Whitebark Pine yamadori

[andrewiles]

Is there a mod around who can please delete this thread? Would probably be best for the community if it didn't exist. Probably want to take down the other threads about collecting Whitebark pine too.

@Delrious you need to calm down a bit.

If you actually read the responses of folks to you in this thread you'll see that everyone is keen on respecting the forest service restrictions. Anyone from the forest service reading this should be happy to see everyone going through the effort to talk to rangers, get the right permits, etc. There is nothing nefarious here. Personally, I've already indicated I will ask specifically about whitebark pine the next time I get a permit. Nothing more to say there.

 

[Delrious]

I'm literally posting federal and state laws in the hopes that we as a community can agree that "hey, collecting this species illegally and bragging about it online might not be a good look" and am being told I'm a dumbass, stupid, lying and to calm down. I guess this must be par for the course around here. Apparently I'm the only adult in the room.

 

[Leo in N E Illinois]

As your quotes indicate with the word "candidate", the list is proposed, as of yet, Congress has not added the species proposed to the official list in the Lacey Act. Therefore, the word "proposed". It is not illegal, as the law has not been amended yet.

Now it does clearly say USFWS should protect those proposed species, but this is not the same as having legal sanctions. So if an individual ranger issued a permit and neglected to specify to not collect white bark pine, the permitee will be doing nothing wrong, as the proposed list has NOT BEEN ADOPTED into law yet. As I said, the Lacy Act was not amended during the Trump admin.

Oh and here's the Oregon State law that prohibits the collection of Candidate Species for the Endangered list:

Oregon Administrative Rules

www.law.cornell.edu

Okay, this is the first piece of evidence you have provided that actually means something. However when you read through it, it is mostly about commercial collecting. The OP was not collecting for resale. And listen carefully, the OP did get a collection permit for the area he was collecting in. Therefore he made a good faith effort to follow the law and the local site specific rules. It was the employee's fault that no limits were noted in the permit.

Now go spend time lobbying Congress to amend the Lacey Act, to move "proposed" species to listed status.

 

[August44]

Is there a mod around who can please delete this thread? Would probably be best for the community if it didn't exist. Probably want to take down the other threads about collecting Whitebark pine too.

The mod doesn't need to delete the thread, he needs to eliminate you! Don't you have any pride or self worth. I would be embarrassed to go around spreading all this bogus BS and trying to convince us that it's the law.

 

[Delrious]

It is the law, but regardless of the law, the blatant disregard for the conservation and study of a keystone species that is in massive year over year decline is disgusting and will reflect badly on the bonsai community. The fact that the only people chiming in on this thread are people upset that I crossed some sort of thin green line tells me everything I need to know about this forum.

You can throw whatever insults you want my way and I'll still have my integrity.

 

[rockm]

Ya know what reflects badly on the bonsai community? Someone being dragged relentlessly for taking the ethical road and getting a collection permit. I have found that ranting and raving about this kind of thing only drives collection into grayer areas. Why get a permit if I'm going to be harrassed? It's a hassle...You made your point several times over. Endlessly repeating it and adding insults won't make your point any more palatable or make people want to adopt it...You may have your integrity, but your credibility is roadkill...

 

[Delrious]

I love it how you assume that ethics stop the moment someone signs a collection permit. The whole reason for the free permitting process is to ensure that collection is done responsibly...if you aren't going to do it responsibly, you are right there is no point in getting a permit. That's why there are no ranger districts that will issue a permit where Whitebark pine is listed as a species that is OK to collect and why the forest service puts this text on the permits that they issue:

"Deliberate or incidental transplant of any USFWS threatened, endangered, or candidate species or any USFS Region 2 sensitive species is PROHIBITED. Knowledge of these species is the permittee’s responsibility."

I don't even care what people do with their private lives. What concerns me is how this false information is being thrown around here will encourage more people to do the same.

 

[rockm]

I love it how you assume that ethics stop the moment someone signs a collection permit. The whole reason for the free permitting process is to ensure that collection is done responsibly...if you aren't going to do it responsibly, you are right there is no point in getting a permit. That's why there are no ranger districts that will issue a permit where Whitebark pine is listed as a species that is OK to collect and why the forest service puts this text on the permits that they issue:

"Deliberate or incidental transplant of any USFWS threatened, endangered, or candidate species or any USFS Region 2 sensitive species is PROHIBITED. Knowledge of these species is the permittee’s responsibility."

I don't even care what people do with their private lives. What concerns me is how this false information is being thrown around here will encourage more people to do the same.

You haven't been on many bonsai boards and talked about collection have you? Unethical collectors aren't going to get a permit. Telling someone that made the effort to collect a sapling that is mostly of in-determinate species they have committed a grievous unethical transgression and should be skinned alive is not going to win over a lot of converts. BTW IS this a whitebark, or something else? The collector doesn't know. At worst, he made a mistake. Calling him names isn't going to make any difference.

