marcello catalano Posted March 9, 2011 Report Share Posted March 9, 2011 Sorry guys, am I the only one who accidentally found this link? http://www.ruffordsmallgrants.org/rsg/projects/irwan_lovadi It's from august 2010, open the second pdf at the bottom of the page. This foundation made a detailed study of the clipeata population to proceed with conservation, and they found 260 plants in 45 different coordinates, most of which are human-proof, being unreachable. How uninformed are we????? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stairs Posted March 9, 2011 Report Share Posted March 9, 2011 Well spotted, Cello; an interesting (and encouraging) read. Alastair. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manders Posted March 9, 2011 Report Share Posted March 9, 2011 Nice one, and a couple of very nice photos of plants in habitat as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Green Posted March 9, 2011 Report Share Posted March 9, 2011 (edited) Good find Cello - strange that this hasn't been more widely publicised (until now). Good to know there are a few more than thought, but still worring that at only one of those 45 locations were male and female plants found. This just goes to show how little many of these species are really known. A few 'westerners' making a short visit to a few locations can never really get a true picture. It's well known over here that the few scattered locations for a some rare and hard to identify species, actually only show the holiday spots of the experts who can identify them. Good to know this guy plans to propogate this species both seed and TC, then we can have more than the couple of clones Wistuba has a monopoly on. Edited March 9, 2011 by Phil Green Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
christerb Posted March 9, 2011 Report Share Posted March 9, 2011 I saw that one few weeks ago, but was a bit hesitant posting about it, even though it is openly posted on the net. I started to wonder why no one had written about it. I even posted on Francois blog regarding the´Rare Nepenthes Project', but since the comment never came up, I pondered it might be a touchy subject. I now realize it was a computer hiccup. Anyway, I hope that no plant collectors get any ideas now. Regards, Christer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sockhom Posted March 9, 2011 Report Share Posted March 9, 2011 (edited) I saw that one few weeks ago, but was a bit hesitant posting about it, even though it is openly posted on the net. I started to wonder why no one had written about it. I even posted on Francois blog regarding the´Rare Nepenthes Project', but since the comment never came up, I pondered it might be a touchy subject. I now realize it was a computer hiccup. Anyway, I hope that no plant collectors get any ideas now.Regards, Christer Hi Christer, It was no computer hiccup because I did decide to not publish your comment (I wanted to tell you Christer but I forgot, please accept my apologies); it is a touchy subject. Still, since the information is available on the net , we can discuss it. Sure 260 plants is better than 15 plants but in the case of N. clipeata, I still think it doesn't change something to the species statues. As been quoted previously, we are not sure that this Nepenthes can reproduce easily. 260 plants is still a dreaded number for a dioceous slow reproducing plant. Gunung Kelam is sensitive to fire, to poaching. We know nothing about the species natural pollinators which might be threatened as well. However, I bow to Irwan inititative: this is a great example of in situ project. And Phil, I think your comment is a bit harsh (It's well known over here that the few scattered locations for a some rare and hard to identify species, actually only show the holiday spots of the experts who can identify them). Even if scientists (Matthew jebb is certainly not a taxonomist wannabe like me but a true and seasoned botanist) cannot get a complete picture by spending few weeks or months in the field, especially when compared to local people who roam daily those areas, this certainly has nothing to do with "holidays" trust me ;-) For one spot with a population, we sometimes check three, four, five spots... with nothing. But I do know you didn't mean to sound harsh ;-) All the best, François. Edited March 9, 2011 by Sockhom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Green Posted March 10, 2011 Report Share Posted March 10, 2011 Francois - You misunderstood me. I was not refering to Neps or Mathew, but more to some insects and some other very hard to identify species over here in the UK and some in Europe. Because sometimes only one or two people can identify them, they can be under-recorded and so when those people go on holiday somewhere, they record 'new' locations for them. This was just as an illustration of how things can be under recorded in general - Neps being no exception. I think as more locals become interested in these species, new locations will start to be discovered for even more rare species and perhaps even more new species discovered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vraev Posted March 10, 2011 Report Share Posted March 10, 2011 (edited) I must say that it is delightful to see that there is a surviving population. More importantly, it is amazing to know the local population are being educated about this species. At the end of the day, local involvement is what can preserve such endangered species. Edited March 10, 2011 by vraev Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobile Posted March 10, 2011 Report Share Posted March 10, 2011 At the end of the day, local involvement is what can preserve such endangered species. This can be a double-edged sword, as it will also highlights the rarity and therefore financial value of such plants. