Arbitrary Rules

[Darin]

Look what came in to the judging center last weekend:



The thing that bugs me is that as a Judge in the US, I was not allowed to look at it because it is considered illegal. However, the same cross was awarded in Canada. Is not the plant still illegal there? The legality question stems from the fact that Vietnam claims that none of these have been "Legally" exported from Vietnam. Therefore, shouldn't all hangianum, except those in Vietnam, be considered illegal and therefore not eligible to be judged (at least under the same judging system)? It seems asinine that a judge should have different rules for plants simply because they are in different countries (both not native habitats for the species).

I'll end with: Orchid judges aren't law enforcement officials, we should not be tasked without due training, authority and charter to determine the legality of a plant presented for judging. If we are to be so tasked, it needs to be formally discussed, proposed, approved and formalized in the AOS Handbook on Judging and Exhibition and should therefore apply to all judges in a system anywhere they are judging under that system. In this case, the only place that hangianum or its hybrids should be able to be judged is Vietnam. Make some standards one way or the other.


End rant

 

[SlipperFan]

It is all so stupid!

What a beautiful flower!

 

[Heather]

Agreed.

 

[Yoyo_Jo]

Ditto^^

What a fabulous cross. :drool:

 

[Shiva]

Lovely! And I agree with you Darin.

 

[Hera]

Gosh that's beautiful. Its too bad.

 

[Rick]

However, the same cross was awarded in Canada. Is not the plant still illegal there?

Apparently not in Canada and Europe. The problems with between Vietnam and USA seem to be more with USA than Vietnam and interpretations of CITES. (Basically the US is bent at Vietnam about the way it handles CITES. Vietnam could care less about where its plants end up.)

It seems asinine that a judge should have different rules for plants simply because they are in different countries (both not native habitats for the species).

Orchid judging rules have nothing to do with the conservation status of plants. However, the AOS follows a charter that agrees to follow CITES regulations as part of the conservation mission of the AOS. The mission of the AOS is broader than just judging flowers, and theoretically the mission of an orchid judge is broader than simply judging flowers.

I'll end with: Orchid judges aren't law enforcement officials, we should not be tasked without due training, authority and charter to determine the legality of a plant presented for judging. If we are to be so tasked, it needs to be formally discussed, proposed, approved and formalized in the AOS Handbook on Judging and Exhibition and should therefore apply to all judges in a system anywhere they are judging under that system. In this case, the only place that hangianum or its hybrids should be able to be judged is Vietnam. Make some standards one way or the other.
End rant

None of the rest of us are law enforcement officials either, but doesn't make it legal for us to possess/trade said CITES banned plants, illicit drugs, or foreign child sex slaves. The plant was not confiscated or the owner turned in to CITES. So I don't see anything turning the AOS judge into an "enforcer", but they are protecting themselves from becoming complicit with an international trade violation by recognizing the plant in the judging system. When did it become the job of AOS judges to rewrite International trade regulations.

 

[jtrmd]

mmmmmm

I've been wanting one of these for a long time.Hopefully I am still alive when they finally do become legal in the states.lol!

 

[Darin]

Rick,

Agree with you on many points. That being said, I stand by my statements that should the AOS judging system place a standard that all plants must be legal under CITES, then

1) it should be so written in the handbook on Judging and Exhibition as those are the official rules for judges. If it is not formally in the rules, it will be implemented arbitrarily and differently at the various judging centers and functions throughout the world.

2) How am I as a judge to determine the legality of a plant (E.g., Paph Ho Chi Minh)? And why at some point to we begin allowing things to be judged that may or may not be illegal (e.g.all the helenae crosses from In-charm???)

Arbitrary differences in judging based upon unclear, undocumented rules and standards leads to confusion and frustration. A simple revision of the Handbook bringing all judges under the most restrictive rules seen in the AOS home countries would remove that frustration.

Additionally, when a hobbyist grower brings in a plant that is bigger, better form, better colour than an existing award but we tell him that we cant judge it because it is in the US. If he takes it 3 hours away from home to Canada he can have it judged and awarded. It shows a lack of consistency in our system and casts doubts as to what other inconsistencies may exist.

