# CITES - conserving or destroying?



## s1214215 (Apr 17, 2011)

I was trawling some blogs and sites and this one brought up something I have thought about for some time. Is CITES and how it is administered really conserving species, or is it actually facilitating illegal trafficking and destruction of plants by not facilitatiing (hindering) the propagation of species.

http://www.c-we.com/cyp.haven/citesblp.htm

Having widely travelled in various countries, I have seen plants trafficked over borders and CITES able to do nothing about it as local governments do not empower them to do so, or local officials are involved. 

I see trafficked plants all the time at markets near my home and the next week you see those plants on Ebay, sometimes offered with CITES certs and an usually at high prices.

In addition, we have species ruled as not elligable for export, yet it is readily propagated in flasks world wide. Why, because a government department deems it was never legally exported? 

We can not stop internal trafficking, but why prevent the trade in plants that are propagated? Isnt that encouraging smuggling?

Brett


----------



## Gcroz (Apr 17, 2011)

I can sum it up from my standpoint, and I will speak to my opinions on the slipper orchid issue:

1. CITES has a very noble purpose, but has been a complete failure in implementation.

2. I understand that regardless of the implementation of CITES, collectors will disregard laws. I can say first hand that I have seen many "illegal" plants in private collections, and can also state that none of these were wild collected. They were the result of flaskings brought in from countries where their propagation isn't illegal. Some of these plants have even been legally imported, under all CITES and Federal regulations, only to later have some petty bureaucrat arbitrarily decide that they are in fact not allowed. This, to me, seems contrary to conservation ideals.

3. The reality is that a variety of species (Vietnamese species come to mind) will exist only in private cultivation in the near future. It would be rational to conclude that it is better to encourage rapid dispersal of cheap, artificially propagated seedlings into global orchid trade as a means of reducing pressure on wild populations. This can only be achieved by a systematic reduction in red tape and the elimination of redundant bureaucratic fiefdoms and roadblocks. Allowing local populations to participate in the production of flasks and seedlings, as well as participate in the economic benefit, would help further reduce pressure on wild populations.

I'm sure that many will disagree with me. I can say that CITES has caused economic challenges to commercial growers here that cannot compete with foreign growers who have access to species we are denied. 

"...but why prevent the trade in plants that are propagated?" I would say that the law is what it is, but there is also the problem of petty minded officials who are more concerned with their individual power than to see a reasonable change to existing regulations.


----------



## Rick (Apr 17, 2011)

I agree.

CITES was originally designed for big slow growing and reproducing animals like rhinos, trees, and tigers. 

All the same attitudes went into the small, fast growing and easy to propagate animals and plants (fish frogs lizards orchids....).

I worked in zoos for many years and saw several cooperative programs develop between CITES zoos and hobbyists that were successful in getting captive bred offspring to the general consumer from limited legalized imports of wild stock.

In the US there are big ginseng (also CITES controlled) farms to reduce collection pressure on the forest and supply medicinal herbs to China.

Cooperative agreements were reached for Phrag kovachii, and apparently P. vietnamense and helenae are out of the box.

So I don't know why there is still such restriction in the orchid world.


----------



## s1214215 (Apr 17, 2011)

Gcroz... I completely agree on all points.

The sad thing is, here on the ground in Asian, we are seeing species decimated in the wild by a rampant trade that provides to a huge domestic trade. Now this runs counter to the myth that the Western world comsumes all. The Asian trade is voracious for collected plants. Want pics.. I can post.

Largely Asia does not care toss for the West and what we think appropriate for conservation. Much is lip service. 

I have seen several new species found, now to be near extinct in the wild as locals once they know there is money in it are on to it. You cant stop a hungry peasant farmer pillaging the forests when the rice crops dont feed the family and selling at a cheap price to a big guy who sell wholesale to the city markets.

Reality is CITES is not working as it controls nothing internally with regard to a country unless it wants to play ball - for what ever reason. CITES in Thailand has told me they cant touch a major player in the illegal plant trade, a politician.

Yet on our end we cant even buy a flask of something that is several generations away from the wild form.. Why? 

Bureaurocrazy I say.

Brett


----------



## Gcroz (Apr 17, 2011)

s1214215 said:


> I have seen several new species found, now to be near extinct in the wild as locals once they know there is money in it are on to it. You cant stop a hungry peasant farmer pillaging the forests when the rice crops dont feed the family and selling at a cheap price to a big guy who sell wholesale to the city markets.



Precisely my point. I don't have a cure all idea for how to combat this, but one start is involving locals in conservation projects where they can benefit, financially, in a direct manner. IE cut the big guy out, or involve him in a way that he can also benefit financially, for example as an investor. If you set up a CITES legal propagation facility and control the legal output globally as a unique source for the plants, even the "big guy" could see a nice financial incentive. Unfortunately, you can't legislate morality, so any effort would have to be a monetary benefit to all participating for it to work.

just my $0.02


----------



## s1214215 (Apr 17, 2011)

Things have been done in the Philippines with the sea horse trade, not sure if it involved CITES though limited. Its possible, but it needs sensible action at our end in end product countries to encourage it.

I was talking to someone today who said there was someone in Vietnam propagating Vietnamese species trying to start a legal trade with conservation in mind. Sadly he rubbed someone the wrong way in the Vietnamese government and well he did time.


----------



## Howzat (Apr 19, 2011)

Brett (S1214215).
Thanks for bringing the CITES subject up this forum.
Most people I know think that CITES are actually hindering the propagation of species. It also distributes the one they consider OK to a select number of people, which may not be the best propagator, and it just grossly unfair. 
I said in your other thread (Vietnamense) in Orchid Culture, that CITES needs to be remodelled, get rid off the clever lawyer and botanists on CITES board who live in the fairyland. These people are behind the current CITES culture which are impractical, unfair, ridiculously difficult for ordinary people to comprehend. CITES maybe good idea, but the writing of it made it hard to administer. The result is, rather than conserving it (it is too difficult to conserve in the wild, but it will come later when conservation of the species in the hobbiest collection has been successful), CITES is hindering the propagation of species in the collectors hand.


----------



## s1214215 (Apr 19, 2011)

By the way, I forgot to say the at the guy in Vietanam was propagating Viet Paphs

Brett


----------



## s1214215 (Apr 19, 2011)

Howzat

I have to agree.. To many experts live in ivory towers, and have not set foot on the ground, or lived in the places their rules affect. They have no idea of the impact on locals, or that they rules accerbate problems in concerveration. 

The only way we can deal with this is that people send messages to bureaucrats and politicians telling them what they think.. Perhaps it is time that we orchidists make an online petition in our own countries to sent to local representatives to show our voter displeasure (as that matters most to them) and to express how we feel about the failures of CITES

Brett


----------



## valenzino (Apr 19, 2011)

CITES is only an economical/political entity....
is to control trade and not to save plants and animals unfortunately...
...born to "Moralize",create job,offices,produce votes for politics,and give a form o power to someone...
Is like european comunity...exists only on papers or when is usefull to some politics etc...to show power or to have something they want...
At the end the only word to say is always MONEY.


----------



## valenzino (Apr 19, 2011)

s1214215 said:


> ....The only way we can deal with this is that people send messages to bureaucrats and politicians telling them what they think.. Perhaps it is time that we orchidists make an online petition in our own countries to sent to local representatives to show our voter displeasure (as that matters most to them) and to express how we feel about the failures of CITES
> 
> Brett



Have to be sent only to Geneve central CITES,by everyone and without stopping for years....maybe at that point someone will listen....


----------



## Howzat (Apr 19, 2011)

valenzino said:


> Have to be sent only to Geneve central CITES,by everyone and without stopping for years....maybe at that point someone will listen....



You got to be joking. They are fortified with machine guns aiming at you. Don't you read "Orchid Fever"?? They raided nurseries in Europe with a military precision and personnel armed with machine guns????


----------



## valenzino (Apr 20, 2011)

Howzat said:


> You got to be joking. They are fortified with machine guns aiming at you. Don't you read "Orchid Fever"?? They raided nurseries in Europe with a military precision and personnel armed with machine guns????



Hahahahah!...as I live on the border near Switzerland,I can watch them :ninja:

...and have liveing material to experiment my new anti cheese/clock/chocolate spray to deactivate their ultra trained machine guns personnel :evil: and to finish burocrats a document written in incorrect swiss german in disorder with wrong bottom page numeration!!!! :crazy:


----------



## Marc (Apr 20, 2011)

Howzat said:


> You got to be joking. They are fortified with machine guns aiming at you. Don't you read "Orchid Fever"?? They raided nurseries in Europe with a military precision and personnel armed with machine guns????



Are you referring to the book by Eric Hansen? I guess I need to see if I know someone who has it, sounds like a book worth reading.

Any more you can tell about raids that took place in Europe?


----------



## Howzat (Apr 20, 2011)

Marc said:


> Are you referring to the book by Eric Hansen? I guess I need to see if I know someone who has it, sounds like a book worth reading.
> 
> Any more you can tell about raids that took place in Europe?



Yes, thjat is the book. Dr. Braem featured well in that book. He may be able to tell you more than most people can. He had been charged over "smugling" a dead speciment of orchid that was sent to him from Austria for research purposes. That Cribb and his coleage de Vogel raided Bosha greenhouse with the aid of armed men.
To be truthfull, since I read the book 10 years ago, I have negative perception of CITES.
I think this is a good book, and I think the best place to find one is to go to your local library or your bookstore. Good Luck.


----------



## Marc (Apr 20, 2011)

Howzat said:


> Yes, thjat is the book. Dr. Braem featured well in that book. He may be able to tell you more than most people can. He had been charged over "smugling" a dead speciment of orchid that was sent to him from Austria for research purposes. That Cribb and his coleage de Vogel raided Bosha greenhouse with the aid of armed men.
> To be truthfull, since I read the book 10 years ago, I have negative perception of CITES.
> I think this is a good book, and I think the best place to find one is to go to your local library or your bookstore. Good Luck.



Bosha = Bosha Popow from Wolfsburg?


----------



## Howzat (Apr 20, 2011)

Bosha Popow from the town of Fallersleben, that is according to the book.
Dr.Braem is on board ST, so you can ask him in more details of Orchids raid in Europe.


----------



## JeanLux (Apr 21, 2011)

Howzat said:


> Bosha Popow from the town of Fallersleben, that is according to the book.
> Dr.Braem is on board ST, so you can ask him in more details of Orchids raid in Europe.



Fallersleben is neighbor (suburb?) of Wolfsburg!

Hansen's book is worth reading, some really interesting stories (K. Wubben also plays a role in the Popow chapter) !!!! Jean


----------



## NYEric (Apr 21, 2011)

One of my thrills in orchid growing is having met people in the book Orchid Fever here on STF and in person.


----------



## Rick (Apr 21, 2011)

NYEric said:


> One of my thrills in orchid growing is having met people in the book Orchid Fever here on STF and in person.




Wasn't Xavier's story also one of the chapters in that book.


----------



## Howzat (Apr 22, 2011)

Rick said:


> Wasn't Xavier's story also one of the chapters in that book.



Sorry Eric, the question was actually directed to you.
Yes Xavier is in Ch 15 of "Orchid Fever". I met him last year TIOS 2010 and again at TIOS2011. He now works as Technical Consultant (company representative0 for Orchiata the NZ pine bark company. But in Asia it is being marketed under Besgro.
If you want to see and meet him, TIOS 2012 is a good bet, but he will be a guest speaker along with Terry Root at the AOC conf in Perth 2012. See its website 19th AOC conf.


----------



## Braem (Apr 22, 2011)

Fallersleben is now part of Wolfsburg


----------



## Braem (Apr 22, 2011)

Since when do burocrats listen? And does anyone really believe that people that have huge salaries will freely admit that what they are doing is nonsense?


----------



## Braem (Apr 22, 2011)

Yes, but you have to read the original. The German translation is terrible ... if fact kind of a scandal as the quotations are translated into nonsense texts.


----------



## Howzat (Apr 22, 2011)

Good to see you, Dr. Braem, get involved in this CITES nonsense.
Where is Cribb now, the champion of CITES ??? If Phillip Cribb and his colleague de Vogel really think that they are doing their best to conserve orchids, where are all the orchids that they helped to confiscate and destroy in the infamous armed military raids in Europe??? I wonder if they were proud of their achievement. And I hope that they thought that the book "Orchid Fever" was malicious. If they did think that, why the hell did not they take Eric Hansen to court???? Their inaction made me wonder if what Eric Hansen wrote, was extremely correct. Why did not they raid Xavier's establishment as well, as apparently Xavier was one that escaped the raid. Were they afraid of Xavier because he may know a lot about the raiders??
I am sorry guys from the CITES establishment, for the last 10 years after reading Eric Hansen's book, I had very negative views on CITES operational matters and antics. CITES should look at the long term solution of conservation (as I said : conservation through increased number of species plants in private collection, rather than willy nilly confiscate orchid species , is the way to go). Look at the number of rothschildianum and sanderianum in private and commercial collection, which make 1. a better quality through line breeding, 2. who in their right mind would collect those inferior species at big cost in the wild if you can get a better quality at cheap price ??? The works of Terry Root, other American breeders as well as Europeans, Taiwanese and Japanese breeders should be recognised as CONSERVATION and the CITES's actions are in fact HINDERING CONSERVATION if not DESTROYING.


----------



## NYEric (Apr 22, 2011)

A person's salary has nothing to do with their nonsense or incompetence. If they can do the job and are overpaid,then everyone wins.


----------



## Braem (Apr 22, 2011)

Cribb has been retired. He has a desk in his former secretary's office ... but he is still a "Kew Man" ... and that means: everything he does is legal .... I don't know whether he is proud ... but he is as arrogant as ever. Xavier was not involved in the German business and I am not sure what is role was in France ... you would have to ask him about that. 
The German CITES authorities are just as always ... but what do you expect ... But they are civil servants, and saying anything bad about them may end in a fine ... no matter how true it is. I guess I have always been the only one who didn't (and doesn't) care about their threats. But they did ruin the orchid business over here.


----------



## Braem (Apr 22, 2011)

The only winners in the CITES game are the CITES people, so why should they change their habits.


----------



## NYEric (Apr 22, 2011)

How about if someone from USA sends the Deutsch authorities a nasty-gram and vice versa!:evil:


----------



## Rick (Apr 22, 2011)

Howzat said:


> Good to see you, Dr. Braem, get involved in this CITES nonsense.
> Look at the number of rothschildianum and sanderianum in private and commercial collection, which make 1. a better quality through line breeding, 2. who in their right mind would collect those inferior species at big cost in the wild if you can get a better quality at cheap price ??? The works of Terry Root, other American breeders as well as Europeans, Taiwanese and Japanese breeders should be recognised as CONSERVATION and the CITES's actions are in fact HINDERING CONSERVATION if not DESTROYING.



One thing to consider is that government beuracracies will lag the commercial and scientific community by several years. Note that P rothchilidianum and sanderianum were recognized species for at least 50 to 75 (maybe even 100) years before anyone knew how to propagate in sufficient numbers to supply a commercial market. Up through the 50's to 80's orchid collections were like stamp collections. Hardly anything was propagated and only a small fraction of jungle collected plants survived for any significant length of time for divisions to become available. Back in the early 1900's collectors would kill each other and burn down swaths of forrest so competitors would be left with no chance to find anything but scorched earth. The conservation legacy of the orchid hobby is not a pretty one.

Serious commercial scale breeding is a relatively recent event. I can recall back to 2002 that the sanderianum seedlings I got from Sheerwood orchids were first generation from a wild importation of the "rediscovered" source of wild stocks. Now the market is close to flooded of blooming size F1's, and F2 seedlings are up for sale for probably a fraction of the price I payed in 2002.

In the meantime CITES is trying to catch up with attitudes and science from the 1970's


----------



## Eric Muehlbauer (Apr 22, 2011)

The problem with CITES is its inflexibility. Yes, in some respects it worked, in that paphs and phrags are being propagated seriously now instead of just being collected. Yet the CITES rules didn't take into account the probability of new species being discovered. By preventing their immediate distribution for propagation, they guaranteed a smugglers market. I wouldn't object to CITES as much if it hadn't declared the entire genera of paphs and phrags forbidden. It should have been done species by species, according to their needs. Prior to 1990, only P. druryi and I think rothchildianum were listed.


