Aquatic Plant Forum banner
Cancel
Create thread New Forums

TEXAS enacts white list - AGA forward

Jump to Latest
39K views 204 replies 26 participants last post by  fishyjoe24  
#1 ·
Hey Everyone,

The Aquatic Gardeners Association would like to wish everyone a Happy year.

We also would like to make you aware of some new developments concerning the State of Texas and the new proposed "White List" for aquatic plants. As many of you are aware, several months ago the Texas Department of Parks and Wildlife had proposed moving from a list of restricted aquatic plants (Black List) to a list of aquatic plants that have been approved otherwise known as a "white list" of aquatic plants that will be allowed. All other plants outside of this list will be prohibited.

Below is a link I received from the folks at the International Water Lily Gardening Society. It contains information on the latest developments. The most important of which is a list of locations and times where the TPWD is soliciting input from the public regarding this new initiative.

The TPWD is set to vote on these new proposed regulations on January 27, 2011. If you live in Texas and would like to have input during these public hearings I strongly suggest you try to attend at least one of these scheduled events.

Exotic aquatic plant public meeting locations:

All meetings begin at 7 p.m.

*Katy - January 11, 2011 Bass Pro Shops, 5000 Katy Mills Circle
*Austin - January 13, 2011 TPWD Headquarters, Commission Hearing Room, 4200 Smith School Road
*San Antonio - January 18, 2011 Lions Field Adult Center, 2809 Broadway Street
*Fort Worth - January 19, 2011 Cabela's, 12901 Cabela's Drive

You can find information on the proposed initiave and the meetings here: <http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/newsmedia/releases/?req=20101229b>

There is also an on-line area where you can view the proposed "white list" and submit your comments here: <http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/newsmedia/releases/?req=20101229b>.

Let's all keep it growing in 2011!

Sincerely,

Larry Lampert
AGA Board President
 
#3 ·
It is not easy to find the actual lists of approved, prohibited, and native (therefore automatically approved) aquatic plants. On my brief scan of the lists, the species prohibited that really jumped out are Cryptocoryne beckettii, C. wendtii, and Hydrocotyle leucocephala. Ouch!

While I am not an expert on aquatic plants, I do have a lot of familiarity with invasive exotic terrestrial plants. These are truly the bane of all my restoration projects! While none of us want to be told to destroy our favorite aquarium plants, in some cases these pose a real danger to native freshwater ecosystems. Let our replies be balanced.
 
B
#4 · (Edited)
Here is a good link to various proposed portions of the rules

Found the link:
http://info.sos.state.tx.us/pls/pub/regviewctx$.startup

Enter aquatic plants into the first search box.
Result will be a list of proposed rules, definitions, etc.

One new link - "weed risk assessment"
http://archive.tpwd.state.tx.us/huntwild/wild/species/exotic/media/weed_risk_assessment_model.pdf

Interesting to note that in my read of the types of permits to be issued, I could not find one that would seem appropriate to me as a hobbyist.

Bob
 
#7 · (Edited)
If you pay attention to the law it's even illegal to posses them. This isn't just about trading or selling them. Last time I went to the meeting there were only around 100 plants on it. That was not family or species but actual plants cultivars. That's not a lot of plants! So each Rotala would have to be listed separately. Just think of it! Makes me so mad. You can't even go naturally collecting as it's against the law already. If ever you care you need to be at this meeting. It's the parks and wildlife dept that proposed this to the legislature and they agreed The tdwp is power hungry Who's state is it anyway? No natural collecting and no foreign plants except their list. Maddening!!
 
#8 ·
GRR I got the pitch forks, and bleed the fiveth here me ROARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!. okay all joking a side...
what is wrong with the government? so if I understand this right it's Texas wild life and rescues putting this list together? aren't they the onces who kept on killing off there pond with invase plants and kept on asking what was going on?... what crypts are on the black list.. :( I have a strange feeling that there will no longer be low light tanks aloud in texas...

we would always give plants new names ;).....

time to make stash tanks in are closets and put blankets over them....

