As a plantsman I am concerned about issues involving cultivated plants that are grown for enjoyment, study and profit. One could say that "conservation" applies here but it may be a poor word choice. Conservation implies a deliberate effort to keep something going over time and over generations but I do not believe most of us are burdened by such a mission, at least not as a primary goal in growing plants. Sharing plants and relevant information is of tremendous and increasing importance to the societies we live in but our activities may have little or no bearing on conservation as the word is used by scientists and bureaucrats. It seems silly to think that collectors and gardeners and nurseries have anything but a negligible impact on the sort of plant conservation under discussion here. Does anyone have evidence to show that propagating and distributing plants ever brought harm to a rare species? Collecting in the wild has been deleterious in some cases but that is not what we are talking about and it is misleading to conflate rarity per se with horticultural activities. That such confusion is common indicates that the subject is either poorly understood by policy makers or that there has been a deliberate attempt to control the movement of plants under the guise of conservation. The practice of some botanical gardens in interpreting the CBD certainly leave a person with that impression. Dylan Hannon *"The greatest service which can be rendered any country is to add an useful plant to its culture..." --**Thomas Jefferson*