Still jumping on Himalayan Balsam

[sparks]

Hi gang, just thougt I'd help to spread a little-light on this matter of up-rooting and then jumping on one of the most beautiful wild flowers we are very privalaged to have growing along our British Waterways. Yes this wild plant is very inevasive, but what would these un-enlightend people rather see growing along our rivers? stinging nettles? As a Bushcrafter with 40years of experiance under my belt I would like to clear up this silly practice of illegally UP-ROOTING this wild flower and chuckin' them all over the public footpaths.

Himalayan Balsam [ impatiens glandulifera ] also known as Indian Balsam / Touch-me-not / Policeman's Helmet

1. This plant is NOT poisonous.
2. It does not cause skin rashes [ quite the oppersite in fact,it is used to treat the rash caused by Poison Ivy].
3. It is 100% edible [ leave / stem / roots / seeds.[ seeds are used to make bread and coffee].

The greatest ironys about this matter is that this beautiful wild flower is actually used to treat skin rashes by herbalists and Bushcrafters like me and our famous Ray Mears.The park rangers that were seen on the BBC up-rooting these plants were
in actual fact breaking the law and setting a very bad example to others [ especially children].The Wildlife and Countryside Act
of 1981 forbids the up-rooting of all British wild flowers.

I would like to also point out that I use the cycle paths in the countryside where my wife and I live and not only find it very upsetting
to see thousands of these plants strewn across the paths, but as any cyclist knows, it is very dangerous because as with autumn
leaves and wet tree roots, they can cause one to loose control of the steering if one of these slippery plants gets under the front wheel.
For more information about the edibility and uses of Himalayan Balsam [ impatiens glandulifera ] check-out Plants For a Future website.

[Wild-Woman]

Hi Sparks. Nice to have you with us.

This is my own personal view. I would prefer to see stinging nettles growing, or any of our own native plants.
Nettles provide an incalculably good habitat for our wildlife species.
HB-although pretty just chokes up the waterways and takes over where our species should be.

In a river near me,it is virtually out of control and just pushing everything else out.

As I say, this is my view and I do appreciate that everyone has their own.

Jules

[Andy Warne]

Originally Posted by sparks

Yes this wild plant is very inevasive, but what would these un-enlightend people rather see growing along our rivers? stinging nettles?

Yes, and any of the other native species that would otherwise be growing there.

Originally Posted by sparks

The park rangers that were seen on the BBC up-rooting these plants were
in actual fact breaking the law and setting a very bad example to others [ especially children].The Wildlife and Countryside Act
of 1981 forbids the up-rooting of all British wild flowers.

No they weren't and no it doesn't.

[peppermint]

Originally Posted by sparks

The park rangers that were seen on the BBC up-rooting these plants were
in actual fact breaking the law and setting a very bad example to others [ especially children].The Wildlife and Countryside Act
of 1981 forbids the up-rooting of all British wild flowers.

.

It is not illegal to pull up himalayan balsalm, if fact it is part of the management strategy for this invasive species.
Himalayan Balsam seeds prolifically and the light seed is then easily spread along ditches, rivers and canals. It is an annual activity in many areas of the country to pull up this shallow rooted plant in an attempt to prevent it from spreading and dominating wetland sites.

[sparks]

Hi Jules,THANKYOU very much for your post and point of view. As at the start of my tread I do agree that HB is very evasive and not really commenting on that side of things, although I beleive Japanese Knotweed is far worse. The main point I am making is that the Park Rangers on that BBC News program set a bad example to children who may start ripping up other plants as well, and that it all started with them saying the plant sap burns peoples hands, which is rubbish; they must be getting mixed-up with Gaint Hogweed...! [ grown..].

