TOPIC: Crickets Chirping* * *

Fellows,
The temperature has risen some and I was able to get back in the mountains today. I planted on two different mountains and both were so steep that it was all that I could do to stay on my feet and not slide down. It rained last night here and that made the footing even more treacherous. Wet leaves on top of limbs sloping down the hill can mean a wicked fall. I was really sore by the time I finished this afternoon. I'll be back in there on another mountain tomorrow. It's really a good feeling to see these plants coming up everywhere the next Spring. There are others doing the same thing and I say: \"God Bless Them\". They will benefit needy mountain families some time down the road. I wish that I could afford to do this until Spring.
Hugh

Hillhopper,
I am glad to have this conversation with you. Your right about microprop not fitting into what we as growers are doing right now. Currently our market is mainly in China, with prices based more on physical characteristics and appearance. But over the last 20 years and especially the last 10 years probably the most research has ever been done on the medical side of ginseng, scientist are now trying to put together the puzzle of what chemical properties ginseng has and are researching how to treat diseases and illness with those ginsenosides, its only a matter of time until they start making those connections, at that point the game will open up a new market for our old friend based upon composition instead of appearance,then it will not matter if ginseng is shaped like a man, a carrot or a duck. The best market to be in right now is wild and wild-simulated, i fully agree but as soon as a few more medical break-thrus are made we may be seeing microprop as the way to reach a desired plant that we may not be able to aquire by our current methods.

Hugh,
if i had some more seed, i would probably be planting also, i hope future generations get to enjoy what we have been blessed to enjoy as well

Latt, I've heard of another category between wild and wild-simulated called virtually-wild. Which is pretty much exactly the same as wild except who put the seed there. No amendments, pesticides or weeding. Just put the seed in the ground 6 inches or more apart and come back in ten years. I think the guy who proposed it also suggested staggering years you plant in order to create a good age distribution as well. Not sure how needed that would be though.

Imho that describes what wild-simulated should be but it seems most people do some kind of low level cultivation like amendments and weeding at the very least. Otherwise theoretically speaking wild-simulated and wild would be exactly the same thing and the roots would be worth the same.

I have read about studies on this before. I'm not real sure what my feelings are of mixing science and ginseng. Your right, eventually they will unveil it's secrets. I fear if breakthroughs are found that the next thing to happen will be for a pharmaceutical company to synthesize it's compounds and turn it into a pill; all the while we get the boot out the back door with the exception of a small novelty gift market. Hopefully Im way wrong on that one.
Hugh,
You had some nice weather to plant in today. From the looks of our forecast you had better do all you can tomorrow. It seems several days of wet weather are headed our way.

Hillhopper

Hillhopper,

I'm not to worried about those studies. First off almost all the Chinese studies I've read are biased. They usually fudge the numbers or flaw the study to favor wild ginseng and to make it look like it works all kinds of magic. Even if they got their act together the people wouldn't just throw out what they think they know. They'ed have to just educate the following generations right. So even then there would be a dwindling of demand over a period of 60 years or so.

Hey everyone. Like you all...it has been completely crazy here the past few months.

Rather than try to reply to each one of you, I'll lay out my thoughts generally and you all can take or leave what you like.

Ginseng classification:
Since we started kicking around the idea of a growers/diggers association, the first thing we appear in which to have mutual interest is consistency of laws across the various states. I've not had time to sit down and study/document all the definitions of ginseng classification in all the states (it’s on the list). But, I am generally suggesting four primary classifications. Wild ...this means you found it. You didn't plant it, but someone else might have. The seed stock was from unknown origin and assumed to be naturally occurring regardless of reality. Wild Simulated... this means you planted the seed or the rootlet and generally know its origin. However, you have applied NO other agricultural methods (tilling, weeding, spraying etc). I know a lot of you guys lay gypsum and rock phosphate. I've not personally made up my mind if this should change a wild simulated classification or not. I have a grower who does this and his stuff looks absolutely awesome at about 5 years of age with very good wild character. We shall see. Woods Grown... In my mind, woods grown is where you can till beds, weed, spray, mulch and add things like gypsum and maybe phosphate. However, you never EVER add any type of growth enhancer at all. I know this might be splitting hairs with the gypsum and phosphate -so I am open to, and seek discussion on that one for sure. Cultivated...do anything you like to this within reason. But for me, the key is that you will be adding fertilizer or other growth enhancers to this product. The issue of what provides the shade -natural woodland over story or shade cloth is irrelevant. If you pour MiricleGrow on your wild sim beds, or weed them, or spray them -even one time- in my mind you have just made it cultivated ginseng. The same for woods grown. If you fertilize it just once...it becomes cultivated.

This is where I suggest we draw the divisions.

