like texgal said miss id's of plants etc, just like hairgrass I remember searching google for hair grass and I got returned results of giant hair grass,hair grass, dwarf hair grass, micro hair grass, dwarf micro hair grass. etc, laughing can we say some one is miss Id'ing the hair grass or trying to make money. it's just like discus the same discus "snow white, white diamond, ghost, pure" just different names. just like a snow white x leopard x snake skin. they have been around for ever but if I wanted to i could change the name to and say " pure heart rainbow x red spot" or something like that. then every body will jump on them and i would make a billions.

so what I'm trying to say is there is ways around the "this plant won't be aloud." 

freedom is being took, from us.


----------



## digital_gods

Maybe with the $1.2 Billion in budget cuts from Rick Perry this project will get put on the back burner or hit the chopping block.

Has anyone thought about our club creating a brochure about responsible fish keeping? I'm a graphic artist and so I could do the design and layout. I would need assistance with the content. We could have this in a PDF format that can be downloaded, printed and distributed by pet store owners. It would have a place where pet stores could place their contact information as a way to encourage participation.

Let us of DFWAPC set the bar high for the rest of the state to follow. Any thoughts on this?


----------



## Tex Gal

digital_gods said:


> Maybe with the $1.2 Billion in budget cuts from Rick Perry this project will get put on the back burner or hit the chopping block.
> 
> Has anyone thought about our club creating a brochure about responsible fish keeping? I'm a graphic artist and so I could do the design and layout. I would need assistance with the content. We could have this in a PDF format that can be downloaded, printed and distributed by pet store owners. It would have a place where pet stores could place their contact information as a way to encourage participation.
> 
> Let us of DFWAPC set the bar high for the rest of the state to follow. Any thoughts on this?


That's a great idea! We could put it on our DFWAPC website. What do you think Niko?

(When we went to the meeting we suggested this as an alternative. They said they didn't have the funding. We thought it would be cheaper than trying to police what they were proposing.)


----------



## Phil Edwards

I've been in contact with Earl Chilton, the one directing the program. He says it's going to go through but agrees that the aquatic plant model needs to be refined. I'm REALLY hoping this will lead to a research project for me. I understand why people feel that freedoms are being encroached upon, but the industry has had ample time to come up with some sort of approach of their own. Since that hasn't happened the state has had to come up with something. In the end it's the industry's responsibility (not the hobbyist's) to police itself and they haven't done that. Sadly, it's going to affect the end user, the hobbyist. Even though we're responsible keepers, on the whole, we're small fish compared to the massive importers and distributors. They're the ones the state's going after.


----------



## davemonkey

I jumping in pretty late on this. It does seem rather backwards to have a list of approved species rather than a list of prohibited species (unless they are willing to update the approved list at least annually as new plants are deemed non-invasive). 

Anyway, the good thing about a local group/club is that you can get together and figure out where you are "headquartered" (where your "experimental growing stations" are kept) and then apply for one of those exotic plant permits. (That's how we were able to get a collection permit for Big Thicket last year  ...although I got shot down for a renewal. )

-Dave


----------



## digital_gods

Phil Edwards said:


> I've been in contact with Earl Chilton, the one directing the program. He says it's going to go through but agrees that the aquatic plant model needs to be refined. I'm REALLY hoping this will lead to a research project for me. I understand why people feel that freedoms are being encroached upon, but the industry has had ample time to come up with some sort of approach of their own. Since that hasn't happened the state has had to come up with something. In the end it's the industry's responsibility (not the hobbyist's) to police itself and they haven't done that. Sadly, it's going to affect the end user, the hobbyist. Even though we're responsible keepers, on the whole, we're small fish compared to the massive importers and distributors. They're the ones the state's going after.


I have to agree with Phil. Just like the home brewers of beer and wine, we collectors are just small fry to the industry. The truth of the matter is that us Aquascapers, were very knowledgeable about the plants that take great pride in the controlled cultivation of the plants in our tanks. We are not a threat but an allies. As mentioned before, the threat is the uneducated public. The same uneducated public who thinks dumping cats and dogs in the country to live on a farm is acceptable also thinks dumping their unwanted fish and plants in our lakes, rivers and oceans. As I proposed earlier, lets step up the bar and start our own education program.


----------



## davemonkey

digital_gods said:


> ...lets step up the bar and start our own education program.


That would be a GREAT idea. You've got to have some dedication from someone willing to spearhead an idea like that (and who has the time to dedicate to it) to make it really work, but public outreach and education can go FAR.

-Dave


----------