I will be going to the ft. worth meeting...

we as hobbiest. need to make a list of the bad (which won't be a bad list), and give tdwp there IQ numbers if you know what I mean....... I bet tdwp would think plastic plants are real.
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#9 ·
If you had to self-enforce these lists today, how much volume would you lose?

I'd estimate on my part about 50% in my 55g, about 75% in my 29g. Of course, I could just spend several thousand dollars for the permits.

Actually, Joey, low light tanks would be relatively unaffected. If you look at the list of approved plants, the typical stock for a low light tank is approved.

Basically, all hygrophila is out (Though I didn't see polysperma listed anywhere, not even on the already prohibited list). Most ludwigia and rotala is out. Any newly introduced species won't see the light of a flourescent lamp in the state of Texas for quite a long time, if ever.

At least we get to keep our Cladophora aegagropila. How generous.

Oh and Dracaena fragrans is approved! Does anyone have any Dracaena fragrans in their tank? I'd love to see pics! I say we all show up at the meeting with our Dracaena fragrans tanks.

Seriously, who put this list together?
 
B
#10 · (Edited)
More web site links

http://info.sos.state.tx.us/pls/pub/readtac$ext.ViewTAC?tac_view=5&ti=31&pt=2&ch=57&sch=A&rl=Y

Existing regulations mention "aquaculture". The State of Texas definition: ""Aquaculture" or "fish farming" means the business
of producing and selling cultured species raised in private
facilities. "
More info than you would ever want to know:
http://law.onecle.com/texas/agriculture/chapter134.html

Under current Texas law, to be eligible for an exotic species permit, one must meet one of the following criteria:
"(a) To be considered for an exotic species permit, the applicant shall:

(1) meet one or more of the following criteria:

(A) possess a valid aquaculture license;

(B) possess a valid permit from the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality authorizing operation of a wastewater treatment facility; (C) possess a department approved research proposal involving use of harmful or potentially harmful exotic fish, shellfish or aquatic plants;

(D) operate a public aquarium approved for display of harmful or potentially harmful exotic fish, shellfish or aquatic plants; or

(E) operate a facility approved by the department for the possession and propagation of harmful or potentially harmful exotic aquatic plants;

We don't seem to fit! Below is the source of the text above:
http://info.sos.state.tx.us/pls/pub/readtac$ext.TacPage?sl=R&app=9&p_dir=&p_rloc=&p_tloc=&p_ploc=&pg=1&p_tac=&ti=31&pt=2&ch=57&rl=117

Bob
 
#27 ·
The TPWD White List is intended to regulate large-scale public and private businesses and interests such as zoos, botanical gardens, and aquariums. Private hobbyists are small fish (pardon the pun) in comparison to nurseries etc. In fact, if not in name, we're under the radar of this initiative and although we need to be aware of the laws and advocates for the hobby, we also don't need to get our torches and pitchforks out yet.

DFWAPC SHOULD ABSOLUTELY ATTEND THE JAN 19th MEETING AND SPEAK UP!

I've spoken with Dr. Chilton of TPWD about the efforts behind the White List and he's been very reasonable in our conversations. :)

BobAlston said:
More web site links

http://info.sos.state.tx.us/pls/pub/readtac$ext.ViewTAC?tac_view=5&ti=31&pt=2&ch=57&sch=A&rl=Y

Existing regulations mention "aquaculture". The State of Texas definition: ""Aquaculture" or "fish farming" means the business
of producing and selling cultured species raised in private
facilities. "
More info than you would ever want to know:
http://law.onecle.com/texas/agriculture/chapter134.html

Under current Texas law, to be eligible for an exotic species permit, one must meet one of the following criteria:
"(a) To be considered for an exotic species permit, the applicant shall:

(1) meet one or more of the following criteria:

(A) possess a valid aquaculture license;

(B) possess a valid permit from the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality authorizing operation of a wastewater treatment facility; (C) possess a department approved research proposal involving use of harmful or potentially harmful exotic fish, shellfish or aquatic plants;

(D) operate a public aquarium approved for display of harmful or potentially harmful exotic fish, shellfish or aquatic plants; or

(E) operate a facility approved by the department for the possession and propagation of harmful or potentially harmful exotic aquatic plants;

We don't seem to fit! Below is the source of the text above:
http://info.sos.state.tx.us/pls/pub/readtac$ext.TacPage?sl=R&app=9&p_dir=&p_rloc=&p_tloc=&p_ploc=&pg=1&p_tac=&ti=31&pt=2&ch=57&rl=117

Bob
Click to expand...
 
