rootman wrote:Okay, I'm seeing everyone's point of view and truly understand but still what do we do with illegal diggers and rogue buyers. I'm still trying to figure out how we can insure in season digging.
I don't know maybe make the first time offences to have fines 10times minimum the value of ginseng confiscated or $10,000.00 which ever is higher, along with restitution to the landowner if trespassing at minimum of 10 times ginsengs value make the 1st time offense punishable by up to a year rather than weeks or months in some states. For 2nd time offenses double up the penalties at minimum and have a minimum mandatory sentence. Habitual offenders stricter minimum's and loss of ability to ever harvest, sell, or buy ginseng.
While were make things harder lets also look at poorly made laws like then look into making changes to the certification process so that anyone in any state can get it certified, buyers as normal and diggers required to pay a administrative fee for the additional time it takes your conservation officers to do this.
Drop the requirement that you have to have separate multiple export license's for every year of ginseng that you wish to export as its ridiculous that if you want to export root dug this year, last year, and the year before that you need to buy 3 export licenses for each separate year. Make it so 1 license can export ANY years ginseng instead because come on they already have each years total harvest #'s from the certification process so what difference does it make to them how much of each years harvest leaves the USA and if it matters for some obscure reason then place a spot on the individual export certificates to state you are exporting X amount of this years harvest, X amount of last years, and X amount of any other year.
Then if you want strict harvest limit quotas on Federal & State lands no problem they are the PUBLICS lands and not everyone's a responsible digger so they do need managed for future generations but once this is done correctly sustainable harvests should increase so review of those quotas should be a part of it. BUT no private land harvest quotas because if a land owner is stupid enough to strip their land of EVERY ginseng plant that's mature just to get maximum money a given year it should be their RIGHT as it is now.
If land is to be stripped entirely of woods and used for another purpose in the future then it should be legal to remove all immature plants for transplanting and all mature plants for sales or transplanting NO MATTER if its private or public land and this should be allowed to be done at any time of year because its a waste to let it be be legal to destroy the ginseng habitat for a area permanently without allowing it to also be legal to remove the plants in that area where the habitat is to be destroyed no matter what time of the year it is. Because now if a areas gonna get stripped permanently and they start in May every plant is PERMANENTLY DESTROYED for no reason other than its illegal. BUT you legally allow it to be destroyed instead now. Just how stupid is that???
The FED's should step up and make it a export requirement that NO ginseng root shall be exported from the USA that is less than 10 years of age rather than 5 in my opinion. Then this STUPID rule in some states that require a plant to be a 3 prong or larger before its legal to be harvested should be dumped. Indiana got it right in there definition I feel ( except for minimum year they have as 5 it should be 10 )
Indiana law states the following
2.To harvest legally, a ginseng plant must have: at least 3 prongs and a flowering or fruiting stalk,
or at least 4 internodes on the rhizome.
Because I know from experience a 40 year old plant can have 1, 2, 3, 4 or more prongs so make it so the laws in all states go by # of internodes and not how many prongs the plant is.
The original framers of these laws had good intentions but they FAILED to foresee some of them actually cause detrimental side effects to sound sustainability and free market principle's.
So in my opinion the laws we have in effect are actually a good start they just need fine tuned and they should as a requirement be subject to regular review.