----------



## Braem (Apr 23, 2011)

In Germany, those who have a say in CITES are lawyers. The lower charges are civil servants that have been switched to CITES offices because they were redundant in other placed but could not be retired because of their "Beamtenstatus". The rest are customs officers who have just passed grade ten (if at all). They don't know anything about nature, let alone species, and they don't care. What do you expect from a group of people like that.... They will never catch up on anything in respect to knowledge ... and why should they ... they have a well-paid job for life.

And just on another note: CITES for animals didn't work either. But that is another story. CITES was and is nonsense.


----------



## Howzat (Apr 23, 2011)

Lawyer, lawyer and lawyers, this was mentioned by ERic Hansen of being the chiefs of CITES in Europe. Yes, Xavier explained verbally at TIOS 2010, about the European raids in general and in France in particular. He said he was a young custom officer at the time. I don't think that he likes Cribb either. 
Was Eric Hansen spot on or not in writing his book?? If not, they (Cribb cs) should have sued Eric immediately. But time has lapsed and since Cribb and de Vogel did not take any action at all, then I have to presume that Eric Hansen was spot on with the stories in his book.
Xavier and Terry Root are two of 19th AOC guest speakers on Paphiopedilum. I wish that you (Dr. Braem) can be here as well. I am sure that the three of you would be one hell of a big drawcard. A point of interest : our state government (Western Australia) has viewed the 19th AOC conference seriously and gives the committee a grant of $200,000 to make sure it will be the biggest AOC conference.


----------



## paphreek (Apr 23, 2011)

This is a little off topic, but the AOC speakers list looks more interesting to me than the WOC's in Singapore. http://www.waorchids.iinet.net.au/Speakers.htm


----------



## Braem (Apr 23, 2011)

Well, ..... there would be a few obstacles ... but maybe you can email me ... 
[email protected]


----------



## Rick (Apr 23, 2011)

Howzat said:


> Good to see you, Dr. Braem, get involved in this CITES nonsense.
> CITES should look at the long term solution of conservation (as I said : conservation through increased number of species plants in private collection, rather than willy nilly confiscate orchid species , is the way to go). Look at the number of rothschildianum and sanderianum in private and commercial collection, which make 1. a better quality through line breeding, 2. who in their right mind would collect those inferior species at big cost in the wild if you can get a better quality at cheap price ??? The works of Terry Root, other American breeders as well as Europeans, Taiwanese and Japanese breeders should be recognised as CONSERVATION and the CITES's actions are in fact HINDERING CONSERVATION if not DESTROYING.



Maybe the Vietnamese government thinks its people can make a better living selling smuggled wild dug plants by discouraging captive breeding. Even if Vietnam starts legal propagation and trade, how long do you think it would take big and small breeders in the US (or Australia) to quit wasting time and shipping costs to import legal plants and produce their own in the US. In the species market, it really only takes a handful of plants with today's flasking technology to generate enough to supply the market. As long as the parent stock is illegal, it suppresses breeding efforts in the US.


----------



## Rick (Apr 23, 2011)

Eric Muehlbauer said:


> It should have been done species by species, according to their needs. Prior to 1990, only P. druryi and I think rothchildianum were listed.



Probably an enforcement nightmare since out of bloom paphs species all look the same to enforcement officials.


----------



## Eric Muehlbauer (Apr 23, 2011)

Which is exactly how the smugglers do it....who can tell the species apart from hybrids when not in bloom? How many vietnamese species have cleared customs by being labelled as hybrids? How many hangianums made it out as emersonii, malipoense as jackii, and helenae as barbigerum? (It actually was sold years ago as "barbigerum v. helenae".) Its an enforcement nightmare regardless.


----------



## Rick (Apr 23, 2011)

Eric Muehlbauer said:


> Which is exactly how the smugglers do it....who can tell the species apart from hybrids when not in bloom? How many vietnamese species have cleared customs by being labelled as hybrids? How many hangianums made it out as emersonii, malipoense as jackii, and helenae as barbigerum? (It actually was sold years ago as "barbigerum v. helenae".) Its an enforcement nightmare regardless.



That's also why the rescue centers get loaded up with hybrid phales:sob:


----------



## Braem (Apr 24, 2011)

Yes, but that proves once again that CITES is good for nothing.


----------



## Howzat (Apr 24, 2011)

*Cites*



Braem said:


> Yes, but that proves once again that CITES is good for nothing.



Quite agree with you. 
How many people are actually benefitting from CITES, apart from the officials?
How about starting a plan to dismantle the Operational side of CITES???


----------



## s1214215 (Apr 24, 2011)

Howzat said:


> Quite agree with you.
> How many people are actually benefitting from CITES, apart from the officials?
> How about starting a plan to dismantle the Operational side of CITES???



Agreed. but how, who to lobby, and to best effect

Brett


----------



## quietaustralian (Apr 24, 2011)

Howzat said:


> Quite agree with you.
> How many people are actually benefitting from CITES, apart from the officials?
> How about starting a plan to dismantle the Operational side of CITES???



Hi Howard,
I must be missing something here??I don’t understand how CITES impacts on you. CITES isn’t interested in flasks and if I read correctly, Appendix I orchid species are treated as Appendix II species if artificially propagated.
So in essence:	
You can import any flasks you want without any interference from CITES.
You can import plants if they are artificially propagated.
Mick


----------



## s1214215 (Apr 24, 2011)

Hi Mick

Flasks are not an issue with CITES, unless a species is deemed not legally exported from a country of origin. 

I think the major issue most people have with CITES is the prevention of export that would otherwise serve propagation, and reduce poaching as propagated plants (more selectively bred and desirable) would then be available: well this would atleast be so in developed nations. Cant say so for some developing nations as the drive there is more economic so many will buy what is cheaper (collected plants) rather than superior propagated forms, though I have seen well off people buy collected plants in Thailand more times than I can count.

By the way, as to Hangianum being of Chinese origin , courtesty of F&W USA, "Regarding hangianum, it is my understanding that there are plants of legal origin exported from China, but we are not aware of production of this species from legal origin plants elsewhere" Seems to be an admission of it not just being a Viet specie.

Brett


----------



## mormodes (Apr 24, 2011)

s1214215 said:


> Hi Mick
> 
> By the way, as to Hangianum being of Chinese origin , courtesty of F&W USA, "Regarding hangianum, it is my understanding that there are plants of legal origin exported from China, but we are not aware of production of this species from legal origin plants elsewhere" Seems to be an admission of it not just being a Viet specie.
> 
> Brett



I agree and I assumed that was why Norman's Orchids HAD 4 hangianum hybrids available on its web page, however they are now no longer listed... I assume they went like hotcakes, LOL!


----------



## quietaustralian (Apr 24, 2011)

s1214215 said:


> Hi Mick
> 
> Flasks are not an issue with CITES, unless a species is deemed not legally exported from a country of origin.
> 
> ...



I don't understand what you mean by	CITES prevention of export. I read the link that you referred to at the start of this thread and didn’t find much in it that related to CITES, the main issue related to US law and was written 18 years ago some much has changed. I think we should differentiate between CITES and the laws of various nations. My main issue is not with CITES but with some nations that don’t fulfil their obligations under the treaty.
CITES doesn’t get involved with flasks at all and plants that have been artificially propagated can be exported/imported with a permit.
The problems our American friends have seems to be with the legislation in their country and not CITES. Please correct me if I’m wrong.

Regarding hangianum: I have heard that hangianum exists in China but hadn’t seen any documentation regarding this. I’d still be interested in seeing something or hearing from someone who has seen them in situ. I’m not sure if Craig is saying that the plants occur naturally in China or that there are legal plants in china?

Regards, Mick


----------



## mormodes (Apr 24, 2011)

snip



quietaustralian said:


> The problems our American friends have seems to be with the legislation in their country and not CITES. Please correct me if I’m wrong.



You are exactly right.


----------



## s1214215 (Apr 24, 2011)

quietaustralian said:


> I don't understand what you mean by	CITES prevention of export. I read the link that you referred to at the start of this thread and didn’t find much in it that related to CITES, the main issue related to US law and was written 18 years ago some much has changed. I think we should differentiate between CITES and the laws of various nations. My main issue is not with CITES but with some nations that don’t fulfil their obligations under the treaty.
> CITES doesn’t get involved with flasks at all and plants that have been artificially propagated can be exported/imported with a permit.
> The problems our American friends have seems to be with the legislation in their country and not CITES. Please correct me if I’m wrong.
> 
> ...



Sorry I disagree, as for some reason, CITES offices in various locations are following US policy as well (Japan being one- try sending any paph there, even with a CITES export cert). I recently spoke to CITES in two other countries and they said, that Paphs of Vietnamese origin in flask would be refused export, inc hybrids. 

In some countries in SE Asia, phytosanitary responsibilities overlap with CITES matters due to the way the local agencies issuing certs relate. When inquiring I got told in a muddled way that the US and Vietnam had issues with each other over Viet species and even flasks would not be considered. So then the question is does CITES follow its own rules or the USA, on a country per country basis. I've sent FS Paph hangianum, and hybrids in two countries, sent and accepted by the recieving, yet rejected for export in another.

From what I have been told, Vietnam did legally export several paph species, but later retracted the decision. That has come from people involved in Paphs in Vietnam and outside. Seems to be a bone of contention that can not be proved either way though.

I took the hangianum matter to be there are plants in China. Now thats is as I put it in my email that they exist there. I am told this has been proven by multiple experts, but at this time, I can not say more as I am not a liberty to say how and by whom. If it comes to fruition, all will know soon enough I guess. I was told it in the pipeline by people I trust.

My issue with CITES Mick is that CITES offices from country to country seem to interpret rules and add other issues to them as they please. Some interpret it so laxly that is a joke, other go overbboard and make it impossible to export species that are common even. I have been in two offices where I had to educate staff as to the appendix value of a plant.


----------



## quietaustralian (Apr 24, 2011)

s1214215 said:


> Sorry I disagree, as for some reason, CITES offices in various locations are following US policy as well (Japan being one- try sending any paph there, even with a CITES export cert). I recently spoke to CITES in two other countries and they said, that Paphs of Vietnamese origin in flask would be refused export, inc hybrids.
> 
> In some countries in SE Asia, phytosanitary responsibilities overlap with CITES matters due to the way the local agencies issuing certs relate. When inquiring I got told in a muddled way that the US and Vietnam had issues with each other over Viet species and even flasks would not be considered. So then the question is does CITES follow its own rules or the USA, on a country per country basis. I've sent FS Paph hangianum, and hybrids in two countries, sent and accepted by the recieving, yet rejected for export in another.
> 
> ...



This may seem pedantic but its import to understand the structure of any organisation so as not to waste people’s time and effort.

There is to my knowledge only one CITES office in the world and it’s in Geneva. It’s the secretariat and its role is to arrange meetings, disseminate information to member states and other pen pushing type activities

When you speak to someone in Japan, Australia or Thailand etc that has responsibility for handling CITES matters, they are not CITES employees and are responsible solely to the government department for who they work (CITES refers to these as Management Authorities) eg F&W USA.

Its made clear on the CITES website that some countries may have tougher requirements that those in the convention. So in the case of the US and some other countries, it appears that CITES isn’t the problem.

If as a result of this thread a couple of hundred Americans wrote a letter to Geneva complaining about not being able to legally import flasks of some species into the US, Geneva would probably return a letter saying that flasks are not covered by CITES and to contact their appropriate government department.

Whether hangianum is endemic to Vietnam is not important. I’m interested in the Paphs that occur in Vietnam endemic or not and any reliable updated information I can gather. I look forward to any information you can provide in the future.
Regards, Mick


----------



## gonewild (Apr 24, 2011)

quietaustralian said:


> I’m not sure if Craig is saying that the plants occur naturally in China or that there are legal plants in china?
> 
> Regards, Mick



This is how I understand it....

What Craig said was that China has exported legal Hangianum plants to some country. Then he says that he has no knowledge that plants have been legally propagated from those exported plants.
Based on that, CITES should allow in-vitro flasks of species entry into the USA if they originate from China with CITES documents.

The CITES documents create a paper trail, if you have the correct paper trail USFW has no reason to suspect the plants come from an illegal source. If China issues correct CITES export papers the USFW would have reason to believe the plants are from China and not Vietnam so they could allow entry into the USA.

Now, if the species has been legally imported into Thailand from China, and then grown to maturity, and then propagated by seed, then the resulting flasks would be legal to import into the USA.

The flasks must be propagated from the original plants exported from China and not some other mature plants than may have been smuggled from Vietnam. So after enough time (years) pass the species will become legalized because of the Chinese exports and at some point no one will know when Vietnamese genetics slip in.

If there are flasks in Thailand that have CITES from China then Thailand can issue CITES Re-export permits and those flasks could legally enter the USA.


----------



## Howzat (Apr 25, 2011)

quietaustralian said:


> Hi Howard,
> I must be missing something here??I don’t understand how CITES impacts on you. CITES isn’t interested in flasks and if I read correctly, Appendix I orchid species are treated as Appendix II species if artificially propagated.
> So in essence:
> You can import any flasks you want without any interference from CITES.
> ...



Mick, these bloggs were originally directed to the problem in USA. Even in flasks the authority there would still ask for the parentage of the babies in the flask.
Yes, you are right, no problem here in Australia. I brought in flasks of roths through Sam Tsui in Sept 2009. He did not have problem getting out of USA, nor did he have from Australian CITES authority. I also brought in hangianum and roths , niveum and bellatulum from Taiwan and did not have to declare, they are species and with CITES paper. Also Joseph brought in leuchochilum andno problem. The Custom here are OK, because there are not knowledgable enough to ask question , but they do refer them to the Quarantine people who are very tough on suspected browning leaves.


----------



## Howzat (Apr 25, 2011)

What intrigues me is how the USA's Dept of F&W could issue a rule that exempt China but not from Vietnam?? People can still bring the flask out of Vietnam into say Taiwan and re-exported and said it is chinese made. How would they, US Dept F&W, distinguish which one comes from China direct or ones which are redirected from Vietnam??
Don't they know that it is so impractical to police?? Unless they have a sniffing ability like dogs???


----------



## s1214215 (Apr 25, 2011)

OK Mick I take your point in that there is one CITES office and you say that all other offices are just government bodies set up to enforce CITES rules. 

Perhaps then they should cease calling themselves CITES offices in various countries, I have been to more than a few and it leads to the impression that CITES is a larger body than one office.

It is also the impression I have seen held by many people in the orchid trade in SE Asia that the local offices responsible for ussuing CITES export/import certs are somehow under CITES' governance.


----------



## gonewild (Apr 25, 2011)

Howzat said:


> How would they, US Dept F&W, distinguish which one comes from China direct or ones which are redirected from Vietnam??
> Don't they know that it is so impractical to police?? Unless they have a sniffing ability like dogs???



They would know because the Taiwan CITES officer would certify that the plants being exported from Taiwan were either legally propagated in Taiwan or were imported into Taiwan legally from China and then being re-exported.


----------



## Gcroz (Apr 25, 2011)

gonewild said:


> They would know because the Taiwan CITES officer would certify that the plants being exported from Taiwan were either legally propagated in Taiwan or were imported into Taiwan legally from China and then being re-exported.



Also, as an enforcement matter, USF&W would need to see that all plants in the family tree of the flasklings were collected legally from the country they are native to. Since China has a population of hangianum, flasks made from plants that were collected with proper government permission (papers) and exported with proper CITES documentation would be fine. However, if there is no paper trail showing legal wild collection of the parent plants, then all seedlings propagated from the improperly collected plants become "fruit of the poisonous tree," and thus illegal. 

Maybe I'm repeating something already written...this is a long thread.


----------



## gonewild (Apr 25, 2011)

Gcroz said:


> Also, as an enforcement matter, USF&W would need to see that all plants in the family tree of the flasklings were collected legally from the country they are native to. Since China has a population of hangianum, flasks made from plants that were collected with proper government permission (papers) and exported with proper CITES documentation would be fine. However, if there is no paper trail showing legal wild collection of the parent plants, then all seedlings propagated from the improperly collected plants become "fruit of the poisonous tree," and thus illegal.
> 
> Maybe I'm repeating something already written...this is a long thread.