#11 · (Edited)
They asked us at the last meeting what plants we wanted on the list. I took a list of about 300 more plants. I had already spoken to Dr. Chilon a week or two before expressing my displeasure. He said there were over 100 tests they put a plant through BEFORE it gets approved for the list. You tell me how many plants will ever see the light of day on their list?

One of the things that irks me is why concentrate on aquatic plants? There are many many more terrestrial plants. Imagine what our yards would look like if we had only 100 plants allowed in the entire state of Texas?

More than that, how can we suggest plants that we don't know about? So many plants that I have in my tank would never grow in TX. They are difficult in my controlled environment. Yet I can't have them because someone hasn't thought about it or tested them. So maddening.
 
B
#12 ·
TexGal

So are you already having a dialogue with the State/Dr. Chilton on this subject? If so, can you tell us more?

Any chance they will tell us what are the 100 tests that they do on the aquatic plants?

Have they had discussions with other aquatic plant hobbyists?

Bob
 
#13 · (Edited)
At the last meeting there were only two of us planted tank people. Both of us were from DFWAPC There were three others there. The others were tree huggers ready to ban everything.

When I said that they really haven't thought this through, that there are positives to new plants like medicines and plant conservation worldwide, Dr. Chilon replied that you could get a permit. I asked how does one identify these miracle plants ahead of time? He had no answers. I asked if they knew what the financial impact on the nurseries or retailers was? No one knows.

I also asked how they could handle the mis-identification issue since even the shippers have them incorrect sometimes. How would they or the store or the hobbyist even know what plant they have? Again no answers. All that I heard was that someone had to do something... So let's throw legislation at it. We suggested having the sellers print warnings on the bags against putting the plants outside or in the wild. That would reach more people than their white list and give the public awareness. People aren't interested in destroying the environment. He said they didn't have a budget for that. I asked why they couldn't shift that burden to the nurseries and retailers and he said it was a done deal, that he was mandated by the legislature. I asked who gave this idea to the legislature and he said his department.

That's or government for you. Beside they aren't going to be swayed by two people who were out numbered at a local meeting.
 
#14 ·
I have some experience with legislative processes. To have an effective voice we need to do the following (at least).

1) Develop a club position on the subject.

2) Attempt to get other like minded organizations to endorse our position. ie NASH (which I know doesn't exist, but you get the idea.)

3) Prepare a WRITTEN testimony for the meeting.

4) Designate a well spoken and credible representative of the club to read the written testimony into the record. Save off-the-cuff comments for a Q&A period.
 
N
#19 · (Edited)
For a short while I will try to pretend that I'm not dreaming all of this:

So what is the deadline that we need to accomplish the 4 steps outlined by Tex_Guy?

I apologize if I have not noticed a date mentioned earlier. This whole thing makes me feel like we find ourselves mixed a coctail of bureaucracy and egos - where logic is the last concern.



--Nikolay
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#15 ·
What if you have a native aquatic plant that isn't on the list? I bet they didn't get all the native aquatics on their list.

I am not a lawyer, but it seems to me that this law would have a difficult time facing a court challenge. A law where it is illegal to have plants that are on a list is more straightforward, but a law where it is illegal to have a plant not on a list seems legally weak to me because you can't argue that all plants not on the list are harmful.

It seems to me that one can argue that plants should be included on the list if there is no evidence that they are harmful. Why can't the waterlily people give a big list of all known commercially available waterlilies and argue that they should all be on the list unless there is evidence they could be harmful. If some of the waterlilies are on the list, why can't the rest of them be on the list?

People are supposedly presumed innocent unless proven guilty. Why not aquatic plants?
 