Seed origin:
The second question we are pondering is if the addition of non-native strains of ginseng into an area will harm the native populations by diluting the genetic make up of the plants. I received some information from folks when I last brought this up. I was also able to find some scholarly studies on the subject (which are currently lying on my desk in hopes I will again have some time soon). My initial impression is that ginseng we find, which we did not plant ourselves or do not know was planted by someone else, is considered wild regardless of the actual facts surrounding the origin of the seed or the method by which it came to be planted. Secondly, that genetic diversity is a good thing in nearly all cases with which I am aware save for the occurrence of a fault. Why would ginseng be the only plant to be contrary to this fact? I would much rather have a woods full of wild simulated ginseng as no ginseng at all. And, if there is a need to keep (assumed) wild population genetics pure, would not the state and federal woodlands be the best place to do that? As I understand at this point, ginseng genetics are similar with small identifiers from various subsets. For instance, this ginseng I just dug will be slightly different genetically from the one I dug on the other side of the hill, or one from a patch 2 miles away. Since there is no protection against genetic strain mixing in the wild, it certainly happens, so why would it be a detrimental thing (especially if the positive side is a woods full of wild simulated ginseng)? I asked one of the Ohio Division of Wildlife researchers this question. The answer I received was a little unexpected, but completely confirming. Apparently, the genetic testing which has been done on Ohio's wild ginseng population has shown that most of the strains originated in Wisconsin. Therefore, the idea of maintaining genetic purity is not only idealistic but overly of no real value in most cases. Besides, where did the commercial growers originally get their seed? That's right, from native wild plants. So, how far do we want to chase this concept back in time? If the premise is that planting seed from cultivated seed sources can never produce anything but cultivated root, then would we not also have to say that regardless of the generations, all cultivated seed is originally wild and therefore will result in only wild root? I think it is all in the method in which you allow your ginseng to grow.

I agree with Hillhopper on the micro propagation thing. I don't think it is needed nor warranted for the ginseng industry. Further, the LAST thing we need is a corporation like Monsanto patenting a strain of ginseng seed which has been genetically modified.

Thank you BCastle for distracting me at work. LOL...

Your commentary on purity of the strains of our favorite plant is interesting to me. Well, in the following ways...

1] Non-Native strains.
Since there is very, very little \"native\" 'sang left in the appalacians, then non-native must be the way to go if one is to replant any at all. Seems self-explanitory, however,one could assert that one could buy seed for sources claiming to have only appalacian origins of seed, like Harding's [who claims it is directly desecended from regional seed by his father] or Dr Scott Person's seed.

This begs the questions: how much of a purist do you want to be about this? And, how important is it to reseed/replant the stripped areas?

IMHO- it is more important to save an nearly endangered plant with seed that is grown nearby [to include some states away], rather than planing only seed that is truely native to the region.

2] Classifications conversation...

Generally I have lots of agreement with what you've stated... however... IMHO- this one point remains to talk about.
You stated on wild sim: \" However, you have applied NO other agricultural methods (tilling, weeding, spraying etc)\" It was my understanding that using organic additives was acceptable for wild simulated growth. In other words, no fungicides, herbicides, or otherwise purely chemical additives. Organics to include gypsum, seaweed deritives, mulches are OK for this method. That marker you lay down, Brad, is very strict; the one about \"even just once\" to provide soil amendments... organic or otherwise.

And another thing we should discuss, different from the above points....

What it is, that is for sale.

In other words, market demand.... is such an incredible shaper of what is bought, how it's bought, and it's classification. Seemingly, it's about the visual. Does it look wild? Does it look like carrots, with no wild character? What's the perception by the buyers of our product?

I mean, look at the Emperor root... that's all about appearance! In the back of most digger's minds is finding one of those to command that incredible sale price that these rare roots can get.

For example.... If someone grows a bunch of 'sang, does it in such a way so that their roots have a wild appearing root, is that root going to sell as \"cultivated?\" Nope. The grower is likley going to ask for the Wild-Sim pricing when it's sold to a buyer. There's a big conversation out there amongst the buyers of our roots about: \"does it look wild enough, so that when the buyers sell it overseas, they can get 30 to 50% more than they paid for it....\" Irregardless of what the grower stated about it's production method. I assure you that this is going on, and is perhaps the prevailing attitude from buyers that sell overseas.

There is mixing of purchased root done by some buyers to include no-so-wild-looking roots with wild-looking roots. There is mixture of roots from one region to another [like tennissee roots with north carolina roots] to augment higher priced sales. Ethical? Hmmm, perhaps not.... Common Practice? Ummm, yes...

Now, I realize that this may be controversial to some, however the reality test in many aspects of Life is sometimes controversial.

Will stop for now, I see that I have gone on and on....

but all points that will need to be flushed out.... It would better if the industry could come up with some type of agreement, otherwise, it would have to just be happy with what the regulators come up with on their own.

Wow this thread got heavy. Comes down to this. If the local buyer that has been buying seng for many years likes the root and knows the quality is there, is he or she not going to buy it from the digger and sell it as a wild root regardless of how we slice it or label it?
Is it possible the tail may be wagging the dog here and we could cause our own problems if we get too regulatory.
Latt

Good point, KYginsing. However, where do the regulators get the time to come up with ethical, comprehensive, and fair regulation? Surely not from the C.I.T.I.E.S agreements alone....

Most government employees have the incredible load of \"too much work and too little time, with too few people.\" It's sorta like what we in healthcare have. There are so few of we healthcare workers in relation to the total population numbers that it's amazing that any paticular hospital can serve the needs of it's region.

However I move away from this post's thrust... I think the Cricket's are waking up.....