For CITES, USFW would not need to see a paper trail showing that the parent plants were legally collected in the past, the exporting countries CITES certification proves that.... the CITES documents could not be issued by the exporting country if the parent plants were not legally collected.

Where the " fruit of the poisonous tree" comes in is with the Lacey Act. The Lacey Act makes it a crime to cheat on the CITES documents.


----------



## Gcroz (Apr 26, 2011)

gonewild said:


> For CITES, USFW would not need to see a paper trail showing that the parent plants were legally collected in the past, the exporting countries CITES certification proves that.... the CITES documents could not be issued by the exporting country if the parent plants were not legally collected.
> 
> Where the " fruit of the poisonous tree" comes in is with the Lacey Act. The Lacey Act makes it a crime to cheat on the CITES documents.



You're correct. Thanks for the correction. With all the convoluted BS that's involved, my explanation wen a bit askew.


----------



## Howzat (Apr 26, 2011)

gonewild said:


> They would know because the Taiwan CITES officer would certify that the plants being exported from Taiwan were either legally propagated in Taiwan or were imported into Taiwan legally from China and then being re-exported.



Never ever when I bought flasks from Taiwan, would they issue any CITES. Perhaps if you ask for it they would get one for you. But then this becomes a joke. As the seller can say whatever he would like to say.


----------



## Howzat (Apr 26, 2011)

s1214215 said:


> Agreed. but how, who to lobby, and to best effect
> 
> Brett


Hi Bret, forget about yours, also my computer crashed and now buying a new one.
Our population of paph lovers a re so tiny that even if you send a petition with one hundred signatories is not good enough against a population of 22 mill in Australia. I don't think that i have the answer to your question.
But one ray of hope is keep on writing in this forum or Orchid journal or the US paph lovers can lobby their AOS chiefs. But lots of them are just afraid of being accused as pro anti CITES lobby. We are not anti CITES. The idea is good, but it is in the operational matters that they become bogged down. A Nonsense cause as Dr Braem said.


----------



## KyushuCalanthe (Apr 26, 2011)

*************************************************

This Just In:

Verdict On CITES and its misenforcementation:

Guilty As Charged

Film At 11

*************************************************


----------



## gonewild (Apr 26, 2011)

Howzat said:


> Never ever when I bought flasks from Taiwan, would they issue any CITES. Perhaps if you ask for it they would get one for you. But then this becomes a joke. As the seller can say whatever he would like to say.




Well actually Taiwan can't issue CITES certificates because they did not sign the treaty.


----------



## Pete (Apr 26, 2011)

Taiwan is in an interesting position regarding being a party to the treaty or not. they are their own country, own president etc, however are technically a part of the republic of China.


----------



## NYEric (Apr 26, 2011)

The glorious People's Democratic Republic grascioulsy extends the hand of friendship to our brethren across the bay!


----------



## Howzat (Apr 28, 2011)

KyushuCalanthe said:


> *************************************************
> 
> This Just In:
> 
> ...



Hi Tom
Is there a film ,titled just that?? Or are you just kidding?????


----------



## Howzat (Apr 28, 2011)

gonewild said:


> Well actually Taiwan can't issue CITES certificates because they did not sign the treaty.



I believe that Taiwan is now a signatory (1995???). At TIOS they also have a spot where people can get plants certified. Never ask them about flask, because I never thought that flasks needed to be certified (at least into Australia). But now I know that USA W&F can ask any one coming into the country.


----------



## s1214215 (Apr 28, 2011)

Er.. sorry, but this kind of sign, the kind I have seen in several countries does lead one to think CITES has some authority here and its not just a government agency enforcing CITES rules.


----------



## gonewild (Apr 28, 2011)

Howzat said:


> I believe that Taiwan is now a signatory (1995???). At TIOS they also have a spot where people can get plants certified. Never ask them about flask, because I never thought that flasks needed to be certified (at least into Australia). But now I know that USA W&F can ask any one coming into the country.




Maybe they are a signator but they are not listed on the CITES website as such. at least not on the page I checked, But then why would CITES update their webpage?


----------



## quietaustralian (Apr 28, 2011)

The Republic of China (Taiwan) isn’t a party to the convention that’s why you won’t find the ROC on the membership list or contacts page. The ROC is able to issue import/export certs because they have referred to CITES in their legislation. As per Article X of the Convention

Trade with States not Party to the Convention​Where export or re-export is to, or import is from, a State not a Party to the present Convention, comparable documentation issued by the competent authorities in that State which substantially conforms with the requirements of the present Convention for permits and certificates may be accepted in lieu thereof by any Party.

A number of flow charts can be found on the CITES website which show the structure of the organisation, personnel in the secretariat and their roles. 
If you read the text of the convention you will find the following in Article IX:

Management and Scientific Authorities​1. Each Party shall designate for the purposes of the present Convention: 
(a) one or more Management Authorities competent to grant permits or certificates on behalf of that Party; and 
(b) one or more Scientific Authorities. 
2. A State depositing an instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession shall at that time inform the Depositary Government of the name and address of the Management Authority authorized to communicate with other Parties and with the Secretariat.
3. Any changes in the designations or authorizations under the provisions of this Article shall be communicated by the Party concerned to the Secretariat for transmission to all other Parties.
4. Any Management Authority referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article shall, if so requested by the Secretariat or the Management Authority of another Party, communicate to it impression of stamps, seals or other devices used to authenticate permits or certificates. 

The Scientific Authorities don’t concern us because we are interested in the people who issue the permits, the management authorities eg.
Thailand
Department of Agriculture
Plant Varieties Protection Division
International Trade of Plants under the Conventions Sub-division

Australia
Wildlife Branch
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities

USA
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Division of Management Authority

Japan
Trade and Economic Cooperation Bureau
Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI)

UK
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra)
Bio-diversity Programme

I haven’t listed all the management authorities for each country. Some countries will have the management authority role split between a number of government departments eg fauna/flora/fisheries.

Regards, Mick


----------



## KyushuCalanthe (Apr 28, 2011)

*More CITES fun!*

Another perspective.

http://www.plantapalm.com/vce/conservation/cites.htm


----------



## Howzat (Apr 28, 2011)

Brett and Mick.
Those are interesting. Thanks
To Tom : WOW that article by Neil Caroll is great. He has clearly defined what is good and what is bad with CITES. And how we can change (though it could be near impossible). Perhaps the paphiopedilum alliance group and enthusiasts could learn a lot from him. First thing is to make sure that habitats are protected (there are lots of signatory countries who allow the destruction of rain forrests where plant species live. CITES does not prohibit the destruction of rain forest and this is, what is so wrong with CITES. Second give the seed and flasks freedom of movement. Third, allow the rescue of plants that were left to die in the clearing of habitat. Fourth, stop any raids on nurseries if they do not know how to look after the plants and if they are not transparent enough where the plants are transported and looked after. Fifth, maybe we should recruit Neil, or at least consult him. He has lots of experience with CITES for Cycads!!!!!


----------



## quietaustralian (Apr 29, 2011)

Howzat said:


> Brett and Mick.
> Those are interesting. Thanks
> To Tom : WOW that article by Neil Caroll is great. He has clearly defined what is good and what is bad with CITES. And how we can change (though it could be near impossible). Perhaps the paphiopedilum alliance group and enthusiasts could learn a lot from him. First thing is to make sure that habitats are protected (there are lots of signatory countries who allow the destruction of rain forrests where plant species live. CITES does not prohibit the destruction of rain forest and this is, what is so wrong with CITES. Second give the seed and flasks freedom of movement. Third, allow the rescue of plants that were left to die in the clearing of habitat. Fourth, stop any raids on nurseries if they do not know how to look after the plants and if they are not transparent enough where the plants are transported and looked after. Fifth, maybe we should recruit Neil, or at least consult him. He has lots of experience with CITES for Cycads!!!!!



Howard,
A very good start in solving the problem . If you do a search for CITES in this forum you’ll get 15 pages of results. Although I haven’t read them all, many are just people complaining about CITES and in some cases complaining about things that don’t relate to CITES but attributing the blame to CITES. Some people say that CITES can’t be changed, whining won’t change anything, only action will.

History has shown that CITES has been changed and amendments made. In the article that Tom provided a link to, there is mention of Dennis Stevenson who is credited with pushing for change and achieving it. 

In trying to make changes in any organisation one must understand the organisation and its structure. There is no point pursuing change in an organisation that isn’t responsible for those things you wish to change. 

Understanding the organisation structure will assist in presenting your case to the correct entity in the organisation.

CITES (the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora) is an international agreement between governments. The key words in the CITES acronym are International and Trade. 

CiTES plays no role in the internal wildlife affairs of a sovereign state unless it relates to international trade. It’s the responsibility of the state to manage its wildlife, sometimes with the assistance of other UN agencies, NGOs and other organisations. Should you wish to affect the in situ conservation of a species, you’d have to lobby the organisations just mentioned.

The convention text doesn’t mention fines, jail terms or other forms of prosecution for breaches of the convention. The CITES secretariat doesn’t have a police force. Member states are responsible for enforcing the convention and any prosecutions resulting from breaches eg Australia would prosecute an offender under Australian law. 


I’d suggest that if you’re interested in making changes, some of the following be considered:

Visit the CITES website, read the convention text and discover the structure and limitations of CITES.

Reach consensus on what changes should be made. The proposal should be limited to matters that relate to CITES. There is no point saying that CITES should do more to protect species in situ, that’s not within CITES mandate. 

Gather evidence to support the proposal. 

Form alliances with other organisations that have the same or similar objectives. As Howard suggests, it may be wise to contact people like Dennis Stevenson.

Lobby the appropriate entity or entities. Who we lobby will depend on the proposal being put forward. 

Regards, Mick


----------



## Braem (Apr 29, 2011)

Sorry Mick, but I must grin when I read your post. Obviously you still believe in the great pumpkin.
Just to add a FACT: since CITES was inforced NOTHING good came of it ... and honestly, I don't understand how someone who is in to orchids can see ANYTHING good in a law (and it side regulations) that have made the legal culture of slipper orchid SPECIES very difficult and in some cases even impossible.


----------



## Rick (Apr 29, 2011)

As I've mentioned in previous posts, I saw (and was part of) several captive breeding programs for non-plant organisms (ranging from fish to rhinos) in public zoo's and aquariums that were put together with CITES blessings.

One of the fish programs was so successful in over producing in the public aquarium sector that release into the hobbiest sector was neccessary.

I rarely see the level of cooperation and organization among orchid breeders to develop a large stable population of captive produced plants before release to the general hobbiest/commercial market. 

Normally its a big race to get the novel species, and then control the release of offspring to generate highest profit (at least until recoup of initial import costs). Note some of the hoops that OL had to go through before releasing kovachii plants to the general public. Kovachii looks to be one of the most cooperative programs that I've seen to date, but I don't know if anyone will make enough money to say it was worth it from a commercial standpoint. 

But breeders in the US know just as well as their foreign counterparts that within a few years of release to the hobby sector, that any novel / high priced species will have the snot bred out of it over the next 5 years, deflating value (and demand within the hobby). I'm currious now that legal kovachii are available in the country if the demand is as high as when they were illegal, and is there a backlog of unsold plants at profitable prices.


----------



## Shiva (Apr 29, 2011)

CITEs reminds me of the Old time roman catholic church making a sin of sex outside marriage. Need I say more?


----------



## Eric Muehlbauer (Apr 29, 2011)

I think that part of the problem is that CITES originated mainly with animals in mind. I think that in many cases it has benefited animals. Plants are so different though, in their patterns of trade and methods of propagation, that CITES doesn't work for them. Maybe (this is very wishful thinking....and I'm sure that it will give Guido a very big laugh) an alternative to CITES could be constructed that applies only to plants, and can take all the various situations and contingincies involved with plants...and leave the animals only to CITES.


----------



## cnycharles (Apr 29, 2011)

people's choices don't make a true thing wrong, or wrong things right, just because they choose to ignore ... the entity in question didn't make something a sin, they pointed out what was told to them. cites is just a collection of do-gooders who didn't think things through before they ran forward making laws. good intentions without good preparation and common sense don't equal good laws (just a lot of knees-jerking, like most things that happen in modern times - reactionary)


----------



## Rick (Apr 29, 2011)

Eric Muehlbauer said:


> I think that part of the problem is that CITES originated mainly with animals in mind. I think that in many cases it has benefited animals. Plants are so different though, in their patterns of trade and methods of propagation, that CITES doesn't work for them. Maybe (this is very wishful thinking....and I'm sure that it will give Guido a very big laugh) an alternative to CITES could be constructed that applies only to plants, and can take all the various situations and contingincies involved with plants...and leave the animals only to CITES.



There's lots of gripes among the animal folk too. It really focuses on the size and fecundity of the species in question. Many fish, reptiles, amphibians can really crank out a ton of offspring fast that can reach sexual maturity in just a few months to years (not that different from orchids). On the other hand Galapagos tortoises, mountain gorillas, rhinos, and certain tropical tree species are big, slow to reach maturity, and don't often produce a lot of viable offspring per reproductive event. The CITES listed tree species are generally not collected live for ornamental or hobby purposes, mostly just felled for exotic timber. So those plant species are more comparable to the "charismatic megavertebrates" that generally get all the endangered species press.


----------



## Howzat (Apr 29, 2011)

If I can sum it up:
1. CITES was intended for conservation purposes.
2. It has not, does not and will not go in parallel with conservation
3. Most countries signed as a signatory to CITES so that they can be seen favourably as pro conservation.
4. But take a look at say Brazil and Indonesia (and many others). Both had vast areas of tropical rain forest that was the habitat of thousands of plant species and animals. But both had their rain forest allowed to be decimated by logging and then turned them into plantation, mining and agriculture. Kalimantan (Indonesia)has its rain forest reduced to 10% of its original. How many plant species have been destroyed as well as animals???? Yet they think by enforcing CITES law they feel that they are pro conservation??? CITES does not save the habitat. But CITES is being used by countries or individuals to promote their tarnished image of the REAL conservation.
5. In this sense CITES has failed its intention (controlling cross border trades) as a pro conservation law.
6. So what can we do??? If there is another attempt to promote conservation, then a new international body should be set up and promote conservation based on saving the habitat. Countries who encourage decimating habitat should not be allowed to be member, before they can show its forests are being protected. In the mean time they can be included in a shame list.


----------



## Braem (Apr 30, 2011)

Eric Muehlbauer said:


> I think that part of the problem is that CITES originated mainly with animals in mind. I think that in many cases it has benefited animals. Plants are so different though, in their patterns of trade and methods of propagation, that CITES doesn't work for them. Maybe (this is very wishful thinking....and I'm sure that it will give Guido a very big laugh) an alternative to CITES could be constructed that applies only to plants, and can take all the various situations and contingincies involved with plants...and leave the animals only to CITES.


I originally also thought that CITES was good for the animals. But what happened ... all big cats are VERY endangered (not mainly by hunting, but maintly by habitat destruction); elephants are also endangered in some placed for the same reasons, in other placed they are overpopulated and have to be shot down again; aligators in Florida are crawling around Miami ... etc. etc. Thus the conclusion is: CITES is good for NOTHING, and even worse ... it ENDANGERS that what it is supposed to protect. What we need is a law that stops habitat destruction ... and that law will never be passed for many reasons ...


----------



## Rick (Apr 30, 2011)

Howzat said:


> If I can sum it up:
> 1. CITES was intended for conservation purposes.
> 2. It has not, does not and will not go in parallel with conservation
> 3. Most countries signed as a signatory to CITES so that they can be seen favourably as pro conservation.
> ...



Now in all these places you mention there are vestigial government parks/forests. Granted these are tiny and under funded. However the fragments of literature I see coming from these locations indicate that the orchids in these sites are under threat of poaching. Surprisingly (to me) P sukhakulii (probably one of the most common and prolific species in collections) appears to be down to a tiny protected population in a Thai state forest. The park rangers won't disclose locations of plants. But in the US you can hardly give nursery produced plants away.