B
#16 · (Edited)
Perhaps the following is an angle on getting the State to listen:

""We don't want anybody to go underground (with a plant)," he said. "If something has been traded for years and hasn't caused a problem, we need to know that."

taken from http://www.statesman.com/sports/out.../outdoors/department-to-begin-invasive-plant-program-261616.html?printArticle=y

Perhaps we can ask

1) what plants common to aquarium aquatic plant keepers has caused a problem in the past?

2) "if you have to start somewhere" why not start with commercial propogation and other industrial users of plants like wastewater treatment.

3) simply put: "why not specifically exempt hobbyist, non commercial keepers of aquatic plants?"

bob

P.S. Here is an example of the lack of needed banning of an aquatic plant for years after which it was shown - by lack of adverse spreading to the wild as non invasive and removed from the banned list:

Invasive Spotlight: Water Spinach (Ipomoea aquatica)

This month's Invasive Spotlight will be a bit different than previous months. We actually have some good news to report about Ipomoea aquatica. Water spinach has been cultivated in Texas for at least twenty years, with some people claiming cultivation began in the mid-1970s. When Texas Parks and Wildlife listed the species as a prohibited aquatic species, in 1989, they did not realize the extent of cultivation, and the growers were not aware of the regulations. Since 2003, TPWD has been conducting a risk assessment of Ipomoea aquatica. After several years of research, TPWD concluded Ipomoea aquatica was not as bad as once thought, and decided to issue permits to farmers. According to Earl Chilton, of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, "As a result of there being no evidence of establishment after approximately 30 years of commercial cultivation, TPWD modified regulations regarding water spinach in 2005 making production legal with an exotic species permit, and possession for personal consumption legal.

Earl Chilton had this to conclude about water spinach, "Today the cultivation of water spinach in Texas, primarily for the Asian food market, has grown to an industry worth over $1,000,000 and including over 80 growers. Despite production estimated at over 50,000 lbs per day in some cases, there is no evidence of establishment outside production facilities. This is consistent with the fact that although water spinach has spread throughout many tropical areas of the world, there is little evidence of it becoming established outside of tropical regions. As a result of the requirement for tropical conditions California and Washington as well as Oregon consider it at low risk of becoming a nuisance plant species. Even in Florida with its more tropical climate water spinach has established relatively minor populations in only two counties."

http://www.texasinvasives.org/pages/iwire/Nov_2009.html

More on water spinach:

It seems that the plant was confiscated but no citations issued. After discussion at TPWD meetings, apparently a suspension of issuing citations was issued and exceptions to the rules were issued regarding water spinach - apparently the growers continued to grow and sell while TPWD did more analysis - for the next FIVE years! Apparently TPWD determined that it was low risk and it is no longer prohibited.

full article:
http://www.texasmonthly.com/2009-11-01/webextra16.php
 
B
#18 ·
Regarding HeyPk's posting and mine about Dr. Chilton's comment about something being traded for years without a problem, I found this on a water lily web site:

"
Here is a short but potent list of those already deemed ineligible...
Imperial taro--Colocasia antiquorum
Lime Green taro--- C elena
Umbrella Palm--- Cyperus alternifolius
Mexican papyrus---C giganteus
Dwarf Papyrus---C haspans
Egyptian Papyrus--- C papyrus
Butterfly Ginger--- Hedychium coronarium
Chameleon Plant-- Houttuynia cordata
Creeping Jenny---Lysimachia nummularia
Dwarf Cattail---typha minima
Wedelia--Wedelia trilobata
Included in this list are species of aquatic plants that have been grown in Texas for decades with no environmental or economic harm. Click on the above link to see what other aquatic species are already on the list of ineligible plants."

http://www.iwgs.org/texas-white-list/

Bob
 
N
#21 ·
I see the deadline. January 19 there will be a meeting on Fort Worth. So by then we need to have all the 4 steps outlined by Tex Guy done. I don't think we have to wait to discuss this at our January meeting.

What we can do immediately is to start outlinging the position of our club. We have less than 3 weeks.

Who would like to start writing this document?



(I still can't believe what I think I'm seeing and reading.

