TED’S SOAP BOX
This is a new addition to my web-site – a sounding board where I can let off steam. For instance:
Item Minus Three: Since 1998 when Dale Kloppenburg published it in Fraterna (based on my herbarium specimen), I have used the name "odetteae" for the handsome little thing from the Philippines that was named to honor Odette Cumming, wife of David Cumming and friends of mine, whom I have collected with. Now, someone pointed out that Chris Burton made a mistake in naming H. tsangii by citing the wrong herbarium sheet (H. angustifolia) and as a result gave it the name "odetteae" - how and why I will never know! This gets better, the one that I have always called H tsangii, with the dark fuzzy leaves and red flowers, and the one I am sure that Chris Burton mean to be tsangii, is to demoted to DS 70. I don't think that David Silverman or Odette would be happy and Peter Tsang is turning over in his grave - I know that I am not happy. Should I tell Odette? If you understand all this explain it to me. Until the dust settles, I am going to continue to list my plants as I always have - angustifolia, tsangii and odetteae for they are all different.
Item Minus Two. Many people ask what our nursery looks like. They think that we have a proper nursery with greenhouses - isn't so! - just our home with a jungle around it - weeds, mosquitoes and tons of hoyas, orchids and other plants. We are about 4 blocks from the beach and at an elevation of about 100 ft. (up against the mountain) in the tiny village of Kaaawa (named after a reef fish), and pronounced Ka, aa, ava (all as are flat sounding). Here are some pictures from front of the house, left and on around the house. 2 of the cars are ours - the rest are visitors.
Item Minus One When I am upset about Hoya names, my wife continually tells me "Why worry, when it is only an opinion anyhow". It does bother me for I think that the collectors are getting bum information. I see catalogs, foreign publications and have inquiries questioning the names of some of my Hoyas. Several of the ones that get the greatest static are: meredithii vs vitillinioides, loyceandrewsiana vs latifolia, uncinata vs padangensis, imperialis var "Palawan" vs var rauschii, pachyclada vs subquintuplinervis, but there are others.
Dale Kloppenburg, who has the greatest library of Hoya literature, and I are continually checking to see if these challenges are valid. I trust Dale's opinion.
Back to the original beef, these names are nothing but personal opinions. Are they worth fighting over? Or, as the Marine said "Is this hill worth dieing for"?
Item One I made an error in the Latin endings for a Hoya species that I named and this must be corrected; therefore, this correction is made under Article 32.5 of the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature, specifically Orthography. This ending must be feminine to agree with gender of the honoree so hereafter, the correct name will be Hoya deykeae.
Item Two A new thing has hit the fan! I have been getting inquiries from some collectors who are looking for certain Hoyas - ones that don't even exist - or, species that my listed ones are suppose to be synonymous with.
To settle the question about Hoya species, I recommend looking any dubious or questionable species up in the Kew web page - which is the bible of plant registry - http://www.ipni.org/ik_blurb.html . You must remember that this just shows names that have been published not how to identify the plant you have. Such names as: Hoya hirsuta and Hoya heterphylla do not exist.
To determine synonomy is harder for it takes a lot of research, and even then it is a matter of opinion. As is H. hasseltii synonymous with H. sigillatis? One inquirer said they were. The original descriptions are miles apart but a picture of the herbarium sheet determines immediately that they are not one and the same. Compare this picture of the herbarium sheet (provided by Dale Kloppenburg) to my photo of H. sigillatis, in the catalog:
|
|
Item Three - Thank God that Hoyas are not covered by CITES, as are all orchids, all Nepenthes, Cycads, and many other plants that have been declared by someone to be rare and endangered. Under that classification, they are “protected” not conserved – CITES has nothing to do with conservation just the control of trade between signatory countries - purely business!
This might explain it better. This was an editorial published at the II Orchid Conservation Conference at Selby Gardens, Sarasota, Florida, in May 2004.
Editorial: CITES, A Far Cry from Conservation
Ted Green
Green: Plant Research, P.O. Box 597, Kaaawa, HI 96730 USA. E-mail: Ted Green
Other than those within the bureaucracy of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), everyone agrees that the treaty, as it pertains to plants and as presently administered, is a failure. Each year, CITES becomes more and more un-workable. Rather than providing a way to solve the basic problem of conserving endangered plant species, it specifically abolishes the international trade in plants.