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcello catalano Posted March 10, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 10, 2011 It's true, we are actually on some kind of razor edge, I saw it myself in Thailand. From here we would like to act in some way, but when you're there, you see how the local people, the local "society" works and think, and you really need to act every time in a different way. I'm more like an activist, a greenpeace man, ready to attack with bare hands and put bombs to keep people away. But unfortunately there are other ways that seem to work better, depending on the place. This Foundation seems to be a local one, involving kids and schools and other people from the local society, and apparently this is the trick. When a mountain is lost and abandoned, then it's in the hands of the poachers, and the local people won't care, because they just see people going there, collecting plants and going away. While we would think that being abandoned, it's unknown and safe. But when you start involving local schools, then teachers are involved, and that's what they will talk about when they come back from work, that's what all the local villagers will know in a matter of a week: "that's OUR kids' plant, OUR treasure, OUR stuff". When the whole place and plants become popular as THEIR stuff, those local people who previously didn't care so much, will become the best guardians (ready to act even in not totally legal ways, I guess... I hope!) against the other "less" local poachers who try to touch THEIR treasure :) So, as bad as it sounds, protect it less to protect it more. Yes, 250 plants doesn't mean the species is fine, but we can finally breath, considering that before they were supposed to be 3, and just in cultivation :) I think with N. kongkandana and N. suratensis we are left with about that same amount of plants, we don't know how many var. globosa are left in the wild, and within a short time we risk to be left completely without N. bokorensis all of a sudden. Of course then we even have N. pitopangii, one plant MAYBE left. I don't know about aristolochioides and some others, you're more informed than me... Guys, anyway, I had the same François doubts BEFORE posting, but I thought that if we wouldn't shout too much, we could talk about it and make the experts relax a bit :). But the target is reached, by now about 100-200 people read my posts here and on pp.com, I think the people who CARE about the plant now know what they had to know. If you think, we can also remove the thread... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
christerb Posted March 10, 2011 Report Share Posted March 10, 2011 It was no computer hiccup because I did decide to not publish your comment (I wanted to tell you Christer but I forgot, please accept my apologies); it is a touchy subject. No problem. Yes, I did think that revealing this news could be problematic, so that was why I was sparse with information in that particular comment. Being factual versus protecting the plants may not be so straight forward. Maybe these survey could have been kept out of the public's eyes, but then it was funded by a grant which required a report... What I am afraid of now, is that collectors might think it is worthwhile to do the trip. Earlier it could have been an expensive trip which could have resulted in nothing. Like Marcello, my hope lies with the local people to keep any would-be collector from the mountain. On another note, it would be interesting to know if the people doing the survey, noticed any hybrids. Since hybrids with N. albomarginata and N. reinwardtiana has been found there, I hope they were able to identify them, so they were not included with the number of pure plants. Also, maybe one of the goals in ICPS's 'Nepenthes clipeata survival project' need not to be implemented now. That is to reintroduce plants from captive sources. Using the wild sources in-situ, which is mentioned in the survey, seems to be the most sensible thing to do. Regards, Christer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rsivertsen Posted March 10, 2011 Report Share Posted March 10, 2011 It would also be a good idea to harvest some seed of these pure plants while we still can and put them in vitro, so that we have more than just 3 clones available in TC. This would increase the chances of having a female plant in cultivation; clones 2 and 3 have already been identified as male plants, clone U has not yet flowered in anyone's collection to my knowledge. According to the private emails that I have recieved of this news, is that these populations are in an area that is very difficult to access unless you are an expert rock climber and have the required equipment to repell down a steep cliff. - Rich Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sockhom Posted March 10, 2011 Report Share Posted March 10, 2011 But when you start involving local schools, then teachers are involved, and that's what they will talk about when they come back from work, that's what all the local villagers will know in a matter of a week: "that's OUR kids' plant, OUR treasure, OUR stuff". When the whole place and plants become popular as THEIR stuff, those local people who previously didn't care so much, will become the best guardians (ready to act even in not totally legal ways, I guess... I hope!) against the other "less" local poachers who try to touch THEIR treasure :) I completely agree with that. Phil, I'm sorry for having misunderstood your sentence. I'm still learning English. No offense, I hope. All the best, François. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rsivertsen Posted March 11, 2011 Report Share Posted March 11, 2011 François, your English is FAR better than my French (for which I am ALWAYS apologizing) ... ;) - Rich Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vraev Posted March 11, 2011 Report Share Posted March 11, 2011 (edited) I personally agree too. THis is an excellent opportunity for the ark of life and clipeata survival projects to get more genetically diverse individuals (seed) in the botanical garden collections. This reminds me of the Wollemi pine situation. To discourage collectors, the plants were very quickly multiplied and openly sold at a premium with a nursery base in Australia to prevent greedy collectors from eying (sp?) the population. Heck, something which i always wondered is why doesn't a local park authority(eg: Mt. Kinabalu park's authority) actually use these maginificent plants as an economic incentive. I mean look at the amount of money we are ready to shell out for a 1cm edwardsiana or a SG villosa, rajah etc. I mean at those climates, all they need to do is controlled seed collection (5 or half the seed pods from half the individual plants), grow them in small pots and export them upon gaining a reasonable size. In later stages, the nursery itself can house a parent plant population to generate their own seed. Heck, I can guarantee you that those