So how can consumers of wildlife in foreign countries support conservation of habitat in the countries of origin?

Maybe the real issue is not CITES but recognizing that people are eating the planet alive, how can we achieve interglobal cooperation to protect habitat.


----------



## Braem (Apr 30, 2011)

We can't ... and that is the problem. And that is why CITES is nonsence. There is no point in "protecting" animals and/or plants from being collected and/or traded AS LONG as you don't protect their habitats. And as we agree on the fact that MAN will never stop destroying the habitats ... for many reasons ... it is obvious that CITES is a nonsense law. The idea behind it may be great ... as is the idea behind ... but it JUST DOESN'T WORK.


----------



## Howzat (Apr 30, 2011)

Rick
I have been in Kalimantan (southern part of Malaysia's Borneo) recently and saw the destruction of rain forest first hand. You can imagine what hundred of millions of hectares of virgin forest can contain. Not just the trees, but trillions of plant species, millions of animals, orang outans, sun bear etc have been lost. Ground water level has also risen and erosion happens everywhere. Just compare this to the thousand of plants confiscated, and which were lost "in transit" or died under CITES direction. And CITES were proud of their achievement in hunting the smugled plants??????The number of smugled plants are so so tiny compared to the ones lost in the destruction of the habitat.
Don't get me wrong, as I have said before the ideas of CITES was good, but if CITES thinks that cross the border policing of ALL plant material (including dead speciment) is the way to conserve plant species, then they have to think again.


----------



## Howzat (Apr 30, 2011)

Rick
So don't you think that "in USA you can hardly give away propagated species" is a good result of breeding in the lab to satisfy people's demand thus it would reduce demand for wild collected ones. Once sanderianum was priced at around $3000. Now you can buy them for a mere $100. I think this is a good result for conservation. 
Your last para, I agree with you. It points to other direction away from the dogmatic CITES in the name of conservation. But again can you achieve global international cooperation??


----------



## Erythrone (Apr 30, 2011)

Howzat said:


> Rick
> I have been in Kalimantan (southern part of Malaysia's Borneo) recently and saw the destruction of rain forest first hand. You can imagine what hundred of millions of hectares of virgin forest can contain. Not just the trees, but trillions of plant species, millions of animals, orang outans, sun bear etc have been lost. Ground water level has also risen and erosion happens everywhere. Just compare this to the thousand of plants confiscated, and which were lost "in transit" or died under CITES direction. And CITES were proud of their achievement in hunting the smugled plants??????The number of smugled plants are so so tiny compared to the ones lost in the destruction of the habitat.
> Don't get me wrong, as I have said before the ideas of CITES was good, but if CITES thinks that cross the border policing of ALL plant material (including dead speciment) is the way to conserve plant species, then they have to think again.



I totally agree! The biggest challenge in the world is now destruction of habitat for many species.

Even in contries where human population is low like in Canada, we have big problems. I don't talk about forestry, since it is possible to have good practices when we cut trees. Temperate forests are easier to manage than tropical ones.

In Quebec, we cannot collect some native species but we can destroy the habitat (houses, industries, etc.).


----------



## Rick (Apr 30, 2011)

Howzat said:


> Rick
> So don't you think that "in USA you can hardly give away propagated species" is a good result of breeding in the lab to satisfy people's demand thus it would reduce demand for wild collected ones. Once sanderianum was priced at around $3000. Now you can buy them for a mere $100. I think this is a good result for conservation.
> Your last para, I agree with you. It points to other direction away from the dogmatic CITES in the name of conservation. But again can you achieve global international cooperation??



I agree that being able to crank out lab propagated plants did wonders for supplying the US demand. And maybe with the US demand down the 2 park rangers for that fragmentary forest in Thailand can keep up with the present poaching for sukhakulii. Probably the same for sanderianum. Most of the spots where they and stonei used to exist are probably either palm oil plantations or golf courses. There are a couple of parks that probably have reduced demand for poached plants. 

Just curious though how many imported jungles collected plants does it take before someone gets off their butts to breed the snot out of them and satiate a market? I would suspect a tiny fraction of what is actually getting moved across international boarders. 

There were some wonderful wooded areas across the street from my house that are now a highway. Me, my wife and neighbors invested $$$ and time effort and emotion to stop that project. I never even got to poach the orchids I knew grew there, but the life lost from that project will be on the hands of the State and developers, not me.

So CITES doesn't work, what does? Is blaming CITES for our need for plants a cop out for the energy we could be spending on investing in forest preserves or cooperative breeding ventures? Maybe a portion of plant sale profits could go back to purchasing forest land in Vietnam. In the zoo biz we came up with all kinds of fund raisers to help with rhino conservation. (For all I know it might have all went to buy arms for rebels:sob:


----------



## gonewild (Apr 30, 2011)

Rick said:


> Maybe a portion of plant sale profits could go back to purchasing forest land in Vietnam.



The people that produce the plants DO NOT have ANY profits to send back.
Collectors and hobbyists WILL NOT donate anywhere near enough money to make a difference. ALL the money they do donate goes to pay for the cost of offices and to collect the donations.

Just enjoy your plants and don't worry about saving the planet.


----------



## Rick (Apr 30, 2011)

gonewild said:


> Just enjoy your plants and don't worry about saving the planet.



True. There's plenty of plants in you're own backyard that are worth enjoying without worrying about possessing something from the other side of the world.

I grew up in LA where nature was often restricted to the weeds growing up from the cracks in the sidewalk. So having a greenhouse full of legal exotics is treasure enough to appreciate.


----------



## Howzat (May 1, 2011)

Many of us would agree with the idea of protecting the habitat. That is good.
But the government agency policy is using the words "No matter what". So when a friend saw a clump of caladenia on the side of the road being widened, right in the middle of the path of a buldozer, he got out of his car. He dug the caladenia, and took it home (not knowing where to replant), but not knowing he was being followed home by an ever enthusiastic employee of the department and got instant summon. He fronted the court the following month and was handed a fine of $1500.00. Is that good??? There is a chain of over enthusiastic rule/law/ then the employee and then the court system. So the conservation of habitat should also allow people to salvage plant that would otherwise be dead. There were also stories, about people trying to salvage epyphyte orchids clinging on trees which had been felled by chain saw, got fined as a penalty for his "crime", but the logger and his logging company got medals for clearing the land and "helped" the country's export industry. Can we still trust the governments of countries where habitat destruction still takes place ??? They are the custodian and enforcer of CITES rule. 
CITES could not care less, so don't be fooled.


----------



## Marc (May 1, 2011)

Howzat said:


> Many of us would agree with the idea of protecting the habitat. That is good.
> But the government agency policy is using the words "No matter what". So when a friend saw a clump of caladenia on the side of the road being widened, right in the middle of the path of a buldozer, he got out of his car. He dug the caladenia, and took it home (not knowing where to replant), but not knowing he was being followed home by an ever enthusiastic employee of the department and got instant summon. He fronted the court the following month and was handed a fine of $1500.00. Is that good??? There is a chain of over enthusiastic rule/law/ then the employee and then the court system. So the conservation of habitat should also allow people to salvage plant that would otherwise be dead. There were also stories, about people trying to salvage epyphyte orchids clinging on trees which had been felled by chain saw, got fined as a penalty for his "crime", but the logger and his logging company got medals for clearing the land and "helped" the country's export industry. Can we still trust the governments of countries where habitat destruction still takes place ??? They are the custodian and enforcer of CITES rule.
> CITES could not care less, so don't be fooled.



Reading stuff like this makes me so sad.


----------



## s1214215 (May 1, 2011)

I grow ever more frustrated by CITES and local government law. I know that bureaucrats will reason that laws that stop you saving a plant thats is about to be destroyed also protect those in reserved areas, but the insanity come to play when there is no caveat for plant rescue. Why cant plants be rescued and then replaced into the wild? I too have seen mile after mile of forest destroyed and no one could go in and save the plants. All that was felled was burnt and the rest went under the plow for wheat fields. That is the insanity of Australian law. We cant even save or export a lot of our fauna and flora, yet it is smuggled out. 

I dont understand why countries dont see these plants and animals as a resource. Breed them, export a percentage, and from the profit rehabilitate the remainder to the areas in need.

I recently exported my orchid collection back to Australia. Probably the last time I will do such a thing. Apart from the phenomenal cost, and plants lost to fumigation, the laws pertaining to import are being gradually tightened to prevent imports by making it hard to do. Why, in a nutshell, some bureaucrats got their butts kicked over a disease outbreak in the horse industry several years ago, but instead of fixing that problem area (theres money in it), they clamp down on plant and other animal imports to make it look like they are doing something.

A problem in Thailand is that many locals like wild plants as they are cheap. Why by a 1000 baht propagated line bred plant when you can get the forest plant for 100 baht a bunch or 300 baht by the kilogram. That make even more sense when the buyer may only earn 15000 baht a month. Collection here wont stop when many species cant be economically produced for the masses at prices they can afford. 

In this way, plants are consumed locally, and yet they are restricted from export. As far as I can see it, we have to preserve plants in collections as soon there will be nothing left by denuded forests and oil palm plantations in SE Asia

To be honest, I think most politicians care little beyond the next election. Votes will make change, and thats the only way.

Brett


----------



## Braem (May 1, 2011)

I just heard another good one - I hear a hybrid between sanderianum and gigantifolium was not awarded because gigantifolium is illegal in the USA ... but if I followed the canhii discussion properly ... canhii is legal in the USA ... so how shizoid can a law be ....


----------



## Braem (May 1, 2011)

Rick said:


> I agree that being able to crank out lab propagated plants did wonders for supplying the US demand. And maybe with the US demand down the 2 park rangers for that fragmentary forest in Thailand can keep up with the present poaching for sukhakulii. Probably the same for sanderianum. Most of the spots where they and stonei used to exist are probably either palm oil plantations or golf courses. There are a couple of parks that probably have reduced demand for poached plants.
> 
> Just curious though how many imported jungles collected plants does it take before someone gets off their butts to breed the snot out of them and satiate a market? I would suspect a tiny fraction of what is actually getting moved across international boarders.
> 
> ...


But even if we do get fund raising etc . etc ... what does it matter ... CITES is still nonsense ...


----------



## quietaustralian (May 1, 2011)

I did a search of CITES trade database to see which countries were trading in these four species. 

All the transactions in the tables are for plants (A/D = art. Propagated, W=wild), CITES doesn’t issue permits for flasks so they are not recorded unless the transaction was prior to the amendment excluding flasks.

I have included only the left half of the table to reduce the size of the pic, the right half relates to re-export so is of little interest. In the import purpose column T= trade and S= science. The database will generate results from 1975 until 2 years prior to the date of search, 2009 are the latest results.

This is the CITES trade database so to be included in the database all the plants listed left the export country with CITES approved permits. I had expected to see that the US was the only country not trading in these species in which case I would have identified the organisation to lobby. If the plants entered the US but were confiscated, this data still shows that the US is playing its own game.
Regards, Mick


----------



## JeanLux (May 1, 2011)

Very interesting extracts!!! From my point of view, interesting also, to see the moves of hang. from NZ (New Zealand!?) to Belgium and Switzerland!

While googling for nz hang, I met this pdf, maybe not new for you, but authored by one of the guys Eric Hansen met in Kew some years ago:

=> http://www.kew.org/conservation/CIT...perOrchids/EnglishCITESSlipperOrchidsPack.pdf

Jean


----------



## Eric Muehlbauer (May 1, 2011)

Nope Guido, canhii is still illegal here in the US. Gigantifolium WAS legal here, until the USFW suddenly decided that Sam Tsui's plants,which had been legally sold for awhile, were actually illegal. Sam got screwed, and now gigantifloium and its many offspring are illegal.


----------



## Rick (May 1, 2011)

Is VN /Vietnam, TW /Taiwan, and CA/Canada?

If so it looks like all trade (with these plants) with Vietnam stopped with everyone around 2000.


----------



## Howzat (May 1, 2011)

Thanks to all for bringing up some very useful materials. McGough paper is very useful and explain why/how the problems started and still persist.
After some insight into CITES, let me say that CITES is NOT really an organisation that promotes conservation, it was merely established to ban TRADE, with the belief that it will stop the pillaging/smugling of native orchids from the wild, thus they call it : "CONSERVATION". However, if we look at what has happened in REALITY. It has NOT stopped the gathering/pillaging from the wild particularly the newly found ones. Although it has not completely stopped the pillaging of well known species such as rotschildianum, sanderianum etc, it certainly has drastically reduced the flow. NOT because of CITES, but because of the AVAILABILITY of plant materials which are in the hand of HOBBYISTS, who continue to propagate and flood the market. And these people are in my book the real CONSERVATIONISTS. NOT CITES and its officials who thinks that they are doing an excellent job in consrvation. They are highly paid, lawyers and public servants who know nothing about orchids and live in their own IVORY TOWERS. I have to agree with Dr. Braem on this issue.
While CITES has approved some exemptions (notably the in vitro propagation), it is still riddled with some highly ideallistic theory/rules, notably that about the "LEGALITY" of the parents of such seedlings in flasks. IF CITES is really concerned with CONSERVATION, then it should have been grateful to the few people who have produced thousands of seedlings, whatever the parentage are. It is noted with concerns that USFW strictly adheres/addresses those exemption rules to the detriment of free flow of artificially propagated seedlings into the US. It has and will confiscate flasks of seedlings whose parentage are "UNKNOWN". May I tell those officials of CITES, that confiscation of seedlings in flasks (and left to die) is HIGHLY ANTI CONSERVATION, no matter what excuses you may present. USFW would not know who to give the flasks to or grow it on and then use them for further propagation, as all of them, for many many generations will still be deemed ILLEGAL. To all contributors in this forum, what chance do we have here ?? in changing the description and definition of CONSERVATION??? NOTHING, because we are dealing with a bunch of people, I can only describe as the biggest knuckle heads.


----------



## s1214215 (May 28, 2011)

An interesting link showing the distribution of Paph hangianum within China

Download and install Google toolbar or go to http://au.babelfish.yahoo.com/ for translation from Vietnamese.

http://www.hoalanvietnam.org/Article.asp?ID=564

Howzat I agree completely. I have worked within governent bureaucrazies and dealth with several in various countries. A big part of the problem occurs with people who largely care little for conservation choose to ennact policy and law to cover their own arses. We have seen this in Australia after the equine influenza outbreak (which occured due to race horses being give a quick ticket in to the country as race money in big money), and post outbreak and loss off masses of livestock on the Eastern Seaboard, what happens? AQIS and Environment Australia crack down on plant imports (covertly), by extreme unterpretations of policy. Why??? Bureaucrats covering arses. 

Thankfully Paphs going to Oz is still not a problem in flask. I recently sent thaianum plants back and they passed in ok and little loss. Also send a malipoense hybrid plant. 

Brett


----------



## quietaustralian (May 28, 2011)

s1214215 said:


> An interesting link showing the distribution of Paph hangianum within China
> 
> Download and install Google toolbar or go to http://au.babelfish.yahoo.com/ for translation from Vietnamese.
> 
> ...



Hi Brett,

That map was originally published on www.slipperorchids.info . The map was based on various sources. I believe the source of the information relating to hangianum naturally occurring in Yunnan is based on the statement below:


The botanists introduced me to a local orchid grower who had mainly cymbidiums in his backyard, but also a few paphiopedilums, including P. hangianum. I suggested that these plants most likely would have their origin in nearby Vietnam, but the orchid grower emphatically confirmed that a *friend from Malipo *had collected these plants near Malipo in Yunnan. *Though doubts remain,*I am inclined to believe that statement.