CITES and its administration have yet to save any endangered species. Conversely, the treaty has created a market for plants declared rare, when in fact they exist in great quantity in the wild or in nurseries. Because of the scarcity of data on which plants are considered rare and endangered, it is illogical to so list whole families and broad species, when justification for listing awaits fieldwork yet to be done.
The bureaucracy that has grown up to administer CITES around the world is self-serving and rules without recourse or oversight, much as the divine-right-of-kings and with appointments-for-life, as documented by the following facts.
For many countries, CITES paperwork has become a way of making money and a source of graft and control. The whole operation has turned into a money and hostage situation––time is money, and certification is held up or delayed to extract money.
CITES is administered selectively and inequitably by administrators far removed from the native countries of listed plants. Administrators, who dictate to and control those countries, consider all movement of plants to be “trade” (with a monetary value) and ignore the non-monetary scientific collection for research and the sharing of scientific knowledge between individuals.
Certification is left up to countries that lack people qualified to inspect and certify plant materials. Many inspectors are unable to distinguish nursery-grown plants from those collected in the wild, and some inspectors can not tell, without a label, if a plant is on a CITES appendix.
Far from the original intent of the Convention to control the trade and movement of wild-collected plants, CITES administrators have expanded their authority to hybrids and plants growing in sterile flasks. Restrictions even are placed on seed collection, which ranks among the greatest chances for the conservation of many plant species.
Prohibiting the salvage of plants destined for loss by logging, agriculture expansion, road building, or other means, is immoral and a far cry from conservation.
I call for oversight of the entire CITES process, not just the trade restrictions but also the incompetent administration and its rules. The problem should be moved to the courts for resolution; therefore, I propose that a committee be organized to investigate these claims. Signatory countries should be polled to see if they have changed their minds and want to be dropped from the list of Parties to the Convention, if they wish to regain control of their own property, both material and intellectual.
Those who agree that CITES needs oversight and change are invited to share their ideas and suggestions.
Additional comments, after this recent trip back to Borneo: I believe that there will never be a true conservation program as long as governments issue permits for logging and land clearing of forests. As Geof Stocker once said, the value of the orchids and other plants destroyed in New Guinea far exceeds the value of the timber logged.
How do you get governments to understand that when forestry, agriculture and tourism departments are at odds?
Ted Green
Presented at Second International Orchid Conservation Congress, Selby Gardens, 2004
Item Four:
To try to correct some scurrilous comments that have been made in the Chat rooms:
I have collected (over the past 40 years) in all of the countries that I list and in several of them I have been back to up to 8 times. Someone said that my travels are a fallacy – dreamed up, and that I have never been in the jungle.
I do not and have never created or changed “trade names” just to sell “new” species of Asclepiads. Name changes are based on scientific classification or to correct an error in the species name, or to note what it was previously listed as.
I don’t know how many Asclepiad plants I have nor how many species I have. It is not a competitive point with me. I consider myself a conservationist, so when I collect, I usually gather several cuttings of a single specimen – contrary to most people who destructively collect many duplicate clones. I don’t have the room nor am I interested in having 10 plants of the same thing! My collecting method has a major drawback, for the one that I collect might not be typical for that species. With the normal variation within a species, it is possible that the one that I offer might differ slightly (to greatly) from the Type specimen (as the one in the herbarium and from which the species was named), but still be of that species. I am not a “splitter” who creates new species just for the hell of it!
I contend that species must differ in at least 2 characters, with color not being one of them, to be valid. And, even then, I believe that there must be at least 500 species of Hoyas. Every time we go collecting we find plants that we consider a new species. But, it is only my opinion. Dale has a different opinion: “I've always said we have only collected in about 1% of the area and so 2000 is my guess as to the number of species. I think we can walk right by a new species that is on the back side of a tree and, who gets off the trails, streams, roads or ridges?. Very seldom, and vast areas in between are untouched by a collector”.
I have seen comments and arguments about some of my plants. I have later found out that in some cases the plant in question is not the one that I originally distributed. I have bought or traded to get back a plant that I have lost and then found out what was sent to me was not the correct thing! Where did the correct labeling go astray? Think of the trouble and hard feelings that causes!
