The state of Connecticut eyeing bamboo for invasive status

[Alan_L]

It's not just towns now. Connecticut is considering adding some bamboo species to the "invasive" list.

http://www.nhregister.com/articles/2012 ... =fullstory

Of course if they do that with Yellow Groove, people can just plant another species instead. (Don't know if I should put a smiley face here or a sad one.)

Read the comments if you want to "learn how to get rid of bamboo".

[sully0family]

Well this scares me. I'm about 2 hours away and like I said in other posts in other topics "R.I. is corrupt ". I just told my wife that I would donate my service to rid this women's yard of the (yellow), but first take some to start. I am so confident that I could control any bamboo without barriers only because I was able to rid one of my yards (6000sqf) of Japanese Knotweed. Does anyone have an opinion? should I get involved? I don't want it to trickle up to R.I.

[Alan_L]

I don't think you need to panic yet. I think the ABS is going to get involved in some of these "fights", at least to ensure that people have the correct information

[canadianplant]

I find it really funny, how people get all worked up in a fuss about this, when they dont really understand what they are doing...

Most species that are "nvasive" are obiously not native to the states. IF they are native you cannot really call them invasive right? The problem here, is that people/states go crazy trying to remove them. THe thing is, most species that we have that are invasive, are pioneer species. They love disterbed soil, and the space that is created revoving trees and invasives. Removing inasives from an area, is more then likely going to encourage MORE invasive species.

A good example is, let say you have a large grove of P Areosulcata that is deemed "invasive". So you get the whole thing removed, creating a LARGE portionm of disturbed soil. THis will encourage knotweed, dock, and pioneer trees such as rusian olive (which IMO is a larger problem in the east coast then bamboo). So you see the problem: Removing invasive species, inevitably creates the conditions for other invasives to come, if the area is left to its own devices.

SO the woman complaining about yellow grove, is probably going to have to removed, and is more then likely going to encourage worse species in her yard, because people dont understand the ecological term succession. SUccession being the estabolishment of a forest, with stages of different plants, that do different things.

[dependable]

Where I'm from, some women from Connecticut are seen as invasive.

Seriously though, I hope ABS does get some info out there soon. As a landscaper, I have been affected by New England's fairly large banned for propagation list. Some of the plants on the list make sense, a lot of others do not. There are also plants that probably should be on the list that were left off. Recently, I had to explain to a client that I could not replace their dead Mimosa tree, nor can I extend an existing euyonomous hedge (but I can still get miles of Lingstrom Ovafolium).

Bamboo, of course, belongs on no banned list, as running bamboo does not spread by seed, and clumpers are difficult to spread if you want them to.

I do believe that people should be responsible and not plant anything in such a way that it spreads (unwanted) on to another's property. So there is probably a need for some education on that end as well.

[canadianplant]

That can depend ont he distributer/ seller. Most of those places just want cash, and dont give the nitty gritty details. OF course, as a gardener, you should know what you are getting into when buying a plant, but it should also be up to the sellar to give some details.

Last year I wanted to buy an amur maple. I asked the lady who was available, and she was really helpful, but she failed to mention the fact that the seeds will pop up anywhere, even in sidewalk cracks. SHe also failed to mention, that amur maple may be on the invasive list up here (I do ebelive it is getting banned in minnisoda). I dont buy things unless I know as much as I can find out about it.

Back in the day they had no concept of environmental harm. It seems some of us still have the old mindset of "ooh its pretty lets plant it". Now we have to "clean up" their mess, and try to educate people properlly.

[foxd]

I found this document.

http://www.hort.uconn.edu/cipwg/pdfs/20 ... Status.pdf

Apparently Caryn Rickel has had a strong hand in this.

[moriphen]

I found this document.

http://www.hort.uconn.edu/cipwg/pdfs/20 ... Status.pdf

Apparently Caryn Rickel has had a strong hand in this.

Hell hath no furry like a angry women with time on her hands... But back on topic we really need to be on top of this, otherwise it will set off a domino effect that could result in many nearby states banning bamboo outright.

[foxd]

I just got this information a few minutes ago: Connecticut is holding public hearings on running bamboo legislation (House Bill 5122) on February 22, 11 AM, Room 1C in the Hartford Legislative Office Building, Hartford, Connecticut.

[moriphen]

I have already have contacted several nearby growers. However did anyone read the offending species list? It mentions only Phyllostachys aurea which if memory serves is not even reliably cold hardy in New Jersey. This bill is targeting the wrong bamboo from the get go.

Relevant links:

Bill main page:
http://www.cga.ct.gov/asp/cgabillstatus ... um=HB05122

Bill itself (PDF):
http://www.cga.ct.gov/2012/TOB/h/pdf/20 ... R00-HB.pdf

Amended for and against briefs:
http://www.cga.ct.gov/asp/menu/CommDocT ... _year=2012

Caryn Rickels rant:
http://www.cga.ct.gov/2012/ENVdata/Tmy/ ... el-TMY.PDF

[Alan_L]

I thought the original article I read the other day mentioned Yellow Groove mainly, with aurea mentioned in passing. Perhaps they don't realize they are two different species?

Even if they ban only one species it:

- sets a precedent for others
- gives bamboo haters one more reference to cite
- gives the "ban bamboo" movement more momentum

I really hope somebody shows up at the meeting who has good information and is against the legislation. Is there contact information? Even if nobody with sense shows up at the meeting, the ABS and growers can write, call, or email to voice their objection.