I was also complaining about the dangers to cyclist and how these plants are being torn-up and just thrown all other the place. Besides.. doesen't it seen rather childish to jump-up-and down on a plant like some nutter! Thanks again Jules. Sparks

[peppermint]

Originally Posted by sparks

Hi Jules,THANKYOU very much for your post and point of view. As at the start of my tread I do agree that HB is very evasive and not really commenting on that side of things, although I beleive Japanese Knotweed is far worse. The main point I am making is that the Park Rangers on that BBC News program set a bad example to children who may start ripping up other plants as well, and that it all started with them saying the plant sap burns peoples hands, which is rubbish; they must be getting mixed-up with Gaint Hogweed...! [ grown..].

I was also complaining about the dangers to cyclist and how these plants are being torn-up and just thrown all other the place. Besides.. doesen't it seen rather childish to jump-up-and down on a plant like some nutter! Thanks again Jules. Sparks

Having not seen the program you are referring to i cannot comment on if the rangers were setting a bad example of uprooting flowers to children. I was addressing the point you made about uprooting himalayan balsalm as breaking the law, as it is not.

I agree that if these plants are being uprooted then they should not be left scattered all over designated pathways, rather put to one side or taken to another appropriate place.

[Jez]

They bring cattle to do this job in my neck of the woods!

[rscott74]

We have had a discussion about this recentlly. Do a search on 'balsam'. In a poll of 40 members only 3 said HB should not be eradicated or controlled. It is an attractive flower but, on balance, it poses a significant threat to natural habitats.

[Kymba]

I agree nettles are great for all sorts of wildlife..
But why oh why do they hate me so much . No matter where i go or what i am doing i never see any nettles close by me.
Then when i am not looking they quietly sneak up and surround me just to make sure I fall, trip or walk into them.
Its like they know that I have a reaction to them when stung,nothing serious just a couple of days of itching,stinging and discomfort

[Ukwildlifeo]

If this is the stuff I think is the less of it the better. Mind you its no where near as bad as japanese knotweed - chop it down, add herbicide, dig up as much as you can, but you still end up back where you started a month or two later

[eeyore]

even if the wildlife and countryside act did forbid uprooting any british flower which it doesnt in so many words - HB would still not be covered as it isnt a native species - it is a foreign invasive.

claiming the the park rangers who were shown uprooting it are setting a bad example is fatuous - its like claiming that showing a farmer ploughing a feild encourages people to plough up nature reserves or that showing woodland management encourages deforestation.

The park rangers concerned were performing a perfectly valid and necessary management task and the reasoning why was perfectly adequately explained - the fact that HB is "pretty" doesnt prevent it from being a major pest which crowds out native british flora and needs to be controlled or preferably eradicated.

you do have a minor poibnt as regatrds the plant material scattered on the cycleways - i generally try and remove as much as possible of cut vegetation from paths when my teams carry ouit maintenance - but then again if you are cycling in the countryside surely you expect a slippery and uneven surface - otherwise you might as well confine your cycling to the road

[alanhill]

As someone who organises Balsam-pulling events, usually in the first weeks of June, I can testify to the fact that it is eradicable as long as you follow up any pulling activity with monitoring and further pulling in following seasons. The reason we are trying to eradicate as much as possible in our local area is that we are committed to the promotion of biodiversity and there are large areas which are now monoculture Balsam. I do agree that Japanese Knotweed (like Balsam a non-native invasive species) is a bigger problem as it is a perennial with a huge root-system, and the only effective way of controlling that at present is through spraying (repeatedly) with glyphosate - this is a much more specialist (and costly)job than that of eradicating balsam.

alanhill

[kshotton45]

It appears that you can destroy it legally. You just have to be careful when using weedkillers on it.

Royal Horticultural Society - Advice: Himalayan balsam control

Keith.

[Adam Cheeseman]

Bit pointless using chemicals when the plant is an annual. Just pull or strim.

Cheers,

Adam

[kshotton45]

That's a good point! It's strange for the RHS to make a gaff like that. Perhaps they're catering for someone who has half an acre of the stuff and no strimmer !!

Keith.