will be in very high demand. Additionally, a 50$ US charge per seedling will give them a fantastic return on their "time" investment as the local climate will nurture those seedlings. The reason I am mentioning all this is that this can be very well applied to N. clipeata. WIth its endangered status, this practice might acutally increase the diversity in cultivation and protect the species long term in its habitat. (Barring habitat destruction, mining etc) Edited March 11, 2011 by vraev Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Green Posted March 11, 2011 Report Share Posted March 11, 2011 Like Cello, I know there are risks, but I also think involving the locals is the only way to really save them and other species. Where ever in the world, if local people have a sense of 'ownership' over something, they help protect it - if it's something that they don't know about or feel excluded from, them they just don't care. Cello - I don't see any reason to remove this thread. the information is out there, so discusion does no harm. Christer - the so called 'Nepenthes clipeata survival project' has been a joke from the start and 'dead in the water'. Hopefully Stewart's new project will have more legs. Rich - I did refer to it in my first post, but you must have missed it in the report. Number 5, future plans "To achieve the final goals, I will propagate the pitcher plant through seed germination and tissue culture next year." vraev - The local Parks growing some of these species would be a very good idea Perhaps this is something someone connected to them should raise or try to get started. If nothing else it could raise some much needed funds and give another reason to continue to protect those areas. Francois - No need to appologise, no offense taken. I'm very used to being misunderstood, even by people who's 1st language is English. I wouldn't even have the chance to mis-understand you in French, as I wouldn't understand a word in the first place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcello catalano Posted March 11, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 11, 2011 (edited) Vraev, I also share your same ideas about the possibilities that we would have if the authorities that are supposed to be involved in conservation were actually involved. I think there are mountains of bureaucracy, multiple interests and relatively little organization that eventually arrive to ruin plans. The controlled collection of seeds is just one thing. But imagine all we cp lovers do in the wild. The world is used to the fact that there are people with responsabilities, power and money sitting in the office, and poor, improvised people out in the forest, and being everybody used to the idea, they think it's normal. But there's indeed something wrong in this, when we realize that the two different kinds of people are actually doing the same thing. I'm not saying there are bad people involved in this eh, I repeat that there's a lot of bureaucracy, system, organization, funds, interests, specific situation in THAT particular park/office/institution that ruin everything (or most of it). Sorry for the social rant :) Going back to us, I know Rob Cantley and Charles Clarke often had to do with the Kinabalu park staff, and even today there are just 4 rajah clones in cultivation and basically no edwardsiana. A part from the seed collection, i'm pretty sure our two heroes proposed many other activities, so if nothing was done, there must be a specific problem (again, bureaucracy, etc). Edited March 11, 2011 by marcello catalano Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
christerb Posted March 11, 2011 Report Share Posted March 11, 2011 (edited) Phil, Hopefully, this new project will work better. Since I am not a member of ICPS I can't say I know why the 'Nepenthes clipeata survival program' haven't made much progress. It would be interesting to know if any wild-collected plants (or any plants not related to the Munich pollination) have been registered. Question is if the older project will be continued, since ICPS now support this new project. Maybe there at least will be updates what happens, since there hasn't been much information from ICPS, at least not publicly. From what I have read the two projects seems quite similar, at least in practice. They also want growers to register their plants, and it differs mainly that they want you to sell/donate plants to their collection. If the ICPS initiative was met with lack of interest (?) from grower, then I don't see why this project will be more successful. The key is to access plants that are not related to the clones that are commercially sold. Hopefully some of them will make it into the Ark of Life collection. Anyone know when BE's N. clipeata clones will be released? Regards, Christer Edited March 11, 2011 by christerb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sockhom Posted March 11, 2011 Report Share Posted March 11, 2011 From what I have read the two projects seems quite similar, at least in practice. They also want growers to register their plants, and it differs mainly that they want you to sell/donate plants to their collection. If the ICPS initiative was met with lack of interest (?) from grower, then I don't see why this project will be more successful. The key is to access plants that are not related to the clones that are commercially sold. Hopefully some of them will make it into the Ark of Life collection. Christer Be patient. Next week , all shall be revealed ;-) You will know more about the Ark of Life. François. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vraev Posted March 11, 2011 Report Share Posted March 11, 2011 THanks for the assurance Francois. This is a tremendous oppurtinity for the Ark of Life to conduct an expedition, perhaps with the aid of the amazingly fit Chien Lee to gather some seed and increase the diversity in ex situ collections as a safeguard for the future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argentii Posted March 14, 2011 Report Share Posted March 14, 2011 What an encouraging read! I'm glad an organization like this has made some relative amounts of head way in the N. clipeata campaign. I would like to just point out one thing, though, that the title of this thread is not exactly accurate - 260 plants is by no means *far* from being extinct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.