Arbitrary Rules

[quietaustralian]

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

I don't understand how anyone in Vietnam could be profiting from this species being prohibited in the US. At the moment the smugglers have a limited market when it comes to the US.
Should hangianum become "legal" in the US all the plants that are already there will materialize and those people that don't want to wait for flask grown plants to mature will buy collected plants.

So in summary I believe the smugglers in Vietnam would profit from the plants being considered "legal". Would a few plants smuggled into the US affect the wild population? I don't think so but the huge numbers going into China and other Asian countries will.

Regards, Mick

 

[Braem]

Everytime I see that a hybrid is considered illegal, I get a fit. (I also get a fit when species from forest that are cut down at a rate of 1 footballfiled per second are considered illegal, but that is another story.)

 

[quietaustralian]

Everytime I see that a hybrid is considered illegal, I get a fit. (I also get a fit when species from forest that are cut down at a rate of 1 footballfiled per second are considered illegal, but that is another story.)

I agree. Habitat destruction is the greatest threat to all species. Worldwide the orchid industry in its various forms is worth hundreds of millions of dollars yet very little money is put into conservation.

Mick

 

[Ernie]

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.

Agreed that ignorance is no defense! However, it does sometimes get sympathy. Ever been to traffic court? If you bother to show up, they usually reduce your fine/points. Just saying that some average judge would likely get sympathy from an "I dind't know" defense that a Paph 'expert' wouldn't.

 

[Rick]

Agreed that ignorance is no defense! However, it does sometimes get sympathy. Ever been to traffic court? If you bother to show up, they usually reduce your fine/points. Just saying that some average judge would likely get sympathy from an "I dind't know" defense that a Paph 'expert' wouldn't.

Totally Ernie. Compared to just a few years ago the "speed limit" signs are falling all over the place and enforcement is greatly reduced. I predict in just a couple more years threads like these will be non starters.

 

[s1214215]

Just got a letter from F&W relevant to this. Posted here.

http://www.slippertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?p=279349#post279349

Brett

 

[AquaGem]

Isn't it true for humans that if the illegal immigrants in the US give birth to a child in the US, even though they are illegal aliens, their child will be legal citizens? If so, the hybrids of hangianum should be considered legal.

 

[Ross]

Isn't it true for humans that if the illegal immigrants in the US give birth to a child in the US, even though they are illegal aliens, their child will be legal citizens? If so, the hybrids of hangianum should be considered legal.

But only if they're "born" in the US. The few hangianum hybrids I've seen were "born" in Taiwan. oke:

That brings up the question: Does an orchid's life begin at pollination or germination? Should we now refer to seeds in a capsule as "ungerminated orchids"?

Back to topic: Darin I share your frustration, not so much at the rules being arbitrary, but at the lack of consistency. A few years back I had a Paph Ho Chi Minh pulled for judging, then rejected because I didn't have a "paper trail" leading to the original "legal" ones released by Antec. I had purchased it from another slippertalk member here in the U.S. Now, the same plant is deemed judgeable because of their general availabilty or whatever.

 

[s1214215]

I find it facinating that a plant can be confiscated, then given but some authority to a "rescue center". Who makes the decisions who is a rescue center? All seems a little dodgy about about who you know and what you know.

It also bemuses me that Vietnam wont allow the export of Paphs, yet they are collected for the medicinal trade which seems not to be affected.

I agree with you anyway Darin, its a frustrating and silly matter. The USA and Japan seem to be the few countries that are really in on this though.

Brett

 

[likespaphs]

I find it facinating that a plant can be confiscated, then given but some authority to a "rescue center". Who makes the decisions who is a rescue center? ...

i believe the info is here:
http://www.usbg.gov/plant-collections/conservation/Plant-Rescue-Center-Program.cfm

the original plant cannot be sold/divided/given away, i think, but divisions, seedlings, any other type of propagated material can be

 

[s1214215]

I had a read. I will respond tomorrow. However, the word arbitrary comes to mind

Probably needs a new thread so I dont hijack this one

Brett

 

[Heather]

the original plant cannot be sold/divided/given away, i think, but divisions, seedlings, any other type of propagated material can be

So, that begs the question, how do you get a legal division if the original plant cannot be divided?

 

[cnycharles]

it's probably that seedlings or mericlones can be made but any part of the plant that was brought in can't be sold

 

[Gcroz]

On the issue of judging, I submitted a Paph. Chiu Hua Dancer, the legality of which is still being determined (I have the properly issued US papers for it from the grower I purchased it from), for judging. It received a HCC and a few weeks later it was rescinded. Here is the text from the letter from AOS:

"According to the US Fish & Wildlife, these (note: referring to Paph gigantifolium) are not legally in cultivation anywhere - yes I know they are for sale here ... but there is a disconnect between USDA which clears plants and F&W which enforces CITES. Since no plants of gigantifolium can trace their history to legally obtained material none of their offspring can either. This then makes it impossible to clear them based on the CITES exemption for hybrids of paphiopedilum. Also, the JC voted (approved by the trustees) that we are no longer able to judge any of the post-ban species and their hybrids anywhere in the world unless it's the country of origin and they are collected legally or they have been released into the US by a rescue center."

So, it would seem that this particular Paph. Liberty Taiwan will have it's award rescinded as well, if it was awarded, at least if AOS follows its own rules.

 

[s1214215]

I am glad I am moving back to Australia where we give two fingers to this beaurocratic BS.

Brett

 

[Wendy]

There was a Paph Liberty Taiwan pulled for judging at the Toronto show yesterday. I didn't stay to find out what happened but based on this thread I bet it didn't get anything. It was incredibly gorgeous so it's a shame that it can't be awarded.

 

[Rick]

it's probably that seedlings or mericlones can be made but any part of the plant that was brought in can't be sold

Another key word in the above is "sold".

CITES is a commerce ($$$$) regulator. The point is to take away the profit motive to discourage commercial trade in the species.

If an organism is very prolific (either by asexual or sexual means)in a "rescue center" then at some point free offspring will get moved around to qualifying parties.

When these other qualifying parties are overwhelmed by the reproductive contribution of the material they recieved, then the decision is usually made to start selling offspring into general trade.

 

[slippertalker]

Just to clarify a point about AOS judging and these "illegal" species. There have been some awards to Paph hangianum hybrids in Canada and Taiwan by AOS judging. About a year ago, it was determined by the Judging Committee that the rules should be equally applied and that American legality issues would apply to any AOS judging whether offshore or not. Such plants CANNOT be judged until the legality issue is changed.

At the present time there is a listing of "illegal species" that AOS will not judge, nor their hybrids. This is more due to the narrow interpretation of the USFW regarding CITES and the possible ownership while judging such plants by the AOS judges. The last thing we need is government agents arresting judges for dealing with such plants.

I personally think that all plants should be reviewable, and that eventually the heavy handed U.S. view of such plants will lessen. It's a shame that such species and hybrids can be legally grown and exhibited in the rest of the world and not in the land of the free and home of the brave.

 

[mormodes]

If you want the relevant section in the Handbook its 5.5.2.1 (13)

 

[Darin]

If you want the relevant section in the Handbook its 5.5.2.1 (13)

Thanks!!! I missed it the last time I went thru the handbook.