[Neil Jones]

Originally Posted by peppermint

It is not illegal to pull up himalayan balsalm, if fact it is part of the management strategy for this invasive species.
Himalayan Balsam seeds prolifically and the light seed is then easily spread along ditches, rivers and canals. It is an annual activity in many areas of the country to pull up this shallow rooted plant in an attempt to prevent it from spreading and dominating wetland sites.

I am no fan of himalayan balsam. It is an ecologically damaging invasive alien.
BUT on a strict point of law it can be illegal to uproot Himalayan Balsam or any other wild plant.
This is what the Wildlife and Countryside Act actually says.

"(1) Subject to the provisions of this part if any person

(a) intentionally picks, uproots or destroys any wild plant include in schedule 8 ;or

(b)Not being an authorised person intentionally, uproots any wild plant not included in that schedule. "

Now there is a list of what constitutes and authorised person but basically it is the owner, occupier or someone with their permission and certain officials.


You may question on a number of grounds the sensibility of having such a law on the statute books but it does exists and there have been prosecutions under it.

.

[svenrufus]

Originally Posted by Neil Jones

I am no fan of himalayan balsam. It is an ecologically damaging invasive alien.
BUT on a strict point of law it can be illegal to uproot Himalayan Balsam or any other wild plant.
This is what the Wildlife and Countryside Act actually says.

"(1) Subject to the provisions of this part if any person

(a) intentionally picks, uproots or destroys any wild plant include in schedule 8 ;or

(b)Not being an authorised person intentionally, uproots any wild plant not included in that schedule. "

Now there is a list of what constitutes and authorised person but basically it is the owner, occupier or someone with their permission and certain officials.


You may question on a number of grounds the sensibility of having such a law on the statute books but it does exists and there have been prosecutions under it.

.

In terms of how the law is interpreted, HB would not be viewed as a wild plant and so not covered by this clause of the WCA.

[eeyore]

Originally Posted by svenrufus

In terms of how the law is interpreted, HB would not be viewed as a wild plant and so not covered by this clause of the WCA.

indeed - foreign invasives such as hymalayan balsam , japanese knotweed, astralaisan stone crop and what have you are not considered to be wild plants - WCA actually makes this pretty clear

that said i wouldnt advise anyone to uproot anything without the permision of the land owner / manager - there are some areas I know for example where HB is the only plant growing on river banks and uprooting it willy nilly could eacerbate bank erosion concerns - the land manager in these areas intends to remove it when he is in the position to othewise stabilise the bank and thus would not welcome people pulling it up on an ad hoc basis

[aeshna5]

Originally Posted by svenrufus

In terms of how the law is interpreted, HB would not be viewed as a wild plant and so not covered by this clause of the WCA.

I would guess it's still illegal for a person to pull this up without permission- most authorities would probably be too happy for it to be removed, but it's possible that a landowner somewhere may be happy having this attractive plant + would resent somebody destroying it without permission. It is very much a wild plant. No it's not native, but the law doesn't seem to stipulate about native vs.alien, so permission would still technically be needed for removal of the plant.

[eeyore]

my understanding is that alien invasives are not considered wild in the eyes of the law - however you are correct about the permission aspect as there are a number of other legal considerations - in some circumstances you could fall foul of the criminal damage and vandalism laws if you pulled any plant without appropriate permissions.

there is also question of access - legally public rights of way giove you access to freely pass and repass - they do not give you access to pull up adjoining vegetation - therefore you could be gulty of trespass against the landowner , and possibly agrivated trespass if a vanadlism type charge was also levied.

beyond the legal considerations there is also the question of common courtesy - you dont enter someone elses land and pull up their plants - it simply isnt done old boy

[Swallowtail]

Originally Posted by eeyore

my understanding is that alien invasives are not considered wild in the eyes of the law

This is clearly incorrect. The law actually contains a definition of a wild plant that says that it is any plant that normally grows wild. Since it also contains a section that prohibits certain foreign invasives from being introduced into the wild, it is clear that wild means growing without control which is what technically this plant is doing.
If it didn't include foreign plants it would then lead to a debate as to what is foreign most of out flora did not grow here at one time. ( During the ice age.) and many wild plants that are now common are technically non-native.

