These misidentifications are far too common.

One of the big problems with all the undeserved panic about ragwort is that other wildflowers get targeted. We get gangs of workmen going out to clear road verges and all yellow plants are going to suffer. These guys are not botanists. Not of course that the evidence shows that ragwort seeds blow around much and that roadside plants are a risk.

Ragwort hysteria has spread to the Netherlands where this latest beauty complete with picture comes from. The article is of course Double Dutch to most people but it talks about the plant being a risk to children, which of course it isn't in any real terms at all.

This picture from the article isn't ragwort of course. It looks as if it is a hawksbeard or something similar.

Milton Keynes council also gets it wrong

Continuing the theme of Councils that get things wrong here is Milton Keynes Council

They say with relevance to ragwort:-
The Weeds Act 1959 requires that five specified weeds are controlled.

This is of course not true.The law on Ragwort is quite clear . It does not automatically require that ragwort is controlled. It just lets the government order people to control it when it is a problem.

The problem here, like many side effects of ragwort hysteria, is that other wildlife is also being harmed in the process of unnecessary ragwort control. A look around the council's website shows that they are using it as a justification for overmowing all roadside verges.

You can also find reference to this council's error here. Milton Keynes Council ragwort errors

Notifiable plants or weeds: There is no such thing in the UK

Local councils are often caught up in the panic about ragwort. There are many many errors. Eastbourne Council are a good example.

They have Ragwort listed as a "notifiable plant". This is a common error. Often it is "notifiable weed". One thing should be made clear. There is no such thing at all in UK law. There is no need to notify anyone about ragwort or any other plant being present anywhere. You are also not automatically required to control it. For the law on Ragwort you can see this previous posting The Law on ragwort: the legislation explained.

In Eastbourne council's case they compound the panic by claiming that ragwort would contaminate compost. This is a rather silly notion.

Ignorance and bigotry in the face of science

One of the problems encountered when trying to communicate the science of ragwort to the public is ignorance (In the sense of lacking of knowledge). Whenever you go on line and enter a forum you will find someone who is ignorant but just knows that they know it all better than you do.

One of these problems was recently encountered by a well known European expert on Ragwort, Esther Hegt from the Netherlands. A keen horsewoman, Esther runs one of the best websites in the world on the subject and it has an English language version Ragwort Myths and Facts. It is stuffed with facts and figures all gathered from a documented list of expert sources. Much of her most important information is co-authored by a leading ragwort scientist Dr Pieter Pelser who actually has a Phd on the plant!

The website contains a great deal of information for dispelling the panic over the plant and the panic originated in the UK which is why the English language section was developed. This Netherlands hosted site does not get well listed in UK search engines which is a great pity.

Unfortunately, when trying to explain things on-line she can get attacked and one vicious and bigoted example comes from the forum of our old friends Horse and Hound. A hotbed of "horsteria" over ragwort.

Trying to explain the facts to some people there this leading expert gets told "to take her ignorance back to France" ( which of course isn't even where she comes from!) The irony is of course it is the attacker who is not just ignorant but bigoted as well.

The law on ragwort : The legislation explained

One of the most common misconceptions about ragwort is that it is in some way illegal to grow it. It is most certainly not. The law relating to this is mainly the Weeds Act 1959 but also the misleadingly named Ragwort Control Act 2003.

The Weeds Act means that in rare cases you may be ordered to control ragwort but in the absence of any such order you have not duties or obligations what so ever.

Before the recent outburst of irrationality over ragwort the Weeds Act was never used at all.

The Ragwort Control Act? Well this does nothing much really only let the government produce a code of practice which could be used in court in the really rare cases ( probably non existent) where someone is prosecuted for not complying with a rare Weeds Act order.

See Ragwort the law explained.

Ragwort seed spread myths

There is a great deal of misinformation around about the ability of ragwort seeds to spread.
This example from Horse and Hound's forum recently is a good example.

The plant is a real survivor and is Worldwide, each plant can produce up to 120, 000 seeds per year that are light enough to travel the globe in the upper atmosphere.

This is nonsense!

Firstly the 120,000 seeds figure is a maximum and not typical. but the research hows very clearly that the seeds do not spread like this. They are heavier than air but they have what is in effect a tiny parachute. Parachutes do not lift they merely slow the rate of descent.

In fact the seeds have been shown to mostly fall within a few metres of the plants.

See http://www.ragwortfacts.com/ragwort-dispersal.html

and
http://www.swanseafoe.org.uk/ragwort-seed-spread.html

Injurious weeds do not cause injury

There is often a poor understanding of terminology that surrounds ragwort. This is a case in point. It comes from this site, which falsely states

It is important that any specialist is familiar with existing legislation such as the Weed Act 1959, which stipulates where action must be taken to guard against injury from weeds such as: Ragwort, Spear, Thistle and any other weed type that is acknowledged as being able to cause harm or injury.

To start with it is the Weeds Act 1959 and the plant is Spear Thistle but ignoring those typos it is clear that that particular act of parliament says nothing of the sort at all. It just gives the government the power to order people to control certain weeds. These weeds do not cause injury but are called "injurious" weeds. This word means harmful to the interests of something. These days civil servants would not use words like this as society has changed and fewer people study Latin, from where this word ultimately comes but it doesn't stop people jumping to the wrong conclusion. For a fuller explanation see this Injurious weeds explained.