Look, I understand your disappointment (and maybe even your anger). I've been arguing with people who have collected trees in protected areas with no permission for YEARS online, probably longer than you've been alive. In those years, I've come across more than a few idiots doing worse and laughing about it, knowingly breaking the law because they "wanted a free tree"..Bitching and calling people names isn't going to change anything.

This collector actually did the right thing. He gave it his best effort according to the rules presented to him. The rules you're arguing aren't readily apparent, nor are they all that clear and understandable. That the collector was ethical enough to make that effort is leagues ahead of the folks doing nothing, or worse actively destroying the species. Telling someone who followed the rules as they know them, then changing those rules isn't fair, nor ethical.

 

[Delrious]

I have not called anyone out directly only stated facts and refuted their claims. If people feel that my facts implicate their activities, that's on them. And I'm fully aware that many of the "Whitebark Pines" on these threads are actually Western White Pine which makes me chuckle (which brings up another point, if you collect you should probably know what species you are collecting). The needle length and girth is a dead giveaway. My main concern is about public perception and encouraging others to dig up Whitebark Pines.

You might want to read back through this thread and see who is actually doing the name calling.

 

[rockm]

I have not called anyone out directly only stated facts and refuted their claims. If people feel that my facts implicate their activities, that's on them. And I'm fully aware that many of the "Whitebark Pines" on these threads are actually Western White Pine which makes me chuckle (which brings up another point, if you collect you should probably know what species you are collecting). The needle length and girth is a dead giveaway. My main concern is about public perception and encouraging others to dig up Whitebark Pines.

You might want to read back through this thread and see who is actually doing the name calling

Blaming others when you know you have your fair share isn't the mark of the being the mature guy in the room as you called yourself. And the clip below is for a millennial that reminds me of my son's best friend who doesn't know how to tone down the self-righteousness:

 

[Delrious]

Yeah but feeling entitled to undo others peoples hard work, tax dolllars, volunteer hours to ensure that our snowpacks last further into the summer and our rivers don't flood and erode their banks just so you can collect a species in rapid decline that is pretty shitty for bonsai is encouraged. Shows real maturity. Seriously, educate yourself before you attack the messenger.

 

[rockm]

Yeah but feeling entitled to undo others peoples hard work, tax dolllars, volunteer hours to ensure that our snowpacks last further into the summer and our rivers don't flood and erode their banks just so you can collect a species in rapid decline that is pretty shitty for bonsai is encouraged. Shows real maturity. Seriously, educate yourself before you attack the messenger.

Oy I can see why they sent you into the woods...

 

[andrewiles]

I really wish we could have intelligent discusions here. Please just stop the petty name calling, everyone.

I emailed a local ranger district and got in touch with their silviculturalist. This is what he said:

• Me: As a "candidate" species for threatened status, is there an implied global do-not-transplant requirement for whitebark pine (say, across the PNW), or is it still a local district or forest decision?
• Him: There is no implied restriction regionally. Should whitebark pine officially become a threatened species there could be some direction from our Regional Office, which manages Washington and Oregon forests, to restrict harvesting the species. Or, maybe not. Due to its high elevation habitat, I would imagine much of the whitebark pine in the PNW is located in designated wilderness which in itself restricts plants from being harvested. So it may be up to the individual forest to determine if it needs additional protections for the tree beyond wilderness protection.

• Me: More generally, if I ask a permit office "what can't I collect in your district" and they give me a list, can I treat that as the final say? Or am I on the hook to do research myself to make sure they didn't omit some restricted species? If the latter, what is the definitive place I look to make sure I've got the right list?
• Him: Each Forest is responsible for letting you know what is restricted, so yes you can treat this as the final say.

So, as far as I'm concerned, the expectation of all of us is to ask each district for their do-not-touch list, when acquiring permits. That is the source of truth.

As an aside, he also highlighted the other key ways threatened species are protected, even if not officially designated so. Wilderness areas, national parks, etc. that forbid any collection at all. I for one can attest that it is very hard to get high enough in Washington, in legal areas, to even reach whitebark pines.

 

[Delrious]

Washington state does not have a statewide rule against candidate species collection like Oregon and California do. However, I can tell you first hand having gotten collection permits from every NF region in Washington, that there are none that list Whitebark Pine as collectable and all have a disclaimer about candidate species on their permit templates. Many NF's in Washington even have restrictions against fairly common species, such as Alaskan Yellow Cedar and Mountain Hemlock (although there a few that allow the latter). Show me a National Forest in Washington that allows Whitebark Pine collection and I'll eat my hat.