(Kinda playing devil's advocate with this whole thing to get people talking and thinking)

 

[Darin]

Warning... Smartass comments follow cause that is the mood I am in tonight. No offense meant, but I want to call out what I see as a valid argument to some of your points. This is to make people think about the situation and to have constructive discussion on possible solutions.

Orchid judging rules have nothing to do with the conservation status of plants.

EXACTLY!!!! So conservation shouldn't play into the decision to judge a plant or not.

However, the AOS follows a charter that agrees to follow CITES regulations as part of the conservation mission of the AOS.

That is fine and admirable. Then that should be across all AOS bodies using the interpretations held by the most restrictive country in which the AOS functions on a regular basis. ( in this case US interpretation should be used... If Canada suddenly lost all common sense and put some wacky interpretation out there then we would need to use the Canadian interpretation as it would be more restrictive.) Additionally, I would pose that it should be under the laws and regulations of the Government under which the organization is incorporated.

but they are protecting themselves from becoming complicit with an international trade violation by recognizing the plant in the judging system.

If that is the case, then they should not award these plants in Canada either as awarding them there recognizes the plant in the judging system and under US law (the place in which the AOS is incorporated) the judging system may have become complicit.

 

[tenman]

Apparently not in Canada and Europe. The problems with between Vietnam and USA seem to be more with USA than Vietnam and interpretations of CITES. (Basically the US is bent at Vietnam about the way it handles CITES. Vietnam could care less about where its plants end up.)

Has nothing to do with Vietnam per se. Applies across the board. It's a head-up-the-bum interpretation leading to the exact opposite effect from the intention of the entire CITES idea.

Orchid judging rules have nothing to do with the conservation status of plants. However, the AOS follows a charter that agrees to follow CITES regulations as part of the conservation mission of the AOS. The mission of the AOS is broader than just judging flowers, and theoretically the mission of an orchid judge is broader than simply judging flowers.

Yeah, they also follow a charter which devotes them to education, conservation and research - and we all know they haven't bothered with that in at least 2 or 3 decades, so why cherrypick an excuse from a meaningless charter?

None of the rest of us are law enforcement officials either, but doesn't make it legal for us to possess/trade said CITES banned plants, illicit drugs, or foreign child sex slaves. The plant was not confiscated or the owner turned in to CITES. So I don't see anything turning the AOS judge into an "enforcer", but they are protecting themselves from becoming complicit with an international trade violation by recognizing the plant in the judging system. When did it become the job of AOS judges to rewrite International trade regulations.

Anb when did it become their job to take positions on and become enforcers of arbitrary interpretations of laws (interpretations that are doing no one, no plant, and no business any good - not while every other country in the world uses a different standard - admitting flasks no matter the provenance, thereby relieving some pressure on the habitat and collecting, surely the intention if not the stated purpose of CITES - but are in fact damaging the orchid businesses and growers)? Never. The slope is so slippery the only thing that is moral and justifiable is for orchid judges to do just that: judge orchid flowers presented to them. Leave the rest to whoever's business it is. If they want to do anything else, then the judges should be required to complete the normal course of eduction for law enforcement officials and then for CITES specialists. It's a matter of put up or shut up. And I think they should shut up and judge plants. We have enough jack-booted thugs whimsically enforcing laws and regulations haphazardly, inconsistently, and heavy-handedly enough already!

 

[Kevin]

Good points, Darin. The AOS is the AOS, no matter which country the plant is being judged.

 

[Kevin]

I'll end with: Orchid judges aren't law enforcement officials, we should not be tasked without due training, authority and charter to determine the legality of a plant presented for judging. If we are to be so tasked, it needs to be formally discussed, proposed, approved and formalized in the AOS Handbook on Judging and Exhibition and should therefore apply to all judges in a system anywhere they are judging under that system. In this case, the only place that hangianum or its hybrids should be able to be judged is Vietnam. Make some standards one way or the other.

I was under the impression that this was already the case. Who then tells the AOS judges what they can and can't judge, if it's not in the manual? Do they just get a memo from the AOS saying that 'bye the way, don't judge anything that might be illegal'?

 

[Marc]

I'm not an expert and I understand the point that the op is trying to make. But seeing that it is a hybrid we can assume that it is flask propagated. The parents might be propagated but there is no way to tell.

On the other hand if you would have goten a for instance a rotschildianum on your desk or even a simple insigne would you have had the same reservations?