Or, in an attempt to capitalize on a new plant that I distributed, a new trade name has been dreamed up and the country of origin changed, as the “Funnel Hoya” that I collected in Sabah, Malaysia, not Papua New Guinea. The correct name of this species is Hoya lambii which I named after my friend Tony Lamb of Kota Kinabalu, Sabah.
Hoya collecting should be enjoyable, a pleasure. Just because the several camps disagree over the exact scientific names of several Hoyas doesn’t mean that there should be such mean spirited and vituperative people to ruin the Hoya world! As a famous black philosopher once said: Why can’t we all just get along?
Item Five:
PLANT COLLECTING and PERMITS
Dale Kloppenburg and I have been working with Hoyas, for our simple pleasure and the scientific interest, for over 30 years. It has been very interesting and enjoyable – collecting the literature and collecting and comparing the plants, that have come from both the wilds and other’s collections. We have shared the knowledge we have gained by publishing it in books, in horticultural articles and talks to garden clubs and hoya societies around the world. It has always been pleasurable, a two-way street, enjoyed by many.
Now, a serious problem has developed, one caused by the U. S. Department of Agriculture, that is changing all of that. The USDA is now insisting that all plants and plant materials entering the U.S. must be accompanied by a Phytosanitary Certificate from the exporting country. The intent, to quote the USDA, being "to prevent the introduction of plant pests, diseases, and noxious weeds not known to occur here".
If all of the countries, where Hoyas grow wild, were sophisticated (with trained personnel, various offices, and a organized work ethic) that would be wonderful BUT the reality is that they are not. Many of the countries where I have collected are not set up to issue permits, anywhere other than the capital city. The permit might be obtained only to collect a fee and then only after confusion and delays (which are both expensive). This can easily amount to $100 for $10 worth of plants.
It is understandable that an individual country should have the right to establish a conservation program, both for the plant material and intellectual property, but many of the unsophisticated countries have been unduly influenced by the U. S. and U. K. governments. The sharing of conservation tracts has awakened them to, not necessarily to saving species, but a new way to make money – permit selling. Though Hoyas are not covered by CITES, thank God!, if they were that would be another turnstile with a toll. CITES controlled plants (as, Orchids, Nepenthes, etc.) must all be accompanied by a Phyto.
Dale and I found out another tollgate while in Vanuatu in 2001. Upon asking for a Phyto in the second largest town (which is on Espiritu Santo), we were told that we could get it only in the capital, Port Vila on Efate. When we contacted Port Vila, they asked why we hadn’t applied for a "Collecting Permit" before we entered the county? Interestingly, in that permit we would have had to enumerate the species and number we wanted to collect! Who knows what you are going to find – hopefully, a new species or two? This permit system idea is now getting to be quite common and has been "improved upon" to the point where some countries insist that a "team" (with all its expenses) accompany you in your collecting. That team might consist of a representative of the government and a district tribal member. It is extortion, pure and simple!
Some of this extortion goes back a long time. In one case I remember, from 1976, when planning on collecting on Guadalcanal in the Solomon Islands, I had to post a $20 bond which was suppose to be returned to me if and when a scientific paper was published. I published a check-list of the Hoyas and Dischidias that I collected and turned it over to Geof Dennis who was the curator of the herbarium at the botanic garden in Honiara. I applied several times to get my money back and to this day, zilch, nada, nothing!
Typically, branches of government seem to be working a odds with each other: Conservation vs. Forestry vs. Transportation vs. Commerce; as in Sabah where logging is licensed (under Forestry) and yet the plants growing on the trees are protected (under Conservation). Or as, in 2000 a conservation conference was held on Palawan in the Philippines, (with signs everywhere) and yet I saw hundreds of acres of plants being destroyed to widen a new highway north from Puerto Princesa, toward Sabang. The extensive over-clearing for the right-of-way was a disaster!
In June of this year, a small package of 9 un-rooted, cuttings was sent to me by my friend Eva-Karin Wiberg of Sweden and it was intercepted and destroyed because it did not have a Phyto. Eva-Karin and I have been exchanging cuttings for years – with no trouble, no Phyto, no diseases. That has stopped our exchanges for Eva-Karin tells me that the closest inspection agency is 100 miles away from where she lives.