*Perner, H. "The Moon Slipper - Paphiopedilum hangianum." 2006*

L. Averyanov wrote the following:
Distribution. Vietnam (Bac Kan, Tuyen Quang). Endemic.
Studied specimens. Bac Kan, Cho Don, HAL 4789 (HN), HLF 806 (HN, LE);
Tuyen Quang, Na Hang, HAL 126 (HN, LE), HAL 192 (HN, LE).
Notes. Local endemic with very restricted distribution. There are few doubts that description of P. singchii reported from southern Yunnan is based on plants imported from Vietnam.
*Turczaninowia 2008, 11(1) : 5–168*

In the description of Paph singchii Z.J. Liu et J.Y. Zhang wrote:
“singchii is described based on two flowering plants cultivated in the Shenzhen City Nurseries. *It was said *the plants were collected from Southern Yunnan”	
*P. singchii Z.J. Liu et J.Y. Zhang, 2001, Acta Phytotax. Sin.38, 5: 468.
*

I’m more than happy to hear of other documentation relating to slipper orchids of South East Asia.

Regards and thanks, Mick


----------



## Roth (May 29, 2011)

Hangianum were sent by the truckload to Wenshan and Malipo nurseries. There are some massive storage places here dealing in Vietnamese wild orchids. No wonder those hangianum came from Vietnam anyway.

Singchii is a mystery. What Chen was selling under that name was a pygmy form of emersonii, about the size of helenae and a 5 cm flower. However the description is clearly hangianum. Now if you look on Ebay, there is a Beijing nursery selling fresh vietnamese hangianum and emersonii, as well as the lao/vietnam canhii. You understand that most of the chinese paphs in fact came from Vietnam, including paph malipoense. I have seen in the wild phal malipoensis, it is growing in Vietnam, not in China too.


----------



## Howzat (May 29, 2011)

By the truck load ????????? That is horrible to hear. Why isn't anybody with contact in the high echelon of the USFW to start pressing them that their policy of emphasizing on the legality of parent plants is failing to suppress the pillaging of orchids??? Why, AOS as the orchids fraternity umbrella is just sitting pretty and not being proactive in identifying that USFW policy is failing. Breeding as many as you possible can, will reverse the situation.


----------



## s1214215 (May 30, 2011)

Howzat said:


> By the truck load ????????? That is horrible to hear. Why isn't anybody with contact in the high echelon of the USFW to start pressing them that their policy of emphasizing on the legality of parent plants is failing to suppress the pillaging of orchids??? Why, AOS as the orchids fraternity umbrella is just sitting pretty and not being proactive in identifying that USFW policy is failing. Breeding as many as you possible can, will reverse the situation.



Even if they do change how they follow policy in the USA, propagation is unlikely to change the buying habits of many people in Asia. The domestic demand for illegally collected orchids is vast in many SE Asian countries, China etc is voracious and greatly outweighs what is sent to the West. 

Propagated orchids can not compete pricewise and from my experience, it seems the average member of the public could care less is the plant has superior form. Cheap is best and logical if you are on low wages in particular.

Throw in official corruption/involvment in orchid smuggling, and this is not likely to stop. 

My irritation with the restriction of orchids being propagated and sent abroad (Viet paphs etc) is that is restricting preservation in collections. These plants may one day be able to replace plants into the wild that will be stripped out in the comming years

Brett


----------



## Roth (May 30, 2011)

s1214215 said:


> My irritation with the restriction of orchids being propagated and sent abroad (Viet paphs etc) is that is restricting preservation in collections. These plants may one day be able to replace plants into the wild that will be stripped out in the comming years
> 
> Brett



Anyway, preservation in collections is bullshit for nearly all species. Most paph species need frequent reintroduction from the wild to 'survive in cultivation'.

That's one of the problems too, we don't know how to grow most paph species beyond a few years, except a very few individual plants, we have to face the truth about that.

Paphiopedilum delenatii, rothschildianum, philippinense, callosum... etc... survived for long time in our collections without reintroduction.

Paphiopedilum hangianum, emersonii, most die after a couple of years from lack of proper care.

Paphiopedilum helenae, vietnamense, etc... the same. For vietnamense, the plants do not last very long overall in most nurseries, and they have to flask in a hurry the next generation. Sometimes they forget to make flasks quickly enough, and there is a massive shortage, like now in Europe...

Paphiopedilum mastersianum, acmodontum, wentworthianum, bougainvilleanum, violascens, ciliolare, randsii, anitum, ooii, intaniae, gigantifolium, urbanianum, hennissianum etc... needed and need periodic collection from the wild to still 'exist in culture', let's face the truth.

Of course, I guess some people will tell me that they know flasks have been done here once, and that there are some individual plants that are alive for many years. That's true, but it is absolutely insignificant compared to the overall situation. Most of the time too, like randsii, the few flasks that I know of have been made with plants that subsequently died afterwards, and the only hope is to get a couple of seedlings to blooming size, make flasks out of them, etc... A slight human mistake, and the species is lost in cultivation.

No one realize how many plants have been exported/imported from the wild. It is tremendous, and some species are still very rare to extinct in cultivation, such as sangii, wentworthianum bougainvilleanium ( last time was the Orchid Zone who did a selfing years ago, nowadays, the newer seedlings were violascens by mistake, as acknowledged by the sellers...), mastersianum (exported by thousands, extremely rare still in cultivation as properly, healthy plants)

Adductum? It has been propagated by Antec over 15 years ago, same for hookerae. Can anyone show me one photo of one blooming plant from those days, or their progeny? None. All the adductum, either blooming size, or seedlings, come from the frequent importation from the wild every couple of years.

Conservation through propagation is, at present time, a nice wish, but does not fit the harsh truth. I will believe it when I will have seen the hundreds of seedlings of wentworthianum and bougainvilleanum from the 4000 plants importation of Paul Gripp in the 80's, or from adductum from the massive 1990 import. Then, I will believe. Today, I know it is very far from the truth.


----------



## s1214215 (May 30, 2011)

Sorry Roth..

I dont agree.. I have seem a number of the species you claim impossible to grow in the long term well cultivated in private collections. And not new plants. 

I find in SE Asia a huge problem is people gooseing their plants with hormones and fertilizers and that later fall over as a result.. Maybe thats the issue.. Secondly growing plants in climatic conditions they dont belong in.

Look, I dont really care what you say.. I can see we wont agree. From what I have seen travelling in Vietnam, Thailand, Cambodia and various other SE Asian countries, locals dont give a toss about preservations (rich or poor).

If you want these species to survive in the wild, good luck, because your own are destroying it. And thats NOT for a export to the West. I have been in Thailand long enough to know people researching illegal plant trades who have stated so. Big inflows to China, Japan, Thailand, and others. they also cite political involvement in several SE Asian nations.

Brett


----------



## Roth (May 30, 2011)

s1214215 said:


> Sorry Roth..
> 
> I dont agree.. I have seem a number of the species you claim impossible to grow in the long term well cultivated in private collections. And not new plants.



Definitely, and I do have those even growing well. But what's the percentage compared to everything that has been sold? Less than a few per dozen thousands...

For anitum on the other side, I grow them in asplenium fern roots. Any attempt to grow them in anything else failed ( and I have yet to see well grown anitum with 4-5 flowers elsewhere. They cannot stand of sphag mos, bark, or anything we usually use, or they just throw one or two weak flowers, weak growths, and eventually die after a couple of years). 

Wentworthianum, I have several, I know there are 1 plant still alive in Switzerland, 1-2 in the USA, in good thriving condition, no more. Maybe we can add worldwide up to 50, but Paul Gripp collected 2000 of those, and the later imports in 1996 numbered another 1500. Five years ago 200. Imports that I don't know ( unlikely but...), total 4000 plants. 50 out of 4000 is quite bad.

Stonei, I imported legally ( They are in the database) 550 CLUMPS to Europe in 1996. I still have the three best ones. ALL the others, sold to Germany, Netherlands, Denmark, England, are dead.



> I find in SE Asia a huge problem is people gooseing their plants with hormones and fertilizers and that later fall over as a result.. Maybe thats the issue.. Secondly growing plants in climatic conditions they dont belong in.



It's true, especially in Taiwan, they tend to overfeed grossly, at least some growers. Same in Thailand. But in Australia, USA or Europe, I don't know many people who have randsii gigantea for many years still alive, or anitum in good condition as an example...



> Look, I dont really care what you say.. I can see we wont agree. From what I have seen travelling in Vietnam, Thailand, Cambodia and various other SE Asian countries, locals dont give a toss about preservations (rich or poor).



That's absolutely true unfortunately. What is untrue is that we won't agree... Let's say that the problem is not only to claim about conservation through propagation, I know it does not work from many examples. The problem is to know how to grow the plants well. And it needs a lot of analysis and studies, as some plants have very specific requirements ( Dendrobium jacobsonii, many dozen thousands plants have been exported, exceedingly few alive, anywhere in the world. They have specific requirements.). If people study the specific requirements, and are not completely blinded by so-called scientists who claims that all plants need the same feeding, AND make propagation, then it can work. Otherwise, in its present status, it is just impossible.



> If you want these species to survive in the wild, good luck, because your own are destroying it. And thats NOT for a export to the West. I have been in Thailand long enough to know people researching illegal plant trades who have stated so. Big inflows to China, Japan, Thailand, and others. they also cite political involvement in several SE Asian nations.



I was closer to one of the former CITES chief in Geneva than anyone else. I do not expect, anyway, those species to survive in the wild. I expect many to be extinct in the next century, and I am sure it will happen, no matter what we will do...

The people researching illegal plant trade know absolutely nothing, they imagine a lot of things, that's another problem ( and the get sponsorship and money by spreading false informations, instead of doing their investigation job, at least several I know of, who spent more time in Nana and similar place than investigating). Political involvement, maybe for some things like ivory. Plants, they just pass the borders through corrupt individuals, many times by luck, but there is no real 'network' with a 'big boss'. 

And for things like the jungle sellers opposite the Jatujak mall, they are here for decades, they are fined, and their stocks regularly seized, but the profit far outperforms any fine, that's the truth behind the story...


----------



## s1214215 (May 30, 2011)

One of the sources citing political involvement was senior CITES. A particular provincial governor was named as being a major controller and untouchable. 

You sound like a lot of hypocritical SE Asian well to do/foreigners gone native that like to accuse foreigners here or someone you dont like as whoremongers when their points of view dont match yours. Not all people here live in gogo bars or whorehouse, drop that reference please.

I do completely agree on this point.. Some plants need individual care and requirements. Perhaps thats why some people can grow some plants well. You will have to be a very well travelled individual to see all the plants in the collections around the world Roth. I only lay claim to what I have seen.

Agreed, the makets at JJ have been around along time. I guess so have the stalls in Vietnam, Cambodia, Burma and Malaysia that I have seen. Point is, allow the corrupt and peasants to strip the forests, or free up flasked plants world wide. We arent going to win on preservation in the long run. Save what we can I say.


----------



## Rick (May 30, 2011)

I think fad and style changes are most influential in what makes paph species popular in collections over many years.

Lots of people just think they are ugly, and a lot of species look to close to each other to get the average collector the impetus to keep bench space for it.

A lot of people are primarily in it for the $ and can't afford to be a Noah's Ark of slipper orchids. So every 10 or so years after the original excitement wheres off, they dust off a stray stud plant, generate a few flasks that get hobbyists pumped up, make some cash, and put the plant away again. Gotta pay the bills. And probably 90% of the seedlings go down the tubes. 

Dedicated hobbyists do have the potential to breed the snot out of plants, but only a fraction ever do. I find that most get overwhelmed in seedling grow-out, and give up the pace after a few years (when they may be on there second GHoke:oke. This drives the prices down so that commercial breeders can't even make a living. This keeps the experts with the plants and resources out of the game for even longer "no-breed" cycles.

Hobbyists themselves come and go on time frames that don't support long term conservation aspects of orchid growing.

No one organization can handle this, and organizing the multitude of hobbyists is like herding cats.


You might have some luck doing things on a species by species basis instead of all paphs. Actually Leo suggested something like this for just a way of hobbyists to focus their skills.

I've brought this up many times, but zoos do this with different endangered species, by developing what is known as the Species Survival Plan. A consortium of zoos gets together to generate an "Ark" for the particular organism of focus. USFW buys off on this to facilitate the movement of breeding stock. This can include an importation of wild stock. No significant money changes hands, everything is on "breeding loan". But no body goes to jail.:wink:

Obviously the process is funded by zoo visitors and other patrons of the facility (same as hobbyists have jobs to pay for their addictions). Eventually overproduction (of species suitable to release to general public), can be released to an approved hobbyist market.


----------



## Roth (May 30, 2011)

s1214215 said:


> One of the sources citing political involvement was senior CITES. A particular provincial governor was named as being a major controller and untouchable.



Honestly I have heard this kind of legend before, and I know from many cases, including Thailand, that it is not true... 

The second problem is that no one on the enforcement side knows how to identify wild plants, or what they are.

The third problem, the fines are too low, so that's just a kind of tax. Get caught today, make profit tomorrow for most of those people.



> You sound like a lot of hypocritical SE Asian well to do/foreigners gone native that like to accuse foreigners here or someone you dont like as whoremongers when their points of view dont match yours. Not all people here live in gogo bars or whorehouse, drop that reference please.



No, for the whoremonger ( and cocain), that was absolutely true unfortunately. 

Let me tell the story. As a customs expert, I went to Geneva to meet Ger van Vliet, the CITES general director at that time.

He showed me some videos from Jatujak, and another wild collected orchid market close to Chiang Mai, with several foreign people dealing in massive quantities. 

The investigation went under way, and they asked the WWF to help. I was going to Thailand a couple of months later, so I told him I would meet with those WWF (and one Greenpeace people too...). So did I, and my friend Krairit Vejvarut told me that there was no risk they would find anything. 

In the evening he brought me to a local style of Nana plaza, those guys were here with several jungle orchid sellers drinking and choosing bar girls. You can ask a ladyboy selling orchids from Malaysia at Jatujak...

Some months later, they reported that there was nothing to report, end of the story.

In the raptor story, some people from the Emirates invited CITES and WWF expert for a tour. Deluxe, and more deluxe journey. Afterwards, all the wild raptors became captive bred, nothing to say, nothing to see...



> I do completely agree on this point.. Some plants need individual care and requirements. Perhaps thats why some people can grow some plants well.



Indeed, but in many cases it's by luck. And the next grower who ll get that plant maybe will not follow. The best sangii I have ever seen in my life, maybe 20 growths 4 years from a single jungle growth, was growing in living forest moss in France.



> You will have to be a very well travelled individual to see all the plants in the collections around the world Roth. I only lay claim to what I have seen.



I did indeed see many collections... Not all the plants around the world, but I know the source of pretty much everything that comes from Asia, and pretty much everything worth of interest in paphs. That's why I know the anitum in Taiwan have been collected 3 years ago, I know even the collector, the way it has been exported, the way it has been imported ( at that time through Kaoshiung by cargo, but shortly afterwards there has been a big scandal and the network collapsed here), and who wholesaled them in Taiwan. I know too that a thousand anitum have been imported 3 years ago, and less than 200 were still alive in february, bad condition, starting to die.



> Agreed, the makets at JJ have been around along time. I guess so have the stalls in Vietnam, Cambodia, Burma and Malaysia that I have seen. Point is, allow the corrupt and peasants to strip the forests, or free up flasked plants world wide. We arent going to win on preservation in the long run. Save what we can I say.



That's my point too. We cannot imagine saving every species, this will be impossible. But we have to accept that, at the end, in some years, decades or centuries, most species will be extinct.

I was optimistic 15 years ago, made a lot of seedlings, distributed a lot of plants. I started to be pessimistic when I realized pretty much all had died.

Take again the adductum from Antec ( and I know exactly from where the original plants came). They released over 200 flasks of 30 seedlings. That's 6000. NONE is still with us today.

Take wentworthianum. 4000 wild plants, less than 50 in collections, 2 only from the 80's import ( one at Fox Valley, the other one belonging to Jo Levy, that's all period), the remaining from the 90's onwards.

Let's assume they are propagated. 6000 seedlings in the next 20 years. Let's say it is easier to grow than adductum (it's not.) and 500 will reach blooming size as healthy, gorgeous plants (they won't, believe me).

When the owners of those plants will die, and they will. Those 50 original plants will be grown by other people. Add the 500 others from seed, in 20 years,

From experience, 50 survived out of 4000. Out of 550 in 20 years, 8 will be alive 10 years later.


