next message in archive
no next message in thread
previous message in archive
Index of Subjects
------=_Part_3241_13322730.1221224220158 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline One must watch the terminology a bit. *Invasive* + *introduced* are two different terms. Roland pointed out that he thought that all of our plants have come in since the ice age; this is anywhere from largely true, to absolutely true. It is my understanding that there may have been some refugia where the ice did not scrape. Thousands of years ago, the plants got here either on their own accord, simply by expanding their range from the rest of the continent via seed (or spore) dispersal or vegetative growth. I suspect that most was done by seed dispersal (via wind or animal), though this is well out of my field of expertise. This range expansion is considered natural. Humans are a part of nature. However, the massive capability of transporting animals, plants, fungi, etc. from remote places to another part of the world, is not natural. Any organism that gets to a new location via non-natural means is * introduced*. If that organism reproduces to a great extent, it is *invasive* . It is my opinion that we should keep all foreign organisms away, unless they are confined to one's garden, home, agricultural setting, etc. Even foreign organsims that are deemed beneficial, like wild apple trees and earthworms, in my mind, should not be here. In another email, the benefits of wild apple trees were mentioned...they provide food for many native species. Consider this...prior to the apple trees, were the animals here destitute? Were they scrawny specimens, ridiculed by their cousins on the other side of the Atlantic? Were the plants pale and rotting, because there were no earthworms here? The native fauna does the job. There is no need for introduced species, some of which become invasive pests. "I tend to believe what I see with my own eyes and tend to question the 'findings' of modern so-called biologists because in many cases they are activists dressed up in a lab coat and with a heavy thumb on the balance. Or perhaps neutral but feel coerced to toe the party line." Ouch. David...what advantage would there be for biologists to "toe [this] party line?" And by putting "findings" in single quotes in your comment, are you implying that the data have been made up? Randy > At what point does a plant become invasive? I think all of our plants have > come in since the ice age. I even remember a discussion when it was said all > the worms arrived after the ice age ended. I think all of the people came > later as well. The only ones that are native here are those of us who were > born here. So also with plants. Where do native plants stop and invasive > plants start? I think some of these plants hat are being called invasive > have been around long enough to consider them native. > > Roland. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "David & Alison Webster" <dwebster@glinx.com> > To: <naturens@chebucto.ns.ca> > Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 8:52 PM > Subject: Re: [NatureNS] Japanese Knotweed-invasive species > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > Get your information fix on your phone. With MSN Mobile you get regular > news, sports and finance updates. Try it today!<http://www.msnmobile.ca/> > -- Randy _________________________________ RF Lauff Way in the boonies of Antigonish County, NS. ------=_Part_3241_13322730.1221224220158 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline <div dir="ltr"><div>One must watch the terminology a bit. <em>Invasive</em> + <em>introduced</em> are two different terms.</div> <div> </div> <div>Roland pointed out that he thought that all of our plants have come in since the ice age; this is anywhere from largely true, to absolutely true. It is my understanding that there may have been some refugia where the ice did not scrape.</div> <div> </div> <div>Thousands of years ago, the plants got here either on their own accord, simply by expanding their range from the rest of the continent via seed (or spore) dispersal or vegetative growth. I suspect that most was done by seed dispersal (via wind or animal), though this is well out of my field of expertise. This range expansion is considered natural.</div> <div> </div> <div>Humans are a part of nature. However, the massive capability of transporting animals, plants, fungi, etc. from remote places to another part of the world, is not natural.</div> <div> </div> <div>Any organism that gets to a new location via non-natural means is <em>introduced</em>. If that organism reproduces to a great extent, it is <em>invasive</em>.</div> <div> </div> <div>It is my opinion that we should keep all foreign organisms away, unless they are confined to one's garden, home, agricultural setting, etc. Even foreign organsims that are deemed beneficial, like wild apple trees and earthworms, in my mind, should not be here. In another email, the benefits of wild apple trees were mentioned...they provide food for many native species. Consider this...prior to the apple trees, were the animals here destitute? Were they scrawny specimens, ridiculed by their cousins on the other side of the Atlantic? Were the plants pale and rotting, because there were no earthworms here?<br> <br></div> <div>The native fauna does the job. There is no need for introduced species, some of which become invasive pests.</div> <div> </div> <div>"I tend to believe what I see with my own eyes and tend to question the 'findings' of modern so-called biologists because in many cases they are activists dressed up in a lab coat and with a heavy thumb on the balance. Or perhaps neutral but feel coerced to toe the party line."</div> <div> </div> <div>Ouch.</div> <div> </div> <div>David...what advantage would there be for biologists to "toe [this] party line?" And by putting "findings" in single quotes in your comment, are you implying that the data have been made up?</div> <div> </div> <div>Randy</div> <div> <br>> At what point does a plant become invasive? I think all of our plants have <br>> come in since the ice age. I even remember a discussion when it was said all <br>> the worms arrived after the ice age ended. I think all of the people came <br> > later as well. The only ones that are native here are those of us who were <br>> born here. So also with plants. Where do native plants stop and invasive <br>> plants start? I think some of these plants hat are being called invasive <br> > have been around long enough to consider them native.<br>> <br>> Roland.<br>> ----- Original Message ----- <br>> From: "David & Alison Webster" <dwebster@glinx.com><br> > To: <naturens@chebucto.ns.ca><br>> Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 8:52 PM<br>> Subject: Re: [NatureNS] Japanese Knotweed-invasive species<br> > <br>> <br>> > <br>> <br></div> <div class="gmail_quote"> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid"> <div> <div><br><br> <hr> Get your information fix on your phone. With MSN Mobile you get regular news, sports and finance updates. Try it today!</div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"> <br>-- <br>Randy<br>_________________________________<br>RF Lauff<br>Way in the boonies of<br>Antigonish County, NS.<br></div> ------=_Part_3241_13322730.1221224220158--
next message in archive
no next message in thread
previous message in archive
Index of Subjects