It is highly unlikely that the Criminal Prosecution Service would consider prosecuting someone just for uprooting Himalayan Balsam, that would probably be considered "not in the public interest". but it is still _technically_illegal to uproot it under the act. They might include it in a prosecution where a whole load of other species were involved.
Also it isn't just up to the CPS to prosecute people. It would not be impossible for a crank to initiate a private prosecution.

- however you are correct about the permission aspect as there are a number of other legal considerations - in some circumstances you could fall foul of the criminal damage and vandalism laws if you pulled any plant without appropriate permissions.

there is also question of access - legally public rights of way giove you access to freely pass and repass - they do not give you access to pull up adjoining vegetation - therefore you could be gulty of trespass against the landowner , and possibly agrivated trespass if a vanadlism type charge was also levied.

You don't seem to understand what the word Trespass actually means.
You can find this in the Oxford English Dictionary, which defines it as "wrongful entry upon the lands of another with damage to his real property".
So they could be prosecuted for the damage alone.

Secondly You are wrong on Aggravated Trespass
Section 68 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 (CJA) defines the offence as follows:
A person commits aggravated trespass if he trespasses on land with the intention of disrupting, or intimidating those taking part in, lawful activity taking place on that or adjacent land.

beyond the legal considerations there is also the question of common courtesy - you dont enter someone elses land and pull up their plants - it simply isnt done old boy

Oh I quite agree with you there. I actually think that the law on uprooting plants in the Wildlife and Countryside Act is badly drafted. However, it says what it says so we are stuck with it.

[rscott74]

All these references to finer points ot law serve little purpose in my view. HB is ruinous to other plant life and, in the longer term, habitat for other wildlife. I've indicated elsewhere that an SSSI near me, Hetton Bogs, has been hugely invaded. Whilst I thought HB attractive initially I now see an ever expanding area of woodland and park being spoiled both visually and environmentally.
What adds to my concern is the lack of action by my local Authority, City of Sunderland, who have known of the problem for some years but have done little or nothing about it - I wonder if they are breaking the law through thier in activity! I e-mailed the so called 'Countryside Team' weeks ago but have not recieved a specific response. As HB is now seeding (at up to 800 seedas per plant and cast up to 7m) things will be even worse next year.

[eeyore]

Originally Posted by Swallowtail

This is clearly incorrect. The law actually contains a definition of a wild plant that says that it is any plant that normally grows wild. Since it also contains a section that prohibits certain foreign invasives from being introduced into the wild, it is clear that wild means growing without control which is what technically this plant is doing.
If it didn't include foreign plants it would then lead to a debate as to what is foreign most of out flora did not grow here at one time. ( During the ice age.) and many wild plants that are now common are technically non-native.

You don't seem to understand what the word Trespass actually means.
You can find this in the Oxford English Dictionary, which defines it as "wrongful entry upon the lands of another with damage to his real property".
So they could be prosecuted for the damage alone.

Secondly You are wrong on Aggravated Trespass
Section 68 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 (CJA) defines the offence as follows:
A person commits aggravated trespass if he trespasses on land with the intention of disrupting, or intimidating those taking part in, lawful activity taking place on that or adjacent land.



Oh I quite agree with you there. I actually think that the law on uprooting plants in the Wildlife and Countryside Act is badly drafted. However, it says what it says so we are stuck with it.

actually it is you who is incorrect on a couple of points

a) as you say the WCA specifys a wild plant as being one that normally grows wild in the uk - foreign invasives do not normally grow wild in the uk which is why they are alien

b) trespass : "a person who enters or remain on land without lawful authority commits the act of trespass against the landowner" (Highways act