The way I see it... there will be a "white list" of permitted plants. All other aquatic plants will be illegal to possess. Noone will ever check anyone's house aquarium. We will still have the plants we have. But we will always be open to be hit out of nowhere. I have to put up curtains so people can't see my tanks from the outside. Never post plant giveaways. Any new person at a club meeting maybe a... spy? This is surreal. 1984.)

--Nikolay
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
N
#23 · (Edited)
Well,

I talked to Lue about all this. I started by stating that even after 15 years in the US I still feel very uncomforable about dealing with bureaucracy and "initiatives" that seem to not make sense.

In the course of the conversation a lot of things became clear to me. But above all I started to see the overwhelming news about a "list of permitted aquatic plants" as an opportunity - we, as a club, have another chance to establish our identity even more.

Here's what we talked about:

Whoever or whatever institution decided to create the seemingly ridicuolus "white list" of permitted plants is not out there to have some kind of witchhunt or decide single handedly how my home aquarium or pond will look like. We will all agree that if I, Nikolay, was charged with deciding which plants to allow or ban I'd have a VERY hard time making a decision. A lengthy research of each plant species would take years. Finding out who the concerned/affected parties are is another almost impossible task. One way of handling the situation would be to motivate everybody concerned with aquatic plants to voice their concerns about a "list of banned plant species". To speak up, to come up with valid arguments for and against. Then the situation will be more or less fair for everybody involved. So my first action would be to use a blanket approach that more or less sets the stage for a reaction by concerned party.

I cannot say that that's the tactic we are facing here. But fact is - we as hobbyists NEED to voice our concern. IF our arguments are well worded and make sense we will have an impact on this entire process.

And the process is about preserving our environment. All that it takes is a single plant species to prove aggresively invasive and all of us will have little to say or do. My Orwellian reference to the "Big Brother watching", 1984 and such is pointless. This is about handling a delicate situation. Everybody concerned needs to get involved. This is an opportunity, not a political moment.

So as I stated in the beginning of this post - in this situation I see an chance for our club to, once again, establish our identity. Basically we will be coming up with a written statement why the aquarium plant hobby is important not only to us but to people all over the USA, and of course abroad too. We should state the tremendous growth of the hobbyist base, the very busy interaction channels, the specific knowledge that the hobby has brought about, and the things we will lose should it be limited - another way to appreciate Nature, more knowledge of habitats and their current state, plant specific information, economic impact from the hobby and so on.

Of course this effort to voice our position should not be local only. But it should start locally.

Tex Guy synthesised everything that I needed help understanding + coming up with a plan of action into 4 simple to understand steps. I would like for us to not see this new development as a reason to turn away from the hobby or reduce our interest and activity.

So to start we need to write a "club position" on the subject. I can start making phone calls tomorrow morning trying to figure out how we are going to do that. But let's start with a new discussion right here - in a separate thread would be best - that way there will be at least 2 different thread on this very important subject.

--Nikolay
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#24 ·
Few quick suggestions:
(1) Give them a big list of aquarium plants that should be on the accepted list. For starters, how about all the plants in Kasselmann with the exception of those already on the black list (Hydrilla, H. polysperma, etc.) Push aggressively to have these put on the accepted list.
(2) Push for establishment of a procedure to license people to keep white-listed plants. Ham radio operators have to pass an exam to operate; this would be a similar kind of exam. Licensed growers would have to demonstrate knowledge of proper techniques of containing white-listed plants so that they do not escape into the environment.

As an aside: I know why Cryptocoryne beckettii is on their black list. It got established in a part of the San Marcos River, and it is considered to be a threat to Texas Wild Rice, a variety of wild rice that is only found in the first 1/2 mile of the San Marcos River. The crypts are found more than a mile downstream of the region where the Texas wild rice grows, and it is not clear to me why they are considered to be a threat, since they grow low in the water and don't get very high. I have seen seedlings of the wild rice, and they get tall enough to grow above the crypts. The wild rice is established in a part of the river that has a high density of escaped Hygrophila polysperma and a variety of other species carpeting the bottom, but nobody seems to be worrying about these plants. The large number of escaped aquarium plants came from an aquatic plant wholesaler and grower who used the river to cultivate his plants during the 1960's. You can even still find water sprite growing in a few places.
 
