Peter, You keep bringing up kovachii again and again. You might as well bring up all of the other orchid species too that have been over-exploited through illegal trade.This will and has become an issue that has moved on as many art prop seedlings of species and hybrids from these species are now available.
As in all elements of society there is always the case where some may do things in an improper way. It is in fact a matter of trust and coming up with a system that says no to any wild plants for export and yes to all seed grown art prop varieties. The American Orchid Society and other organizations can have direct input or influence to the convention as we are Non Government Organizations. I have done this before as president of the Commercial Orchid Growers Guild in the mid 1990's. It is true that we have no voting rights but CITES officials can and do consider the concerns of the people that are being regulated. Being that CITES was conceived as an institution under the UN ( a democratic organization) it is incumbent upon CITES officials to consider the effect their regulations have on the people who are being regulated. I believe that CITES officials have done this and try to evaluate and understand what is happening in the commercial orchid growing world. My proposal is just trying to say that those nurseries that are doing the right thing in the Artificial propagation of orchids should simply be certified and allowed to trade without an onerous process. Safeguards can be put in place that will help catch those that deal in illegal, wild specimens. I am sure Peter O'Byrne has more knowledge about the CITES treaty than most but quite honestly I think he often makes sweeping statements about the treaty that are not entirely based on what the treaty or its documents really says or what the spirit of the treaty really is. Is the treaty entirely right or perfect? Of course not. It is and always will be something which evolves over time. There are many things that I and others disagree with in regards to the treaty. One thing I think most agree with is protecting wild plants and animals form over-exploitation. I point again to the document CoP 14 Doc. 30 http://www.cites.org/eng/cop/14/doc/E14-30.pdf Which brings into question the effectiveness of reporting on trade in artificially propagated specimens. Read it carefully for there you can begin to see that there is some question about whether art prop specimen trade reporting is really a valid use of resources and brings in to question what benefit there might be for wild flora from this reporting. Although the CITES secretariat has a responsibility to uphold, I do believe that if enough member nations would ask that truly art prop plants be exempted from CITES then it could happen under the same or modified proposal which I have suggested. I also encourage people to read the CITES strategic plan for 2008-2013 http://www.cites.org/eng/com/SC/54/E54-06-1.pdf which not only discusses trade in WILD plants and animals but also discusses understanding cultures, promoting conservation, benefiting indigenous people, using money from regulatory fees to benefit local conservation etc. CITES role is beginning to take on new meaning and can and will effect habitat conservation and bio-diversity loss one way or another even if indirect. This strategic plan seems to say that trade in wild specimens to some degree can be allowed as it is now. It also says that it can bring benefit to local people. That is fine and then I would agree that regulation of trade in Wild specimens with proper permits and government over-sight is required. What I disagree with is requiring permits for plants that are artificially propagated. My proposal is an attempt to simplify the system by not allowing trade in any wild specimens. Once they are art prop let them go. I do believe it would be better for countries to encourage the development of art prop nurseries for the production of orchid species rather than to allow wild collection and export. Finally I would like to say that my goal is to change the way CITES works in regards to art prop plants and that is all. If you, Peter O'Byrne or others can't see beyond the treaty as it exists or see the implications for the future then I think growers will always be trapped in distrust and will (as they are now) be limited in the ability to grow and survive. Working together for a positive solution is what is really required. Sincerely, Jerry Lee Fischer Orchids Limited 4630 Fernbrook Lane N. Plymouth, Minnesota 55446 USA Toll-free: 1-800-669-6006 Local: 763-559-6425 Fax: 763-557-6956 Website: www.orchidweb.com Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) [email protected] http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