 

[August44]

This just goes on and on. Why don't you go do something about saving the Whitebark verses running off at the mouth on this forum and making yourself look exceptionally stupid! The Forest Service does a terrible job, at best, of managing anything, let along the forests! Like any Federal US agency, I have absolutely ZERO (0) faith that they are going to do anything right, especially when each district can be run however the person in charge wants to run it. That's crazy!@

 

[Delrious]

...and I see Mature Whitebark pines all the time in washington in my collection spots, usually covered in rust. I also see tons of seedlings no where near mother trees that have been obviously planted. If you wanna go so see some armegeddon, go drive up Bethel ridge where they have literally bulldozed all of the native trees off the top and are planting a large plot of Whitebarks. Whitebark pine conservation isn't some hippy shit about preserving the environment, it's about making sure these tree's thrive at elevations where other trees can't to reduce the high elevation snowpack from melting so fast so it is a slow release for power generation, irrigation and to stop flooding. The trees can't spread their seeds themselves, they are rely exclusively on the Clarke's nutcracker which caches the seeds underground where rodents and other birds won't get them. The bird has stopped doing it's job, probably because there aren't enough trees anymore to sustain it's diet so it moved on. Now the forest service is in the business of collecting seed and raising healthy seedlings and planting them in areas where they can thrive. They have done extensive studies about how to do this the best way which I've provided in the links above.

Someone in this thread suggested that the FS had no idea what they are doing and should just be throwing seed around....which is basically just covering the ground with birdseed for the animals to eat. The forest service has a 50% five year survival rate for seedlings in the Rocky's and a 30-40% survival rate for seedlings on the West coast. This is much better than the natural survival rate of seedlings from natural dispersal by the Clarks nutcracker.

Seriously, before you guys call bullshit on me, educate yourselves, you might learn something that will change your perception.

 

[Delrious]

Also, the FS extensively studies their plantings and routinely does check ups on test plots to see what sort of environment the trees will thrive in. Let's say you find a nice honey hole in some rock with great seedlings and you grab them all. You may have just fucked up a study that has been ongoing since 1988. Now the forest service may think that the environment was a shitty place to plant them because they all died and their statistics get skewed. After all, it's not legal for someone to collect from that spot so it must have been something else that caused their death. One of the reasons the endangered species act is so strict with even propagating stuff at home from cuttings is because they want to be able to study the species in a vacuum to understand their decline, which may even be natural, but is still something worth understanding. You start distributing a species out of it's natural range and suddenly you are adding bad actors to the study, which may include DNA analysis that is used to know where a species came from and how it evolved.

 

[rockm]

I really wish we could have intelligent discusions here. Please just stop the petty name calling, everyone.

I emailed a local ranger district and got in touch with their silviculturalist. This is what he said:

• Me: As a "candidate" species for threatened status, is there an implied global do-not-transplant requirement for whitebark pine (say, across the PNW), or is it still a local district or forest decision?
• Him: There is no implied restriction regionally. Should whitebark pine officially become a threatened species there could be some direction from our Regional Office, which manages Washington and Oregon forests, to restrict harvesting the species. Or, maybe not. Due to its high elevation habitat, I would imagine much of the whitebark pine in the PNW is located in designated wilderness which in itself restricts plants from being harvested. So it may be up to the individual forest to determine if it needs additional protections for the tree beyond wilderness protection.
• Me: More generally, if I ask a permit office "what can't I collect in your district" and they give me a list, can I treat that as the final say? Or am I on the hook to do research myself to make sure they didn't omit some restricted species? If the latter, what is the definitive place I look to make sure I've got the right list?
• Him: Each Forest is responsible for letting you know what is restricted, so yes you can treat this as the final say.

So, as far as I'm concerned, the expectation of all of us is to ask each district for their do-not-touch list, when acquiring permits. That is the source of truth.

As an aside, he also highlighted the other key ways threatened species are protected, even if not officially designated so. Wilderness areas, national parks, etc. that forbid any collection at all. I for one can attest that it is very hard to get high enough in Washington, in legal areas, to even reach whitebark pines.

I tried intelligent discussion-repeatedly. That route seems particularly difficult...Even what you've posted didn't seem to have much effect...

 

[Delrious]

1. I think it's hilarious that you guys think I'm a millennial. I'm not hiding behind some mask of anonymity. 15 seconds of research and you could figure out exactly who I am.
2. The obsession you guys with calling out petty name calling when you are the only ones doing it is also hilarious and seems to be a common way of shutting down actual discussion on this forum.
3. I won't give up.

 

[andrewiles]

I tried intelligent discussion-repeatedly. That route seems particularly difficult...Even what you've posted didn't seem to have much effect...

Yeah, I tried. Disappointing. On the plus side the discussion motivated me to go chat with the FS and get some actual guidance. Hopefully it's useful to someone else here as well.

@jevanlewis I forgot that I said I would post a photo of my tree and the marks I have on one branch. Hopefully it's ok. I applied a fungicide and will keep an eye on it.



And yes, everyone, this was dug under a permit in a district that did not list whitebark pine as restricted when I picked up the permit. Incidentally, when I returned home I found evidence of blister rust infection on one small branch, which I had missed when I dug it up. Presumably the tree would have eventually died. I removed that branch:



I plan to provide fungicide every fall to prevent future infection, and will watch of other branches and evidence of existing rust. From what I gather removing the entire branch should have removed the disease from this particular tree. Fingers crossed.