A species that is considered legal in any given country because it's pre cites or artificialy propagated from propagated parents can still be illegal by being a wild collected black market import.

So what would be the best way to handle this situation? I for one can't tell.

 

[Ernie]

Darin,

I totally agree with you. Judges judge plants. We aren't law enforcement, we aren't politicians... We see nice plants, we award them. Done. At least that's the way it should be. When we refuse to look at a plant based on its protection status, we encourage folks to change names on tags etc, and create a black market.

Another kicker is that folks that touch naughty plants can be taken down just like the owner. So, one can fight for the argument that education could be a bad thing because then we couldn't say "I didn't know I was not supposed to touch it".

Another thing about education is that some judges don't really care. We here are all slipper enthusiasts. We know the traits the parents pass. People that don't grow Paphs might sit through a lecture on it, but won't suck up the info as if they were genuinely interested. I've seen a lot of Pleuros up in the midwest, but I still don't know one species from the next other than the common ones. Although I can probably get to genus if I really strained my brain. The Pleuro growers are like "what do you mean you can't tell?!"

To top it all off, I've been on several teams where a "Mem Larry Heuer" or "Sugar Suite" comes to the table and everyone ooos and ahhhs. And I go through the process of explaining why it is centimeters larger than the old awards, the sepals are wide and proud, the stami is flat and marbled. We end up in a discussion and a gorgeous flower gets passed out of fear or ignorance. However, at another judging table, the same hybrid gets awarded under a false name...

It's all a bunch of rubbish, especially for the hybrids.

 

[NYEric]

Isn't hangianum found in China? I was at WOC in Florida and watched an AOS judge buy the entire lot of hangianum seedlings with Certification papers. This confusing legality issue is making it hard to give fair judgements because it's splitting the standard.

 

[Rick]

Isn't hangianum found in China? I was at WOC in Florida and watched an AOS judge buy the entire lot of hangianum seedlings with Certification papers. This confusing legality issue is making it hard to give fair judgements because it's splitting the standard.

That's one of the issues with any conservation issue, that plants/animals/water...... could really give a rats ass about where humans put political borders. However given the lack of documentation of where plants originate, how do you know if you have a Vietnamese or Chinese hangianum? especially when hangianums from Vietnam are transported into China for sale in the local trade. In the case of the above judge, he's putting his trust in the certification papers presented that they are legitimate. If he keeps the plants to himself, then the odds are very good that there won't be an issue. If they become a big public money maker, then the legitimacy of the papers may get investigated with iffy outcomes. Similar to what happened to Sam with his gigantifolium.

If the papers get investigated and deemed illegitimate at least the above judge could claim that he got the plants in good faith and deflect harsher penalties than just confiscation. But hopefully the papers are good, and aforementioned judge will flood the market with legal seed grown hangianums to the point where CITES is irrelevant.

 

[s1214215]

I have raised an issue with F&W about hangianum and am awaiting a response from the relevant experts in F&W whom the question was passed too. I has been verified as growing naturally in China (Yunnan) and seen there by a prominent Paph expert. I have heard as mentioned elsewhere on this site, hangianum may soon be legally sent in flask to the USA. I wont hold my breath.

There are some on Vietnam profiting off this species being prohibited in the USA, but from what I can see, the reason its not allowed into the USA, is US interpretation of CITES and the Lacey Act

The whole this is insane. You can get hybrids of hangianum and other Vietnamese species worldwide, not to mention the species themselves. I hope you can judge them soon

 

[Rick]

I'm not trying to support CITES, but just pointing out an old adage, that ignorance of a law, does not make you exempt from a law.

You can still get a speeding ticket if you are speeding and fail to see the speed limit sign.

As Ernie said if you touch a dirty plant you can get in trouble too. The AOS did not invent the CITES laws, but that doesn't make AOS judges (or any orchid grower) exempt from following the laws.

Personally I wouldn't worry about the plant being judged in a more lenient country. Ultimately the market will get so flooded with these hybrids and species that enforcement will be impossible.

 

[s1214215]

.
Personally I wouldn't worry about the plant being judged in a more lenient country. Ultimately the market will get so flooded with these hybrids and species that enforcement will be impossible.

From what I see on other countries, it is flooded now.