----------



## Howzat (May 30, 2011)

s1214215 said:


> Even if they do change how they follow policy in the USA, propagation is unlikely to change the buying habits of many people in Asia. The domestic demand for illegally collected orchids is vast in many SE Asian countries, China etc is voracious and greatly outweighs what is sent to the West.
> 
> Propagated orchids can not compete pricewise and from my experience, it seems the average member of the public could care less is the plant has superior form. Cheap is best and logical if you are on low wages in particular.
> 
> ...


Brett
You said the domestic demand is huge and fuel pillaging of the species, but probably those villagers or even the city people can grow better than us here, which have to resort to creating artificial environment. 
I agree with you that restricting the flow of artificially propagated species is restricting the conservation of species in private collection. But this is correct with USA. I think Australia does not restrict species in jars coming in.


----------



## s1214215 (May 30, 2011)

Hi. Sorry Oz is beggining to restrict.. Some nurseries have had glass flasks rejected. Some AQIS offices are now requesting plastic only. Idiocy, but thats another matter.

No, the peasants dont grow them.. Why would they. They also by and large dont propagate... Immediate resale is the thing they do, selling to wholesales that get them to bring to distrubution areas like Bangkok, a major hub in plant trafficking. No the locals here cant grow them well. its too hot for most species.

ps.. sorry if some dont like my use of peasant as a term.. It is really just to describe accurately and not derogatorily.


----------



## s1214215 (May 30, 2011)

I am asking for moderator assistance. My partner and I feel insulted buy this Roth character. This has devolved into an outback slanging match. I am fed up with the insults. I know the manager and submanager of Thailand CITES and many legitimate orchids growers here who do propagate, who do care about conservation and who lement the situation here like we do. Roth has chosen to label people I know within CITES as liars, and foreigners living in Thailand as drug users and whoremongers. If the administrator does not act, it will show a certain lack of quality in this forum.

Brett


----------



## Hien (May 30, 2011)

Maybe the situation of species not surviving in collection after a while would improve a little bit with more peoples who really care about growing the species & with extensive knowledge about them.
We tend to favor the hybrids too much (from the perception that they are more perfect beauty wise, in reality, they are created to conform to Orchid societies' judging standard).
For example, I used to favor (used to collect them as well ) the many beautiful dendrobium Yamamoto Nobile hybrids which would dazzle the public.
On the other hand, I did a search and realized that there were many (more than 20 ) pure species nobile cultivars registered at one time, now nobody have or grow them.
So it would be the case for paphs as well as you pointed out.


----------



## s1214215 (May 30, 2011)

I have seen people growing anitum, gigantifolium, and hangianum in Thailand, 4 years now. Not always easily, but doing ok. Those suceeding have bothered to treat species with individual care per species.

Brett


----------



## gonewild (May 30, 2011)

s1214215 said:


> I am asking for moderator assistance. My partner and I feel insulted buy this Roth character. This has devolved into an outback slanging match. I am fed up with the insults. I know the manager and submanager of Thailand CITES and many legitimate orchids growers here who do propagate, who do care about conservation and who lement the situation here like we do. Roth has chosen to label people I know within CITES as liars, and foreigners living in Thailand as drug users and whoremongers. If the administrator does not act, it will show a certain lack of quality in this forum.
> 
> Brett



I will comment that as an uninvolved reader I do not see anything written that defames you or anyone else.

Roth stated his opinions and so did you. If you feel insulted, this forum provides you a place to explain why he is not correct in your opinion.

I suggest to respond to him using polite words and help to educate the people that might actually make a difference in the future.

The fact that a moderator will not intervene shows the quality that this forum believes in.... free speech.


----------



## Heather (May 30, 2011)

We don't have a history here of doing a whole lot of moderation/deletion of people or posts, Brett. It's kind of something set in stone about this forum, which stems from the regular censorship that goes on at another one. 

We'll keep an eye on the thread though and move it out back if it gets out of hand.


----------



## Sirius (May 30, 2011)

s1214215 said:


> I am asking for moderator assistance. My partner and I feel insulted buy this Roth character. This has devolved into an outback slanging match. I am fed up with the insults. I know the manager and submanager of Thailand CITES and many legitimate orchids growers here who do propagate, who do care about conservation and who lement the situation here like we do. Roth has chosen to label people I know within CITES as liars, and foreigners living in Thailand as drug users and whoremongers. If the administrator does not act, it will show a certain lack of quality in this forum.
> 
> Brett



Roth wrote an account of an event he claims to have witnessed. If you believe it to be untrue, prove it. Nobody is stopping you from proving him to be a liar. If he is not a liar, however, you have no reason to be insulted. He isn't abusing you verbally, so there is nothing for the administrator of this forum to do. 

If you know these people from CITES, invite them to chime in.


----------



## Candace (May 30, 2011)

There is no need to alert a moderator to a thread where someone offers a differing opinion then your own. Debate it, ignore it or move on.

Here is a recent thread that may be useful http://www.slippertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=20447&highlight=ignore


----------



## paphjoint (May 30, 2011)

hmm 

If I'm not mistaken ROth's real name is Xavier something ( can't write his french name its too complicated) he has several accounts here. 
just like me :rollhappy:

Now Roth gives the impression that he knows everything about everything so do even start arguing with him its a waste of time. 

Roth is excellent in presenting his own presumptions as facts but for people who knows him, well we know that he's just a cheap trick not worth the attention





gonewild said:


> I will comment that as an uninvolved reader I do not see anything written that defames you or anyone else.
> 
> Roth stated his opinions and so did you. If you feel insulted, this forum provides you a place to explain why he is not correct in your opinion.
> 
> ...


----------



## Sirius (May 30, 2011)

pandora said:


> hmm
> 
> If I'm not mistaken ROth's real name is Xavier something ( can't write his french name its too complicated) he has several accounts here.
> just like me :rollhappy:
> ...



I don't have the right to close your "Pandora" account Uri, but I am petitioning Heather and the other moderators to close it. If you want to attack somebody, do it like a man and use your real name. I do know that Xavier has two accounts open here, but he is only using one. I don't feel anyone needs two accounts, or more, to post with.

I never thought I would be saying this, but some of you need to grow up.


----------



## Hien (May 30, 2011)

May be Xavier has two accounts because at one time he really liked paph. sanderianum but now he leans more toward paph. rothschildianum .


----------



## Sirius (May 30, 2011)

Hien said:


> May be Xavier has two accounts because at one time he really liked paph. sanderianum but now he leans more toward paph. rothschildianum .



:rollhappy:


----------



## Hien (May 30, 2011)

Everything in the world can be presented in different versions (including orchids' events). Let us enjoy both versions and enjoy each other no matter what.
Here are examples of different interpretations, let's see if you won't feel a little better after watching them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Au6c-Xtab4Q

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d7a7GlTn4ng&feature=related

Somebody please slap me if you think I am a little bit silly and inappropriate in a serious discussion.

Notice , what Tom Jones said " I beg you are a lying son of a gun, don't you'


----------



## gonewild (May 30, 2011)

Hien said:


> Everything in the world can be presented in different versions (including orchids' events). Let us enjoy both versions and enjoy each other no matter what.
> Here are examples of different interpretations, let's see if you won't feel a little better after watching them.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Au6c-Xtab4Q
> ...



Thankfully Slippertalk runs the Sammy style of discussion.


----------



## Roth (May 30, 2011)

s1214215 said:


> I am asking for moderator assistance. My partner and I feel insulted buy this Roth character. This has devolved into an outback slanging match. I am fed up with the insults. I know the manager and submanager of Thailand CITES and many legitimate orchids growers here who do propagate, who do care about conservation and who lement the situation here like we do. Roth has chosen to label people I know within CITES as liars, and foreigners living in Thailand as drug users and whoremongers. If the administrator does not act, it will show a certain lack of quality in this forum.
> 
> Brett



I don't speak about any people 'you know' as drug users and whoremongers. I talk about my experience, that's it. I have two friends as well in the CITES in Thailand fyi. I know Thailand a bit better than you I am sure orchidwise, and sometimes what you see is not what happens.

You have to agree with me that nothing has changed over the last 20 years, so the people can talk about whatever they want, there is no effect.

They have everything to do their jobs, there has even been hidden cameras stories several times, etc... but nothing is done. The stories about the 'corrupt officials' is as well bullshit. If they wanted to act, they could do instant, at any time. There could be a general CITES Trade ban issued by the CoP until they solve their problem of massive wild collection. No more crocodile bags and belts, ivory dildos, allowed to be exported until they solve their problem. 

Nothing is done, you don't agree with me ? I think then in Thailand it would take 2 hours after such a ban to solve all the problems of wild plants and animals they have. They know absolutely EVERYTHING, so ???

Don't tell me that the people opposite the Jatujak mall are 'protected by a governor'. They are not. I have heard crazy stories from people that they were protected, bribing the police, etc... In fact Nok E., that you must know there in this market, said herself that it is just a 'hit and miss'. They do not bribe anyone, they get fined, that's it... and they accept it because they still earn more than they loose.





s1214215 said:


> I have seen people growing anitum, gigantifolium, and hangianum in Thailand, 4 years now. Not always easily, but doing ok. Those suceeding have bothered to treat species with individual care per species.
> Brett



I know about some of them, and I agree. I have two friends in Thailand who have very beautiful gigantifolium for some years, though they loose some every year to the orange rot. 

Now, tell me how many PERCENTAGE of plants do those people own out of everything that has been collected. One per dozen thousands ? When those people will die or loose their interest in orchids, what is going to happen to their plants ? What in 50 years from now ? That's my position, we do whatever we want, whatever we can to propagate/protect the plants, or their habitat, but it is highly unlikely that in 200 years from now there will be all the species of paph still alive. I would say maybe 30-40 percent will still be around, the others will join the diplodocus and the dodo.

I visited a Thai grower who had amazing wild leucochilum for many years. He died in the 90's. As of today, his plants, and the progeny from those, are nearly gone. Another 50 years, all from his collection - the best in Thailand at that time - will be gone, trust me.



pandora said:


> hmm
> 
> If I'm not mistaken ROth's real name is Xavier something ( can't write his french name its too complicated) he has several accounts here.
> just like me :rollhappy:
> ...



Uri Baruk, I feel so sad to have helped hobbyists in France not to get any problems with the customs, you know that?

I do not know everything, but I know pretty much everything that happens in the paph world. 

Now, yes I know quite a bit about you.

The 'cheap trick not worth the attention' is here:

http://www.douane.gouv.fr/data/dab/pdf/03-064.pdf

Xavier Garreau de Loubresse f.y.i.
In the customs list of expert and technical advisors, that's an official document. 

Of course if you know people, about the National School of Customs in Rouen, they will tell you that I have been part time teacher. I do not work anymore over there, because I am a bit far to be of any use. That's it.

So what do you have to say about that?

Uri, you play very well about the name you dont remember, I like it. I think you got some documents officially with my name right, you don't remember? How STUPID I have been to help you...

You let too a bitter taste to the Senat Botanical Gardens if I remember well, and some hobby orchid societies...


----------



## Mark Sullivan (May 31, 2011)

*CITES and Conservation*

I didn't read all the posts in the thread, but as a few people have said CITES is a trade agreement not a conservation agreement. CITES only goes into affect if a species is considered endangered, and crosses the border between one or more participating parties. It is also interpreted and applied differently by countries that are partied to the agreement. 

The word conservation only appears in the CITES document three times:
Article XI 
Conference of the Parties 
3. At meetings, whether regular or extraordinary, the Parties shall review the implementation of the present Convention and may: 
(c) review the progress made towards the restoration and conservation of the species included in Appendices I, II and III; 

and same article:
7. Any body or agency technically qualified in protection, conservation or management of wild fauna and flora, in the following categories, which has informed the Secretariat of its desire to be represented at meetings of the Conference by observers, shall be admitted unless at least one-third of the Parties present object: 

and
Article XII 
The Secretariat 
1. Upon entry into force of the present Convention, a Secretariat shall be provided by the Executive Director of the United Nations Environment Programme. To the extent and in the manner he considers appropriate, he may be assisted by suitable inter-governmental or non-governmental international or national agencies and bodies technically qualified in protection, conservation and management of wild fauna and flora. 

Trying to change CITES is like hitting your head against a wall even for those that have any influence. A lot of energy over the years has been spent railing and talking about CITES, it exists and is not going to change anytime soon. So if you care about conservation you have to work with and around CITES. Can things be done about conservation? Yes.

New post soon,


----------



## Sirius (May 31, 2011)

Mark, it appears that the forum software is editing your custom user title. Apparently, it won't let anyone have the word "admin" in their user title, unless they are a forum admin. Just wanted to let you know in case you wanted to change it.


----------



## Mark Sullivan (May 31, 2011)

*Orchid Conservation - What can be done?*

There are people trying to make a difference and save orchid habitat and orchid in situ. A list of some: http://www.orchidconservationcoalition.org/conservationorgs.html

Admittedly I am bias but an a small step anyone could take is to get there orchid society to participate in 1% for Orchid Conservation. It get societies and their members to participate in orchid conservation.

Orchid Societies and businesses that participate in 1% FOC commit to budget 1% or more of their net revenue towards in situ orchid conservation projects of their choice. Through 1% for Orchid Conservation we want to create a network of orchid societies and businesses to raise money for in situ orchid conservation. The Orchid Conservation Coalition does not take donations or distribute money. More details: http://www.orchidconservationcoalition.org/program.html

Right now there are 18 orchid societies and 5 businesses that make up the coalition: http://www.orchidconservationcoalition.org/participants.html

Any society around the world can participate. We are trying to have a direct impact on saving orchids in situ.

For more information or to receive at the most a bi monthly update you can e-mail me at [email protected]
The current update is here: http://www.orchidconservationcoalition.org/update/21.html 

I realize that this may seem like a big ad, but we are very non-profit -meaning absolutely no money. We try and raise money and awareness for other worthwhile non profit orchid conservation organizations.

I will write other post of which us as individuals maybe able to have on orchid conservation and maybe even CITES, but it will have to be hopefully tomorrow.


----------



## Mark Sullivan (May 31, 2011)

Thank you John. It is ok with me that I am *****istrator of 1%FOC.


----------



## Roth (May 31, 2011)

s1214215 said:


> Point is, allow the corrupt and peasants to strip the forests, or free up flasked plants world wide. We arent going to win on preservation in the long run.



Just one note like that... I imported one of the very few legal gigantifolium plants in Europe with a CITES. I made flasks, sold flasks with invoice and CITES copy. The only thing I allowed by doing this? Preserving the species? Allowing artificial propagation? No, I just laundered by mistake all the wild collected gigantifolium all around Europe from before and after, allowing traders to make more profit and business.

That's a point, legalizing some species will not preserve them, it will just allow sellers to deal wild plants in a legally safe environment. I think Antec could speak about vietnamense at lenght... few flasks released, all the wild plants legalized.


----------



## Marc (May 31, 2011)

pandora said:


> hmm
> 
> If I'm not mistaken ROth's real name is Xavier something ( can't write his french name its too complicated) he has several accounts here.
> just like me :rollhappy:
> ...



The discussion that is taking place here is so far over my head that I have nothing to add that would be relevant.

However I do want to point out that eventhough this forum has very open discussions taking place I would consider it to be a bad thing if users are allowed to have multiple accounts on one forum.

I used to be a forum admin on a forum that has nothing to do with orchids but I clearly remember that there was at least an option to see which users have posted from the same IP. Of course this is not foolproof and there are workarounds but I at least hope that the official stance of this forum is that using multiple accounts is not tolerated.


----------



## Heather (May 31, 2011)

Marc said:


> However I do want to point out that eventhough this forum has very open discussions taking place I would consider it to be a bad thing if users are allowed to have multiple accounts on one forum.



Hi Marc, 

We agree and made that rule adaptation today:
http://www.slippertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=21116


----------



## Sirius (May 31, 2011)

At this point, the thread should be back on track. Xavier has made his statements, and some of you disagree with him. Instead of crying that he offended you, and using separate accounts to belittle him, why don't you rebut his arguments with some evidence or account to the contrary. Or could it be that he is more right than any of you want to admit?


