Late night yamadori ninja mission.

[Craigm]

I'm pretty sure I heard that Casurania are considered endangered or threatened in certain parts of the world due to over collecting... I could be wrong but I could be right.

I haven't heard this before but it wouldn't suprise me at all ,in some south east asian countries Casuarina are heavily collected. In Aus it's of no real threat but collecting with Ethics helps reduce the risks of this happening .

 

[rockm]

You're collection tactics hurt the rest of us that ask and be up front about our tree collecting activities.
I don't care where you live. Someone owns the land. If you didn't get permission from the rightful owner that tree is stolen.
So. Did you procure permission for the tree? Or is it as it looks? You went out at night and stole it? Which by your beating around the bush you did.
Clear it up and quit trying to be smart in your responses.
If not no one cares about that tree. Except maybe the real owner.

I'm pretty sure I heard that Casurania are considered endangered or threatened in certain parts of the world due to over collecting... I could be wrong but I could be right.

This species, if I'm not mistaken, is pretty common in Oz, but there is precedent for overcollection of some species, particularly in the Western Pacific. Collection of Pemphis Acidula in the Philippines has directly endangered that species there.
"The main threat to this species is collection for use in the ornamental bonsai trade"
http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/178838/0
Beanbag probably don't really give a crap about all that stuff though.

 

[Dav4]

This species, if I'm not mistaken, is pretty common in Oz, but there is precedent for overcollection of some species, particularly in the Western Pacific of some species. Collection of Pemphis Acidula in the Philippines has directly endangered that species there.
"The main threat to this species is collection for use in the ornamental bonsai trade"
http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/178838/0
Beanbag probably don't really give a crap about all that stuff though.

It may have been the situation with Pemphis collecting I had heard. Still, responsible collecting is just that. If you feel the need to collect under the cover of darkness, your conscience is likely to be telling you you're probably doing something wrong.

 

[rockm]

Should also be noted that from what I've heard, collecting pemphis without permits and without regard for the areas its collected from also lead directly to permanent restriction on those areas and collection.

In other words, assholes who took advantage of "unowned" land in the Philippines basically fucked it up for everyone else. But Beanie weeny's too smart for us.

 

[Quince]

I would just like to recognize that the ethics of collecting are more complicated than a simple question of law and permission. Legal does not always mean right and illegal does not always mean wrong. I believe it is important to consider all the stakeholders including local wildlife pedestrians, and the tree itself, not just the land owner. Land ownership is a legal convention nothing more. Say a property is owned by a bank and collection does not reduce its value, deprive the community of a local landmark, or degrade the ecosystem who exactly has been harmed?
Not trying to promote theft, just trying to look at this realistically.

 

[Beanwagon]

It may have been the situation with Pemphis collecting I had heard. Still, responsible collecting is just that. If you feel the need to collect under the cover of darkness, your conscience is likely to be telling you you're probably doing something wrong.

Correlation does not mean causation. Genuinely just self conscious of doing it infront of people for fear of looking like a crazy person.

 

[Beanwagon]

I would just like to recognize that the ethics of collecting are more complicated than a simple question of law and permission. Legal does not always mean right and illegal does not always mean wrong. I believe it is important to consider all the stakeholders including local wildlife pedestrians, and the tree itself, not just the land owner. Land ownership is a legal convention nothing more. Say a property is owned by a bank and collection does not reduce its value, deprive the community of a local landmark, or degrade the ecosystem who exactly has been harmed?
Not trying to promote theft, just trying to look at this realistically.

This.

 

[Craigm]

Should also be noted that from what I've heard, collecting pemphis without permits and without regard for the areas its collected from also lead directly to permanent restriction on those areas and collection.

In other words, assholes who took advantage of "unowned" land in the Philippines basically fucked it up for everyone else. But Beanie weeny's too smart for us.

It's utterly disgraceful what has happened with the pemphis.

 

[rockm]

I would just like to recognize that the ethics of collecting are more complicated than a simple question of law and permission. Legal does not always mean right and illegal does not always mean wrong. I believe it is important to consider all the stakeholders including local wildlife pedestrians, and the tree itself, not just the land owner. Land ownership is a legal convention nothing more. Say a property is owned by a bank and collection does not reduce its value, deprive the community of a local landmark, or degrade the ecosystem who exactly has been harmed?
Not trying to promote theft, just trying to look at this realistically.

Realistically? OK--Realistically, those property laws prevent stuff--such as preventing people possibly being harmed or killed by unseen hazards on the property when they try to take stuff off of it, suing others if they're injured taking said stuff. The land owner could be liable if some asshole breaks his leg illegally digging a piece of shit tree like this one.

There are solid REASONS you are legally prevented from helping yourself as you see fit to other people's stuff. . If it is on someone else's property, IT IS NOT YOURS, regardless of YOUR PERCEPTION that "no one was harmed" if the tree was dug.

