Interesting and scary development.

[Peterthecactusguy]

Ed, I think it varies between the states, in how tough they can be on others, but L. williamsii is on the Federal banned list. (It's also on the Endangered species list, I think, in Texas) (but then again it might be on a state list.)

[Subverted]

In California all of the genus Lophophora is illegal and treated as peyote, I think we are the only state who has that special interpretation. In the rest of the USA, as far as I know, it is legal to own L. diffusa and etc.

[Peterthecactusguy]

yes, that is what I was hinting at. In Texas it's on the endangered species list I think. There are not very many L. williamsii left in habitat (in the US at least)

[Onzuka]

In Texas it's on the endangered species list I think. There are not very many L. williamsii left in habitat (in the US at least)

Given the truth of the above statement, you would expect the authorities to be encouraging us to prevent these plants from becoming extinct, rather than persecuting those in some countries that try to preserve them.

Steve

[Peterthecactusguy]

Steve you would think that is the case, but sadly in America they have such a huge issue with drugs, mostly cause it justifies budgets of the police and other agencies.. You would think that instead of all the illegalities they have for L. williamsii instead they would encourage collectors to grow a few to protect the species. They could do this easily enough if they made it legal to grow them but not to ingest them, with severe penalties for mass growers who are looking to make money off the drugs, and not valuing the plant as a plant.

[Ed]

Peter, threat of species extinction is unlikely to sway authorities. The concern is drugs and needs to be approached from that angle i.e. show this plant (name all the countries where it is legal to grow) has not figured in drug statistics, nor posed a public health threat. Drug/alcohol NGO's in your country should be able to provide local stats.

[Peterthecactusguy]

better yet show the number of hobbyists who have the plant and then show that about 0 of them actually kill their plants to do the drugs?

[SnowFella]

Well, in this case I'm afraid even that won't work as the legislation is inregards to "any" plant containing alkaloids and they seem focused on 2 plants that historicly have been used in various cultures. Lots of folks in that specific forum are kinda panicking at the moment and are even trying to ship their plants out of state it seems, doesn't really help much that the forum in general is aimed at ethnobotanicals and their chemical composition and use

[Ed]

Well, in this case I'm afraid even that won't work as the legislation is inregards to "any" plant containing alkaloids and they seem focused on 2 plants that historicly have been used in various cultures. Lots of folks in that specific forum are kinda panicking at the moment and are even trying to ship their plants out of state it seems, doesn't really help much that the forum in general is aimed at ethnobotanicals and their chemical composition and use

If the charges pertain to "possessing cacti containing ...", then a great many people in the state of W.A. ought to be panicking.

It's lucky for the Melbourne and Sydney Royal Botanical Gardens that they aren't located in Perth else they'd be prosecuted ...

http://forum.auscactiforum.net/t509-roy ... mage-heavy

It's one thing to create unthinking and unjustified laws, but a blight upon society to apply them.

[Peterthecactusguy]

Ed, botanical gardens are safe. The one in St Louis, MO that has Engelmann's collection, has a collection of L. williamsii that they were researching a number of years ago, and UofA here in Tuscon, AZ had to put their Lophs, out of a common greenhouse cause they kept ending up disappearing, ironically right around the time they were flowering.

[Ed]

Ed, botanical gardens are safe. The one in St Louis, MO that has Engelmann's collection, has a collection of L. williamsii that they were researching a number of years ago, and UofA here in Tuscon, AZ had to put their Lophs, out of a common greenhouse cause they kept ending up disappearing, ironically right around the time they were flowering.

If there is a special dispensation, I imagine it would be specifically written into the law. E.g. in AU each state's drug laws specifically excludes treated poppy seeds else bakeries, food supermarkets, and shoppers could be prosecuted.

I'm unaware of any special dispensation w.r.t. to cacti in AU. The fact that Melbourne and Sydney RBG's have and display these plants in the open is simply more evidence that cacti are not a problem.

Regarding cacti theft, they've always been a target due to their novelty and scarcity

[Peterthecactusguy]

my feeling about the ones in Tuscon is someone who worked there knew what they were and waiting until they were at about the right age and dug em up and stole them and sold them.. (or gave them) to someone

[Ed]

I note Collectors Corner is now replacing t.scop in their "5 pack" with another species for all orders sent to WA. I thought it was a quarantine issue, but not now. How is it they knew about the law change but the average collector is told nothing and risks unwitting prosecution.

I went back to the ebay listing
http://cgi.ebay.com.au/250900642775
to discover now it's Pilosocereus species that's not being sent to W.A. - not T.Scopulicola.

Did I misread the advert first time around? I don't believe so. I checked it more than once before posting and I distinctly recall a listing from the same vendor earlier in the year for a variegated T.Scopulicola - which also stated it could not be sent to W.A. (reason not supplied).

If one is to believe the advert as it stands today, Collectors Corner will send T.Scopulicola to W.A. That's unfortunate for W.A. citizens because according to reports W.A. is enforcing drug laws which prohibit 'any plant containing a drug of addiction'.

If the largest cacti nursery in Australia (supplier of a million plants a year) cannot comprehend W.A. drug law, one wonders how the W.A. government and justice system can expect the average citizen to do so. If these cacti are in fact banned then I'd like to know why they are listed on the W.A. government's quarantine website as "Permitted".

Another oddity. Several AU states have criminalized possession of L.Williamsii. Disclaimer aside, how ironic that this plant should be featured prominently by Australian New Crops - a body supported by the Australian government Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation.
http://www.newcrops.uq.edu.au/listing/s ... iamsii.htm

[SnowFella]

Well, apparently it's been finalised with a $2500 fine and a criminal record for "Cultivation of a prohibited plant aswell as possession"

[Peterthecactusguy]

glad I dont live in Australia then, I have some " prohibited" plants that are legal here in the US, a shocking first for us Americans