----------



## Howzat (May 31, 2011)

To Mark Sullivan and CITES,
What you said about insitu conservation works well in western countries. This effort should be commended. Thus CITES policy and control of the cross border traffic of wild collected orchids was actually based on this presumption. ie If it works in USA/Europe and other western countries , it should work in Asia. . However from this forum here we learned that pillaging is still continuing with report that orchids are being sold by the kilo and also transported by truck load. Mark, how would you and your organisation and CITES enforcers react to this and have you and your CITES enforcers friend done something about this???? A 10 metre high wall encircling the habitat might work for a while, before somebody blow it up.
I still believe that to conserve Asian Paphiopedilum/ S.American Phragmipedium in the best possible way is to produce as many seedlings as you can, artificially. And stop chasing the "illegal" parent. Be a little more practical and pragmatic in your approach to conservation, particularly for Asiatic Paph and S.American Phrag.


----------



## NYEric (May 31, 2011)

Rick said:


> True. There's plenty of plants in you're own backyard that are worth enjoying without worrying about possessing something from the other side of the world.



When I own the last asian orchid species in the world I'm not selling it back for propigation and re-introduction into the wild after this statement!


----------



## Hien (May 31, 2011)

NYEric said:


> When I own the last asian orchid species in the world I'm not selling it back for propigation and re-introduction into the wild after this statement!



Plant those last survived asian orchid species in your backyard.
See how easily you can fulfill both aims at the same time.:rollhappy:


----------



## NYEric (May 31, 2011)

There aren't a lot of orchids from NYC so without getting orchids from the "other side of the world" I'd pretty much have no orchid collection!


----------



## gonewild (May 31, 2011)

NYEric said:


> There aren't a lot of orchids from NYC so without getting orchids from the "other side of the world" I'd pretty much have no orchid collection!



Probably would have been cheaper for you to move to the other side.


----------



## NYEric (May 31, 2011)

Wow!


----------



## Rick (May 31, 2011)

NYEric said:


> Wow!



You don't even have a backyard Eric. You grow your orchids on the stove.oke:oke:


----------



## Hien (May 31, 2011)

Evidently some species need no CITES protection.
In fact it is human that need protection from them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3Bf0WhvsNk&feature=related

Watch the fish attack those bow hunters, it is hilarious

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nc-e8EGkLMo


----------



## valenzino (May 31, 2011)

Hien said:


> Evidently some species need no CITES protection.
> In fact it is human that need protection from them.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3Bf0WhvsNk&feature=related
> ...



:rollhappy::rollhappy::rollhappy::rollhappy::clap:


----------



## Mark Sullivan (May 31, 2011)

*Poaching/CITES/ in situ orchid conservation*



Howzat said:


> To Mark Sullivan and CITES,
> What you said about insitu conservation works well in western countries. This effort should be commended. Thus CITES policy and control of the cross border traffic of wild collected orchids was actually based on this presumption. ie If it works in USA/Europe and other western countries , it should work in Asia. . However from this forum here we learned that pillaging is still continuing with report that orchids are being sold by the kilo and also transported by truck load. Mark, how would you and your organisation and CITES enforcers react to this and have you and your CITES enforcers friend done something about this????



I don' t know anyone that has any influence over CITES. I don't have CITES enforcer friends. The Orchid Conservation Coalition has nothing to do with CITES. The OCC's focus is keeping the orchids in their habitat and saving orchid habitat. Once an orchid is pulled from the ground, rock or tree and taken from its habitat it is pretty much game over.

My reaction to trafficking of wild collected orchids is that it is a travesty. I don't think CITES work any better in the western countries than in Asia or South America or anywhere else. Western countries help provide the market for endangered species to be smuggled over borders in large amounts. If there was no demand there would not be any trafficking in wild orchids.

CITES doesn't interest me much, as it is what it is. It is not going to change anytime soon. Changing of CITES involves politics and many countries. I agree with what many have written in prior posts in regards to CITES. You can talk about it all you want on posts but it is not going to make a bit of difference.

I am more interested in orchid conservation especially in situ.



Howzat said:


> A 10 metre high wall encircling the habitat might work for a while, before somebody blow it up.
> I still believe that to conserve Asian Paphiopedilum/ S.American Phragmipedium in the best possible way is to produce as many seedlings as you can, artificially. And stop chasing the "illegal" parent.



Poaching of wild orchids is the number two threat to orchid species extinction in the wild. Number one is habitat destruction - logging, farming, road building, damming, water diversion, and climate change.

Poaching and smuggling are going to happen as long as there is economic disparity and people who are starving and living day to day trying to figure out where there next meal is going to come from. As long as there is value to what they pull out of the ground or a tree, there is going to be someone who needs to do it to survive. Producing as many seedling as you can artificially in developed countries is not going to stop the smuggling because the cost will not get low enough to be profitable in developed countries and yet under cut the person struggling to eat in a third world country. The only way you are going to stop someone from poaching is when it is not economical for them and is a waste of their time. You have to lessen the economic disparity and provide more security for the less well off. If endangered species are worth more in their habitat to the people that live near by than in ex situ, the endangered species will stay in their habitat and be protected. Eco Tourism (hired locals as guides), maybe carbon offset and other type of offsets. But is there a big enough market for those things? I doubt. 

Artificial seedling orchid production may help if it is done in the third world countries from which the orchids come from, employes locals, nurseries are local, plants exported out and benefit the local economy. Is there a large enough market for species to support on going artificial propagation and nursery grown plants to help sustain local businesses to help people make a livelihood from it?

I don't believe artificial propagation of species in the west is going to have much effect on poaching and smuggling. The underlying problem is local economics and a struggle to survive. 



Howzat said:


> Be a little more practical and pragmatic in your approach to conservation, particularly for Asiatic Paph and S.American Phrag.



Please elaborate on where I am not being practical and pragmatic in my approach to conservation particularly for Asiatic Paph and S American Pharg,


----------



## quietaustralian (May 31, 2011)

Mark Sullivan said:


> I don' t know anyone that has any influence over CITES. I don't have CITES enforcer friends. The Orchid Conservation Coalition has nothing to do with CITES. The OCC's focus is keeping the orchids in their habitat and saving orchid habitat. Once an orchid is pulled from the ground, rock or tree and taken from its habitat it is pretty much game over.
> 
> My reaction to trafficking of wild collected orchids is that it is a travesty. I don't think CITES work any better in the western countries than in Asia or South America or anywhere else. Western countries help provide the market for endangered species to be smuggled over borders in large amounts. If there was no demand there would not be any trafficking in wild orchids.
> 
> ...



Keep up the good work Mark. 
I admire everything about the Orchid Conservation Coalition, the concept, the structure and outcomes. 
Its great to see that Australia is punching above its weight in regard to donations and well we should with 25 % of globally extinct orchids being Australian***.

*Habitat retention and protection isn’t a concept in saving species, its the answer.*
Regards, Mick

***Koopowitz H. Orchids and their conservation. Portland: Timber Press; 2001.


----------



## valenzino (Jun 1, 2011)

Mark Sullivan said:


> ...Poaching and smuggling are going to happen as long as there is economic disparity and people who are starving and living day to day trying to figure out where there next meal is going to come from. As long as there is value to what they pull out of the ground or a tree, there is going to be someone who needs to do it to survive. Producing as many seedling as you can artificially in developed countries is not going to stop the smuggling because the cost will not get low enough to be profitable in developed countries and yet under cut the person struggling to eat in a third world country. The only way you are going to stop someone from poaching is when it is not economical for them and is a waste of their time. You have to lessen the economic disparity and provide more security for the less well off. If endangered species are worth more in their habitat to the people that live near by than in ex situ, the endangered species will stay in their habitat and be protected. Eco Tourism (hired locals as guides), maybe carbon offset and other type of offsets. But is there a big enough market for those things? I doubt.
> 
> Artificial seedling orchid production may help if it is done in the third world countries from which the orchids come from, employes locals, nurseries are local, plants exported out and benefit the local economy. Is there a large enough market for species to support on going artificial propagation and nursery grown plants to help sustain local businesses to help people make a livelihood from it?
> 
> I don't believe artificial propagation of species in the west is going to have much effect on poaching and smuggling. The underlying problem is local economics and a struggle to survive. ...



I agree mostly with all you said.But,the protection of the habitat,is stil very difficult if not impossible due to the enormous pressure done by big companies etc...that moving money can change the economy of a country.

I can see few solutions,and majority are between dreams and mental masturbation...

Ecotourism not enough,in vitro production "on the place"...difficult and need big money...buy all the possible land...we need someone really rich!:rollhappy:

so maybe the solution are 2:

1)complete banning of all orchids species trade(sounds terrible and very difficult to apply,will stop big part of poaching,but will be useless if not negative on habitat destruction)

2)
In my opinion all things have to be putted together.
For example(also if not possible burocratically,but never say never),CITES have to put money produced from "documents" into invitro reproduction "on the place" etc.
Peoples that need to collect plants to survive have to be educated about the value of what they have and start a kind of commercial cultivation insitu.I remember being in kalimantan with Dayaks:those peoples only collected few plants from the jungle,and only portions of plants and said that they will wait sometime before going again,because for them was a kind of "Bank" and forever income...(some of them,others wanted to strip out everything).

Oblige government to rescue plants from deforested areas and reintroduce to similar area,devide and sell and send all the money to labs and educational institutions that do conservation education and economic production insitu.

If orchids become a bussiness insitu,the same peoples that use to poach plants will became the ones that will protect land from deforesation.To this,all kind of economic revenue can be added like ecotourism,derived product,medicine bio productions reponsible fishing and many others...

Building a real net between orchids producers,botanical gardens and hobbists,opening facilities for invitro production in every "first world" country.Like "I send you seeds and i send you back a flask for only the expenses of row material and shipping...so hobbists material will became available to botanical gardens and producers...Push Producers to send some material for free to botanical Gardens and Push botanical gardens to grow them...

Make campaigns to promote the orchid world and orchids conservation as is done in the animals protection.

Make classes about orchids,and oblige all schools to make grow an orchid plant to all elementary school childs(that is very important).
Peoples have to feel what is "Nature" to defend it(now child know nature only from television...can be seen of the great ammount of allergies child have in new generations).Knowledge is nothing without experience and sensation.If started as jungster,will work.Is important to invest on future generations to save plants and animals.


As happened in many different things in human history,the solution is not forbidding but educating.

Hope there is something interesting in what i've written...:rollhappy:


----------



## Howzat (Jun 1, 2011)

Wow, I think I lost my post.
Here it is again.
To Mark
I said before, your works has to be commended. But I think it only works in western countries. Not in Asia.
I draw a parallel between the CITES idea of banning cross border trafficking, because it tries to force the people (villagers and the second/third man) to leave the orchids alone in the jungle. ie. conserve all those orchids in their natural habitat. Which is also the forefront idea of yours about insitu conservation. But in Asia, this has never succeeded. And it will never either. They are just ordinary people who just want to feed the family on day today basis. The middle men could not care less as long he made a quick buck and even if he was apprehended (very very rarely) and pay a small fine, his activities is still profitable. So it is so hard to police. Putting fence around 

the habitatit??? You got to be joking!! Put local policemen to guard it, they take bribes and let people take the plants. Educating them ??? Questionable!!
But in the bigger picture, the situation is more frightening. Take Indonesia for example. The destruction of Kalimantan where only less than 10% of natural habitat left standing is an example. And you are thinking of protecting the natural habitat???. From the local chiefs to the ministers collaborating with companies, the destruction is on mega scale. 
Yet Indonesia is a signatory to CITES, which actually should promote conservation?? What has CITES done?? Would they punish Indonesia?? Laughable.
CITES only deals with the few kolopakingii. supardii, gigantifolium, and lowii's that escape this mega destruction only to be met by the border controller. This is easy to get around, with a bit of money changing hands, these little fellows find its way to European nurseries. And only to be raided by CITES enforcers. who could not care less about thse plants post raid. There is no report where these plant 've gone to. And if they escape the raids, the few that did were selfed, mated, produced seedlings , but only to be declared illegal by USA CITES. 
Fortunately there are some countries, like Taiwan who closed an eye to the existence of the numerous lab, producing seedlings and there are countries which do not question the legal status of the parents. Australia included. And I think this a practical and pragmatic approach. Maybe more than half of the seedlings died, but because of the big numbers, some will survive to adulthood, and ready to be propagated. 99% of the hobbiest in Australia do not take wild plants, so do not say that seedlings cannot compete with wild collected plants. We only buy seedlings in flasks
Mark there are some people, not many (I am sure that you are not), who have grand vision and ideas which cannot and impossible to achieve.


----------



## Braem (Jun 1, 2011)

OK ... let me get in here just for a minute. Let me give a pragmatic picture of the issue. I have been in the wild, I know CITES, I know the orchid trade, I know human nature (and I don't mind getting flamed).

1) As long as people are on the planet, the habitats will be destroyed ... anyone who thinks that we can stop the forests being cut or burned down is naive. Thus habitat protection is utopia.

2) CITES is useless ... I won't get into the details ... it is all déjà vue.

Ergo: the theorem that orchid cultivation and propagation in vitro is the only way to save the orchids in the long run is correct but unfeasable. 

I like (but smiled at) the idea of having orchid classes in school and have the kids grow an orchid ... OK, but then also tulip classes (I mean the wild ones, not the Holland stuff), iris classes, roses classes, etc. etc. etc.


----------



## valenzino (Jun 1, 2011)

Braem said:


> ...I like (but smiled at) the idea of having orchid classes in school and have the kids grow an orchid ... OK, but then also tulip classes (I mean the wild ones, not the Holland stuff), iris classes, roses classes, etc. etc. etc.



I smiled too when was writeing it.But as orchids now is the Popular flower(phalaenopsis) that can be seen in television in movies,on publications,in shops,everywhere...is a good start to rebuild a "nature consciousness" in the new generations,that now are grown up by TV,Playstation and Cars...And will include all flowers and plants...But I think orchids are so similar tu humans,that can be easily used to make understand to young the way the world turn around...is like teaching mathematics using agriculture...

Unfortunately I have to agree that as humans still exists,forest will still fall and burn down...


----------



## s1214215 (Jun 1, 2011)

I decided to tune out of the forum for a few days. My partner and I were quite annoyed. To often we see peopel insinuate that foreigners/locals are sleaze driven, druggies, you name it. There are a lot of us here that are professionals who give a damn though. We do abide by law and order. We know others who do too.

I am very familiar with come CITES officials. It was they who told me that some SE Asian politicians are into the illegal trade, but as its a local thing, the can do nothing. They also said they can do nothing to stop the internal market as they have no power their. 

This week in Bangkok, we have the case of an animal smuggler caught trying to bring in big cat cubs in a suite case. He was arrested, with the help of an NGO. Within a short time, the Thai police claimed they came under pressure to release the Middle Eastern smuggler. The people putting the pressure on where said to be (by the police) big politicians, and officials. Today, it was reported that the man was released on bail by the police and handed back his passport. He has now left the country. Says it all. Sorry Roth, but you are wrong if you think there is no political involvment in the smuggling game. 

I may have over-reacted with the whoremonger issue, but its annoying to hear that lame story again and again when someone wants to put down people living in or working out of some developing country and to rubbish your opinion or input.

Roth, its not just illegal orchids that are protected. Tour Jatujak and REALLY get to know people. There are loads of illegal animals, corals, fish, plants for sale there. Many in back rooms.. I have seen them. Takes a while to know these people as they wont show you unless they know you are local and dont see you as a threat. Its there. People I know there told me that when a police raids is coming, they get a phone call to move stock or lock up for the day.

It was in the media here some years ago, a stand of with the military when police tried to raid areas of Jatujak. Sorry, but it to was reported. Sure, the police get to fine and collect a bribe from the small folk across the road, and in JJ in general, but theres a line the dont ever cross. 

I am sure you will deride this. But having lived here 7 years now, I have seen and read enough to know enough of what goes on. 

Sure CITES can shut the door to export, but I bet that will never happen. Sure as heck the powers that be would make life hell for locals that tried to initiate that. 

Even if it happened and trade to the West was shut off, it would not stop the Asian market as that is for the most part illegal anyway with illegal border movements.