You come on my land and dig a tree because, hey, it "LOOKS like it's in trouble," or "the guy's not going to miss it," I have rights to defend said property and land. In some cases, if you stray too far into my property, I am allowed to forcefully defend my property, if I don't know your intentions. If you're sneaking onto my property at night hoping not to be seen, I may rightfully assume you are up to no good. That kind of behavior is unsafe and can (and has) lead to tragedy. I am allowed to KILL you if you come into my house if you see something you like and I have no idea what you're after.

Moral equivalency is bullshit. It promotes bad behavior by giving people license to do stupid shit. Laws are laws for a reason for Christsake.

 

[Dav4]

I would just like to recognize that the ethics of collecting are more complicated than a simple question of law and permission. Legal does not always mean right and illegal does not always mean wrong. I believe it is important to consider all the stakeholders including local wildlife pedestrians, and the tree itself, not just the land owner. Land ownership is a legal convention nothing more. Say a property is owned by a bank and collection does not reduce its value, deprive the community of a local landmark, or degrade the ecosystem who exactly has been harmed?
Not trying to promote theft, just trying to look at this realistically.

Wow, I can't believe you really believe this. At least here in the USA, it is as simple as what the law says. If you take something from someone else's land without their permission, you are stealing their property, and that is illegal. You're trying to rationalize an illegal act with your statement above.

 

[A. Gorilla]

I would just like to recognize that the ethics of collecting are more complicated than a simple question of law and permission. Legal does not always mean right and illegal does not always mean wrong. I believe it is important to consider all the stakeholders including local wildlife pedestrians, and the tree itself, not just the land owner. Land ownership is a legal convention nothing more. Say a property is owned by a bank and collection does not reduce its value, deprive the community of a local landmark, or degrade the ecosystem who exactly has been harmed?
Not trying to promote theft, just trying to look at this realistically.

Most people think bonsai is: "Huh? What? Ok..."

Some shady goof sneaking around at night gives conventional people a weird taste in their mouth at the very least, regardless of the technicalities.

 

[Starfox]

I know each state is different in Oz but I know where I would like to retire you can't dig natives at all, even on private property. You even have to get a permit to clear the land, that would be my only shot.
Other states are more lenient, may have to look into them.

 

[rockm]

Most people think bonsai is: "Huh? What? Ok..."

Some shady goof sneaking around at night gives conventional people a weird taste in their mouth at the very least, regardless of the technicalities.

I have had no problem asking people for permission to dig a tree on their property. I have had the "huh, whut? Sure you can" response more than once. It's not hard to do. Even had offers from landowners to help me dig things up once I'd asked. Not asking and stealing stuff (and making excuses for "not wanting to look like a crazy person") is for, well, babies. Man up. Accept responsibilty

 

[namnhi]

...The land owner could be liable if some asshole breaks his leg illegally digging a piece of shit tree like this one.

I can't never understood why the property owner is held liable for something that is not under their control. I have to buy insurance for this... Pretty crazy.

Carry on.

 

[A. Gorilla]

I have had no problem asking people for permission to dig a tree on their property. I have had the "huh, whut? Sure you can" response more than once. It's not hard to do. Even had offers from landowners to help me dig things up once I'd asked. Not asking and stealing stuff (and making excuses for "not wanting to look like a crazy person") is for, well, babies. Man up. Accept responsibilty

Exactly. If I were doing something shady (i.e. rucking a tree out of somewhere I probably wasn't supposed to), and if someone asked me why (cop, custodian of land), they would NOT be impressed with my reason for skirting law and courtesy. All the more reason to squarely get your ducks in a row.

It's not like someone would say: "Oh, I understand now. No problem. I would do the same thing."

"What? Bonzai? The fuck outta here...!"

 

[Nybonsai12]

Everybody knows Australia is full of criminals.

 

[A. Gorilla]

I can't never understood why the property owner is held liable for something that is not under their control. I have to buy insurance for this... Pretty crazy.

Carry on.

So when the meter reader comes by, he isn't killed by a some sovereign citizen's booby traps; as an extreme example to highlight the principle.

 

[M. Frary]

I have had no problem asking people for permission to dig a tree on their property. I have had the "huh, whut?

You should see the look on Amish farmers when you ask.
The thing is now since they are such a close knit community they have heard of me before. It's almost always "sure. Dig them all up I have to cut them down son anyway" in reference to digging along their fences.
I spied a piece of land near me loaded with Scots pines. Some right along the road. The property is for sale. I found out by asking the neighboring people. I'll be calling the realtor in order to get the number to the property owner for permission. I could just stop and start digging. It's out there. Hardly any traffic and no neighbors. But those trees are someone's and to commit a crime just to get a tree isn't on my list of things to do.

 

[rockm]

Hey Beanie....

 

[coh]

I would just like to recognize that the ethics of collecting are more complicated than a simple question of law and permission. Legal does not always mean right and illegal does not always mean wrong. I believe it is important to consider all the stakeholders including local wildlife pedestrians, and the tree itself, not just the land owner. Land ownership is a legal convention nothing more. Say a property is owned by a bank and collection does not reduce its value, deprive the community of a local landmark, or degrade the ecosystem who exactly has been harmed?
Not trying to promote theft, just trying to look at this realistically.

I think, looking at this realistically, you are trying to promote theft. Or at the very least, justify it.