The Australian government doesn't trust any foreign Phyto for all plant shipments entering the country, Phyto or not, are fumigated! That is really over-kill - which it does to many plants that are susceptible to the gas treatment.
The easiest way to correct the whole problem would be to recognize that the USDA (APHIS) is the organization best qualified to inspect and accept plants destined for the U. S. and this should be done at the Port-of-Entry, not overseas.
Times are changing and I am sad. The new rules and regulations are completely destroying the pleasure and joy of sharing our new Hoyas from the wild. After field collecting for over 40 years, it is going to be a thing only fondly remembered, gone forever unless the rules are changed, fast.
Oops, I forgot to mention a sore-spot with me, that collectors for the large universities and herbaria have a blank permit (for scientific interchange) that allows them to collect and ship a ton of un-named material with no hassle, no phyto permit and a carte blanche CITES!
Item Six: I have given up on trying to prove that H. curtisii is the long lost H. pruinosa. Without flowers on the Type sheets, I though that DNA could prove the identity BUT that route is impossible without a leaf sample and Leiden Herbarium will not release any. From my photos that I took at Leiden of the Type sheets, a closer look shows the shape of the pruinosa leaves are not apiculate like the curtisii, or the stems angularly branched. Win some – lose some!
Item Seven: It was pointed out to me, from a comment by a lady in one of the Hoya Chat rooms, the size of the cuttings that I sell are small. Come to find out, I did not sell the items to her but to another person who proceeded to cut them in half and share, sell or trade to the complainer. I think that this is a reason why some do not ask for replacements - for I ask that the dead material be returned, as sent. That is impossible to do if they have been cut up and the half sold or traded off.
Item Eight: You be the judge. There has been a running battle in the 2 camps, over Hoya uncinata,Teijsm. & Binn vs Hoya padangensis Schlecter, and what is the correct name for the plant in the trade. Uncinata was named in 1863 and the padangensis, in 1916, and by a priore, the uncinata comes first.
Uncinate means "hooked" as the outer tips of the coronal lobes. Padang, in Bahasa Malay means "field" but in this case, refers to Padang Pandgang, Sumatra, close to where it was collected.
In Teijsmann and Binn's description, they detailed the coronal lobe as "apexes inflexed-hooked, apiculate".
In Schlechter's description, he detailed the coronal lobe as "apexes ascending, a little shorter than the anthers, outer angle obtuse, curved inward, sides almost flat".
 |
|
| Umbel and leaves, with hooks on lobes | Close up of flower, showing hooks on coronal lobes |
Item Nine: Many hoyas normally have aerial roots that are both good and bad. Good, for they show a healthy growth - bad if dealing with the bureaucrats. Roots (terrestrials) are usually the place where nematodes are found, seldom in the aerials. The aerials are produced along the stems, far above the ground where the nematodes live. A statement that they were cut high above the ground means nothing to the bureaucrats.
Here is a case in point:
A recent large shipment to Taiwan was rejected because of these aerial roots on some of the cuttings. It made no difference that the roots were aerial, not terrestrial, they were roots. The rules say (that to prevent the introduction of the specific nematode Didylenchus dipaci, one that might infect the sugar beet industry) - no rooted plants, unless, they have been government certified by the exporting country, to be free of nematodes. A certification I can't get in Hawaii.
The Taiwan government and the importer agreed, that lacking a USDA phytosanitary permit, the cuttings could be imported but would be fumigated on arrival. Never happened! The government first rejected the shipment and then as week later had a change of heart and the shipment was released.
There must be a God in heaven!
Item Ten:
ORCHIDS IN HAWAII
What started out to be a book for tourists in Hawaii has been reconsidered for general distribution and to reach a greater audience. This is a different orchid book. It is NOT a book about growing orchids but where they can be found in Hawaii, recognizing orchids, orchid science, reading labels, nurseries, clubs, meetings, shows, choosing and buying plants, etc. 128 pages, all in color.- even the fly and the ant on the cover!
This book is listed at $10.95 and is available at garden shops and book stores
across the country, AOS Book Store, or from the publisher: www.mutualpublishing.com
Item Eleven:
AND, DON'T FORGET, give a look-see to the INTERNATIONAL HOYA ASSOCIATION'S web page: www.international-hoya.org JOIN TODAY!
Revised 20 June 2010