B
#25 ·
Niko and others, although this may appear to be argumentative, it is intended as constructive criticism.
The approach of telling "written statement why the aquarium plant hobby is important not only to us but to people all over the USA, and of course abroad too. We should state the tremendous growth of the hobbyist base, the very busy interaction channels, the specific knowledge that the hobby has brought about, and the things we will lose should it be limited - another way to appreciate Nature, more knowledge of habitats and their current state, plant specific information, economic impact from the hobby and so on. " I don't think will work. The commission/State experts will say that is nice, but we must protect public waterways.

The suggested can be a preamble but I think the key must be to a) show that people who keep aquatic plants in aquariums are not a significant source of risk to Texas waterways especially as compared to and contrasted with keepers of plants in outside ponds, commercial growers, etc. b) I think we may have a chance at challenging what is excluded from the white list by better understanding how they are deciding and helping them better understand our aquatic plants.

Of course, in a recent discussion on this subject, another individual proposed another option which is to just ignore all this. How likely is it the state will have the resources to target individual aquatic plant keepers who keep such indoors when there are so many better targets available??

Finally, a thought, most crypts cannot positively be identified until they flower. So how are they going to identify c wendti vs. "whitelisted crypts"?

Bob
 
#36 ·
BobAlston said:
The suggested can be a preamble but I think the key must be to a) show that people who keep aquatic plants in aquariums are not a significant source of risk to Texas waterways especially as compared to and contrasted with keepers of plants in outside ponds, commercial growers, etc. b) I think we may have a chance at challenging what is excluded from the white list by better understanding how they are deciding and helping them better understand our aquatic plants.Bob
Click to expand...
I think this is wise.

BobAlston said:
Of course, in a recent discussion on this subject, another individual proposed another option which is to just ignore all this. How likely is it the state will have the resources to target individual aquatic plant keepers who keep such indoors when there are so many better targets available??
Click to expand...
I think may be naive. It's wishful thinking to think that they are creating a law without the intention to enforce it.
Bob[/QUOTE]
 
#26 ·
what about a list of what we want and should be on the white list, and we put bs on the black list... what about reptile tessial plants on the black list and the rest on the white list...

grr, land of the free. BS.
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#28 ·
Not to sound egotistical, but I believe I understand both the hobby and regulatory opinions well and will be more than happy to prepare and present a written statement before the committee on the club's behalf.

We're all entitled to our own opinions and think DFWAPC is stronger for our differing points of view on this topic. However, please refrain from wholesale "government" bashing. There's a lot more going on than what meets the eye and TPWD's been put in an uncomfortable position by having to come up with this list in relatively short order. Many years of research needs to go into a program such as this and they're sorely limited in funding and available personnel.

In fact, y'all need to come to the meeting and voice support for the need for further research on the topic! I've sent in grant proposals to study exactly this sort of thing. Perhaps more voices will convince them to search the couch cushons for a little $$. :)


Cheers,
Phil
 
#38 · (Edited)
Phil Edwards said:
Not to sound egotistical, but I believe I understand both the hobby and regulatory opinions well and will be more than happy to prepare and present a written statement before the committee on the club's behalf.

We're all entitled to our own opinions and think DFWAPC is stronger for our differing points of view on this topic. However, please refrain from wholesale "government" bashing. There's a lot more going on than what meets the eye and TPWD's been put in an uncomfortable position by having to come up with this list in relatively short order. Many years of research needs to go into a program such as this and they're sorely limited in funding and available personnel.

In fact, y'all need to come to the meeting and voice support for the need for further research on the topic! I've sent in grant proposals to study exactly this sort of thing. Perhaps more voices will convince them to search the couch cushons for a little $$. :)

Cheers,
Phil
Click to expand...
I'm here to break the news to you that the State of Texas is facing a $25billion deficit going into the legislative session that starts in about a week. Good luck on finding new money for this kind of effort.
 
Aquatic Plant Forum
posts
733K
members
55K
Since
2003
A forum community dedicated to aquatic plant owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about collections, displays, tanks, styles, troubleshooting, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
General Aquarium Plants Discussions Aquascaping El Natural Equipment Fish for the Planted Aquarium