N.H. Professionals Oppose Possible Invasives Ban

Some nurseries and plant growers in the New Hampshire are bristling at a proposal to ban the sale and distribution of certain species of plants and insects. At a hearing on the proposed law recently, nursery owners said three of the plants listed as invasive could cost their industry in the state as much as $19 million.

The proposal, which passed the state Senate and House last year, would prohibit the sale, distribution, collection or transportation of 18 plants and 15 insects. Three more plants would be added to the list by January 2007, and another 16 plants would be on a watch list.

Proponents say the rules would protect the environment, human health and taxpayers’ pocketbooks: The state does not have a budget to control invasive species, but experts estimate $140 billion is spent nationwide each year.

On Dec. 16, nursery owners told the invasive species committee that the three plants slated for regulation in 2007 – the Norway maple, Japanese barberry and burning bush – are extremely common for ornamental and landscaping purposes across the state and their regulation would cost them millions of dollars in business.

The Norway maple has been in the United States since the 1700s; the Japanese barberry and the burning bush have been here since the early 1800s. But the three meet the invasive species criteria: They aren’t native, have the potential for widespread dispersion and negatively affect native species, commercial agriculture and forest crops.

Instead of banning their sale and distribution, which would only affect the growers’ business, some said it would be better to either make it illegal to possess those plants or allow for a voluntary elimination.

“If the plants . . . are so bad, why not prohibit them entirely from our state?” said George Timm, owner of Davis Brook Farm in Hancock and a member of the invasive species committee. “The rules target my industry by prohibiting anyone from selling these plants but do not directly address the tens of thousands of specimens currently on public and private land.”

State Department of Agriculture officials said the committee considered that language, but opted against it because it wouldn't be feasible for all private landowners to get rid of invasive species.

Officials also said much of the nursery industry has already started shrinking sales of the three most controversial plants, those that will be regulated in three years, something they did before the committee proposed them for the list.

John McPhail of the New Hampshire Plant Growers Association, headquartered in Bow, which is against banning the sale and distribution of those three plants, said in his testimony Dec. 16 that sale of the plants has declined every year, as the horticultural industry educates its consumers. But he also urged the committee to consider a voluntary elimination, instead of a law.

Meanwhile, of the 18 other plants and 15 insects slated for regulation, some might sound familiar: the giant hogweed, whose sap causes rashes and blisters by depleting the skin’s ability to protect from UV rays; the hemlock woolly adelgid, a voracious insect that makes meals out of hemlock trees across the East Coast; and the glossy buckthorn, a shrub whose large number of seeds feeds birds loads of empty calories.

Source: The Concord Monitor