[CC Bamboo]

My personal observation.
Don't expect to ABS to magically jump in.
I am a past member and feel that the organization if off-track and geared too heavily to the hobbyist. This should not be taken as a jab at the ABS or it's members. The reality is that we have a very small fragmented industry that has very little organization and very few true bamboo specialist. Those that do work with bamboo on a daily basis, many times don't have the time to pursue and debate these topics. Many of us are small business owners, trying to pursue a dream during a brutal time, both economically and politically.

I think the ABS needs to consider an executive type committee or maybe we need to organize and create a separate entity focussed on one thing, our lively hoods. "Tell me where to send the paperwork"

Let's be honest, there is no doubt that current and past members of the ABS are guilty of selling some of the bamboo that has caused these bills to be drafted. Some sold it locally, and some likely shipped it thousands of miles. They happily made money while doing so, but (some) never took responsibility to ensure the customer was properly educated. "Hence the wording of this bill"
Many of the larger growers have stepped up and included very detailed sections of their websites relating to expectations and containment.
"Yes, that can be taken as a shot over the bow, because it is time for all of us to man up and be responsible!"

Many of the worst situations I see are from bamboo that was NOT sold by a bamboo grower. They stem from the average joe that takes a random clump from along the road and plants it where it shouldn't go. All too often than not, the bamboo does not present an issue for 20 years until it has been allowed to grow uncontrolled and unmaintained.

All this said, we should be organizing all of this legislation from across the country. I will gladly start a file if the info is sent to me!
Havertown Township in PA went as far to say it must be removed in full if it is within 30ft of a road or power lines. Rutledge township went as far to say it must be trimmed so no part of the bamboo is within 10ft of a property line. "Yes, leaning growth is a violation".

Honestly, I don't find issue with RI's wording. It simply requires that the bamboo is contained and that the grower/seller explains the proper methods of care. Technically, since it does not state (all Phyllostachys) or (all running) bamboos, the letter of the law only applies to golden, which is not well suited for the area anyway. If you want to cause some trouble, go plant nuda or bissetii next to the nearest politicians house.

For whoever took the time to read my rant....you may not like it and that's fine. Just provide me with an educated retort. If you feel that I have a point, and I think many of you will. Then let's get our heads out of the sand and get some educated, articulate, knowledgable people to be our voice.

Who the heck am I?
I probably have more passion towards bamboo than most. In fact I left a lucrative corporate career to pursue my passion. I take responsibility when I install and I guarantee all of my work even the worst case removals.
I believe that with the right people in place, we should be able to avoid the need to import most of the bamboo products that come from behind the red curtain.
The problem is that I do not see the perceived leaders of our industry as the correct players to make this happen. We have a handful of people that believe and have created the perception that the industry is theirs and they are simply positioning themselves as the authority without the supporting voice to back it up.

John Kohler
CC Bamboo
Malvern, PA
610-888-4900

http://www.ccbamboo.com
http://www.removingbamboo.com

[moriphen]

I contacted Connecticut Green Industries http://www.flowersplantsinct.com/index.htm

They only brief filed against the bill:
http://www.cga.ct.gov/2012/ENVdata/Tmy/ ... an-TMY.PDF.

I have offered them our support and knowledge in the hope that we get a positive outcome.

[jd.]

I found this document.

http://www.hort.uconn.edu/cipwg/pdfs/20 ... Status.pdf

From the document, five characteristics must be met for a plant to be deemed "potentially invasive." The third characteristic follows:
"3.) under average conditions, the plant has potential for rapid and widespread dispersion and establishment in the state or region within the state;"

To assert that phyllostachys aurea is capable of "rapid and widespread dispersion" seems to belittle the fact that this bamboo requires seeds to spread beyond a short walking distance every year. Considering that under average conditions this bamboo only produces seed that falls to the ground every half century or so, this document seems to invoke an altered or paranoid perception of the "rapid" nature of the "widespread dispersion."

On the other hand when someone invents a bamboo/dandelion hybrid with fluffy wind-borne seeds, I fully agree that such a plant well deserves a "potentially invasive" designation in Connecticut even if it only seeds once every century.

[Alan_L]

My personal observation. Don't expect to ABS to magically jump in...

...Many of us are small business owners, trying to pursue a dream during a brutal time, both economically and politically.

John, I appreciate your comments, but I have a few rebuttals. (Anybody please correct me if I'm wrong.)

First, I don't think the ABS was ever intended to be focused on the business of bamboo, but on bamboo itself -- it's growing, care, information about it, etc. It sounds like you want a "Bamboo Growers Council" or something, specifically for those whose business involves bamboo. As you said, perhaps it's a branch of the ABS.

Second, I would think that when the political climate became "brutal", as it apparently is in the northeast, the small business owners who are affected would have more reason and more motivation to become involved, not less.

Third, this forum isn't officially connected to the ABS. Some of its members visit here regularly (including past and current officers), but it's probably best if you express your concerns directly to the ABS. Their website has contact information for many (all?) of the officers I believe.

Finally, you mention that growers/sellers must be more responsible and let customers know how to control running bamboos so they don't grow where not wanted. I completely agree, but feel like there may be many companies that would rather not give away too much information. If a large portion of one's business is removal of unwanted bamboo, would the owners of that business want out-of-control bamboo to no longer be a problem? Even your website has very minimal information on controlling bamboo -- just a small paragraph that mentions barriers or mowing. I would expect to see a prominent "keeping bamboo under control" link on any grower's website. This is information that customers need before purchase, and that many people who inherited a bamboo problem need to know too (not just paying customers).

That's maybe one reason why the ABS needs to stay unconnected to businesses -- the ABS provides all of the free information that potential or actual bamboo owners need, while the individual businesses can choose to deliver information to customers as they think is best.

If this came across as a personal attack I apologize, as that was not my intent. I'm just trying to keep the discussion going.