----------



## Sirius (Jun 1, 2011)

s1214215 said:


> I decided to tune out of the forum for a few days. My partner and I were quite annoyed. To often we see peopel insinuate that foreigners/locals are sleaze driven, druggies, you name it. There are a lot of us here that are professionals who give a damn though. We do abide by law and order. We know others who do too.



Listen, and listen good. You obviously have issues with people making reference to the sex trade in Thailand. Frankly, you are blowing **** out of proportion because of your mental hang ups. I am not going to sling facts at you about the sex tourism trade in Thailand, and how many foreigners do visit that country purely for it, because that is not what this thread is about. Let's take a look at the facts in this thread, so we can finally put this bullshit to rest.

You started getting irritated with Roth in post #104 of this thread.

In post #105 he said he knew of several officials who spent time in bars instead of doing their job.

By post #106 you called him "hypocritical" and started claiming, *falsely*, that he said every foreigner in the country was a "whoremonger."

In post #108 he recounts the story of seeing some representatives of the WWF and Greenpeace being entertained at a bar by some bar girls and the orchid smugglers they were supposed to investigate. 

He never said every foreigner in the country was a "whoremonger," in fact, he never used that term, you did. He also is claiming to have witnessed these incidents himself. You can't see past your own hyperinflated sense of outrage to ask him to provide any more details or proof to back up his claim.

Instead of acting like a crybaby, why don't you attack the facts of his story and see if you can make the truth he is presenting unravel?


----------



## s1214215 (Jun 1, 2011)

Whatever you wish John. But I think you missed my point that this is just an all to often dredged up story. Fear not, I wont mention again and you can get on with your life.


----------



## Sirius (Jun 1, 2011)

And, because now you have pissed me off, let me clear something else up. Uri has requested that we delete his account from this forum. In the past, I have stood up for Uri, and begged him to stay on this forum even though he acted like a crybaby whenever Dr. Braem joined the forum. Twice he threw a hissy fit and left the forum, and twice we asked him to stay.

Uri was using a second account, username Pandora, to attack Xavier personally. It was not the first time he did it either. There are old threads on this forum, where the Pandora account made personal attacks on Xavier. At the time, we just dealt with it. This time, we happened to look at the email address of the person posting as Pandora. Surprise, surprise, it was Uri. We didn't have to do anything sneaky to figure out who Pandora was, the proof was right there when both accounts had the same email address and IP number. We didn't ban him, though I think he probably deserved it. We simply asked him not to do it anymore, and told him we were merging his two accounts. 

He quit the forum instead.

I don't care what the beef is between Uri and Xavier, and I don't care if anyone else feels a beef is developing between them and Xavier. I am telling you right now, that I am not going to sit idly by and let you cry on the forum, or fraudulently attack someone, without saying something. I am trying really hard to keep my stubborn Irish temper under control, but you people aren't making it easy.

Get back to the facts, and keep it clean.


----------



## Sirius (Jun 1, 2011)

s1214215 said:


> Whatever you wish John. But I think you missed my point that this is just an all to often dredged up story. Fear not, I wont mention again and you can get on with your life.



Stick to the point of the thread. That's a warning. You don't want to keep egging me on.


----------



## fibre (Jun 1, 2011)

Sirius said:


> And, because now you have pissed me off, ...



Excuse me John, I may have a very poor English, so I don't understand why you are soo stressed. But I never read those words in this forum 

I love this forum for its excellent input of all the specialist here! 
So I please you *ALL*: _calm down! _ and go back to the Paphs :wink:


----------



## Sirius (Jun 1, 2011)

I am sorry if I offended anyone with my strong tone. 

Now does anyone have anything new to add to the conversation about CITES?


----------



## baodai (Jun 1, 2011)

Before you can talk much about other countries people you need to know about them, about their culture (at diff region within the country, specially Vietnamese), In general here is where the goverment and the people where i live works:
1) Money will buy you mostly everything, including a goverment seat
2) There are park ranger at national park, where you are not allow to collect orchid ... but here is how it works: the local can share some percentages of what he/she make by selling orchid, animal, tree, etc ... these rangers will share some percentage to his boss, then his boss will share some percentage to his boss and so on ... one thing you got to remmenber that is: the boss buy his seat, so he can't get fired, if there is heating from upper boss, he will move to diff location and do the same thing over and over again ....
Here is another example: If the police stop you for not obey the traffic law (speed, over weight, etc ...) You just have to pay him (50% or something like that) in cash then you go
Now: how do you deal with corruption goverment? You don't, you just deal with it
3) Vietnam can accesses Thai Lan, Cambodian and China border. You can move a 18 wheelers in and out at custom border just like free way. You just know who you need to talk to before you move 18 wheelers of orchid .... For smaller scale, you don't need to go by custom check point, you can just cross the trail to another country
4) the bottom line: you can't stop people from collecting wild orchid, as long as they can make profit from it. (if someone have a solution, I'm listening ... don't tell me, everyone in this world will stop buying orchid  )
5) I read somewhere and people mention that: propagate in third world country where the orchids live, ... my comment to this is good luck ... to buy orchid median and sowing kit ... it is way more expensive than buy wild plant and you don't have to wait many years for it to flower

You can talk about it as much as you want, ... It is what it is, nothing you can do about stopping people from collecting wild orchid as long as they can sell it and feed their family
Thank you for reading
BD


----------



## s1214215 (Jun 1, 2011)

baodai said:


> Before you can talk much about other countries people you need to know about them, about their culture (at diff region within the country, specially Vietnamese), In general here is where the goverment and the people where i live works:
> 1) Money will buy you mostly everything, including a goverment seat
> 2) There are park ranger at national park, where you are not allow to collect orchid ... but here is how it works: the local can share some percentages of what he/she make by selling orchid, animal, tree, etc ... these rangers will share some percentage to his boss, then his boss will share some percentage to his boss and so on ... one thing you got to remmenber that is: the boss buy his seat, so he can't get fired, if there is heating from upper boss, he will move to diff location and do the same thing over and over again ....
> Here is another example: If the police stop you for not obey the traffic law (speed, over weight, etc ...) You just have to pay him (50% or something like that) in cash then you go
> ...



Thank you Baodai. I 100% agree with you. You are much more eloquent than I on the matter.


----------



## Braem (Jun 1, 2011)

baodai said:


> Before you can talk much about other countries people you need to know about them, about their culture (at diff region within the country, specially Vietnamese), In general here is where the goverment and the people where i live works:
> 1) Money will buy you mostly everything, including a goverment seat
> 2) There are park ranger at national park, where you are not allow to collect orchid ... but here is how it works: the local can share some percentages of what he/she make by selling orchid, animal, tree, etc ... these rangers will share some percentage to his boss, then his boss will share some percentage to his boss and so on ... one thing you got to remmenber that is: the boss buy his seat, so he can't get fired, if there is heating from upper boss, he will move to diff location and do the same thing over and over again ....
> Here is another example: If the police stop you for not obey the traffic law (speed, over weight, etc ...) You just have to pay him (50% or something like that) in cash then you go
> ...


Thank you Baodai for this posting!!


----------



## Rick (Jun 1, 2011)

Braem said:


> OK ... let me get in here just for a minute. Let me give a pragmatic picture of the issue. I have been in the wild, I know CITES, I know the orchid trade, I know human nature (and I don't mind getting flamed).
> 
> 1) As long as people are on the planet, the habitats will be destroyed ... anyone who thinks that we can stop the forests being cut or burned down is naive. Thus habitat protection is utopia.
> 
> ...



Ergo
Live today, die tomorrow. The only hope for tomorrow is that it ends soon and doesn't hurt to bad when it does.

Pretty dismal

Maybe we can instill such a sense of futility and depression that there will be a general world boycott:wink:


----------



## Eric Muehlbauer (Jun 1, 2011)

Relax John.....this is the INTERNET. There is no reason in the world for anyone to lose their temper, Irish or otherwise, for something posted on the 'net. This is still the calmest, most peaceful internet forum I have EVER posted on. And its because of us. Someone gets their hairs up about something? So what? They'll calm down if the rest of us are calm. The flames I have seen in the 5 (?) years of this lists existence don't compare to a flicker on most other lists I subscribe too...and you know it would have been snuffed out on that long ago "other" slipper list....if it even still exists.


----------



## Sirius (Jun 2, 2011)

Eric Muehlbauer said:


> Relax John.....this is the INTERNET. There is no reason in the world for anyone to lose their temper, Irish or otherwise, for something posted on the 'net. This is still the calmest, most peaceful internet forum I have EVER posted on. And its because of us. Someone gets their hairs up about something? So what? They'll calm down if the rest of us are calm. The flames I have seen in the 5 (?) years of this lists existence don't compare to a flicker on most other lists I subscribe too...and you know it would have been snuffed out on that long ago "other" slipper list....if it even still exists.



Eric, 

Because I have respect for you, I want to respond, but this is the last time I am going to post in this thread. I really have nothing to add to the CITES debate.

I am not going to go into it, but let me just say that presently I am under a lot of stress in my personal life.

I do not have any friends local to me that are interested in plants. If I were interested in Nascar, hunting or crystal meth, I could find all the friends in the world right in my own back yard. The book, and subsequent movie "Winter's Bone" are about the very county I am living in, and I can tell you that movie is not at all wrong about the poverty and drug use in this area of the country. There are not a lot of people here who have orchid collections, and believe me, I have been searching for them.

My only resource for socialization with other plant owners, is the internet.

I come here to get away from all the stress and drama of the real world. This should be a place where I can relax and read. It's very hard to do that, when people I really like, use a dummy account just for the purpose of starting drama. I can't do that, when people keep emailing the forum administrator, and posting how they had their feelings hurt over something that never happened.

So I snapped. I regret it. I do not, however, regret anything I said. It's all true. I am sorry, again, if anyone's day was ruined by my outburst. I was hoping it would snap everybody out of their funk, and we could return to normal programming. 

So please, please, please...if you want to discuss my need for anger management, feel free to send me a private message. Otherwise, can we return to the CITES debate as I have requested? Do me that favor at least.


----------



## Mark Sullivan (Jun 2, 2011)

*Orchid Conservation and success*

Success is a relative thing especially when it comes to conservation. I do I agree with many it looks very bleak. I fully expect the rate of species extinction to continue to at its current pace and get faster. We are seeing the greats mass extinction species on the planet since the meteorite hit.

Baodai you are right there is a lot of corruption and people have to feed their families. I know that here are some examples Indonesia: 
http://www.orchidconservationcoalition.org/hl/bukitbarisanselatan.html






Workers cultivating coffee illegally in Bukit Barisan Selatan National Park photo by Kathleen Sullivan

Another story: http://www.orchidconservationcoalition.org/hl/gunungleuser.html





Deforestation just outside Gunung Leuser National Park photo by Kathleen Sullivan

This is all happening in supposed national parks. There are going to be casualties. So do we just fold up our seats and go home and complain about it all on forums? about how it is all going to hell in a hand basket? Or do we try and take one small step and do the best that we can? It is possible we will save very little and our effort will be futile but no effort to try and save habitat and we will definitely fail. 

There are good organization like Ecominga in Peru. http://www.orchidconservationcoalition.org/hl/ecuadorecominga.html
with trustworthy local guards that believe in what they are doing:





Our guard Luis Recalde with a giant mahogany tree in Candelaria. Photo Juan Pablo Reyes.





Reserve caretaker Fausto Recalde in the high paramo of Cerro Candelaria. Photo Luis Recalde 

You are right Howzat, Guido and others CITES has problems and it is not going to solve any problems. It exists and we have to deal with it. I would though waste to much time complaining about it because its not going to change anytime soon. But Howzat there are people in South America and Asia that do care and want to do the right thing. 

Valenzino you have good suggestions in your post and you are correct that if we have any chance of success "In my opinion all things have to be putted together." There are going to have to be multiple approaches to conservation for any success. It is going to be slow. It is going to take many people. Many people taking small steps and some big steps.

Ex situ conservation has got to be part of the package but it has it pit falls also. I wrote an article called "The Challenges of Ex situ Orchid Conservation" http://www.orchidconservationcoalition.org/pr/exsitucon.html which outlines many challenges. “Genomic extinction” through hybridization maybe one that people are not familiar with. 





Paphiopedilum spicerianum photo by Gordon Kenyon 





Paphiopedilum spicerianum 'Monster' HCC photo and grown by Ramon de los Santos

Towards the bottom of this article are some suggestions for ex situ 
conservation. One of which this forum as a whole and its members could do.
Just substitute Slippertalk Orchid Forum for orchid society:
"The National Council for the Conservation of Plants and Gardens in the United Kingdom has a Program called the National Plant Collections, which is to be “as complete a representation of a genus or section of a genus as possible.” Some orchid genera are in this collection. A similar program could be set up with orchid societies. Orchid societies could choose to be the keepers of as complete a representation of a genus or section of a genus as possible. The collective members of the society would maintain the genus representation in their various growing situations. They could help guarantee the genetic diversity of species in the genus. Societies could choose to be the keepers of several genera. If different societies overlap by keeping the same genus, this would be beneficial. It could promote interaction between societies. An easy way to begin would be for orchid societies to assess which species their members grow. This would be an indication of the genus the society could become involved in with an ex situ conservation effort. Then orchid society members would become direct participants in orchid conservation. The effort would give orchid societies another dimension of interest in keeping and attracting new members."

Thanks for reading and having an interest in orchid conservation.

Thanks Mick for your kind words and support. It is appreciated.


----------



## Roth (Jun 2, 2011)

Well, Baodai summed up very well how it works. On the other side, there are a few points that need to be explained:

- animal trade has indeed nearly all the time officials involved. Because an animal is easy to identify ( take a tiger, a turtle...) so a complete network needs to be arranged. Plants, most enforcement people have no idea if they are orchids or not, and if they know it, anyway, they do not know which species, the value... So there is no 'big boss' as a result, as plant smuggling is the poor parent of animal smuggling, and does not generate enough money. Only smuggled cycad are manged by complete networks, however, but they are far more expensive than any orchids for some species.

- Explanation for the UAE... Well I have some 'educated guesses. There are two reasons. UAE tourists makes up for a lot of cash flow in Bangkok ( they have even complete streets where they go, the JW Marriott where I usually stay can have up to three quarters of the rooms booked by UAE people, spending a lot of cash in Siam Paragon and elsewhere, etc...). It is not the main reason however I think. 

Let's say too that they sponsor a lot of things inside the CITES, and they have some traditions too, that they can freely enjoy more or less as a result, related to raptors and Chlamydotis, the 'houbara' bird. Been there, seen that, from Almaty to UAE, with some CITES officials, and some WWF raptors experts people, who were so impressed that they immediately reported that capturing raptors was not destructive to the environment. Some of those expert, as well working in universities, got their full travels and further studies for some years paid by some very rich people. I have no right to comment further, as it was a professional investigation. 

- For the WWF, there are some very good people, and there is as well the worst of the worst. There is a miniature monkey in Indonesia, discovered about a year ago by collectors. I don't know if they described it already. It is about 10 cm tall all included, and I have seen one live specimen myself in Tretes at a collector's farm, though it is not from Java. One of the WWF Indonesia ( a woman) sold location information to several animal traders, and quite a few have been smuggled, including to the USA. When I was back in France, we found a lot of scientists, sometimes from very famous institutions, 'selling' informations about plant or animal locations, to get money from people who have money... smugglers... to sponsor their studies.

- Regarding protecting the environment, the plants, the animals... Well, there is a problem, and Baodai says it clearly of culture ( or lack of in some cases). 

When you see that in some countries, all people, including officials, eat dogs, you realize the problem. The dogs are not killed like a duck or pig. They have to be beaten and kept alive as long as possible, breaking all the bones usually with a bicycle chain, because it is unlikely to kill them too fast, they are tortured. I have seen and heard puppies of 2 months being 'treated' for hours, with the screams completely preventing me from sleeping. The consumers, including scientists, etc... want the dogs to be treated that way, because if they die in pain, the meat is better. You can ask Baodai, or koreans even, or chinese for that. 

I know some places, not in Vietnam, but in a country next to it, where you can eat in restaurants aborted fetuses. I think again baodai has heard about that too, and it is not a 'rumor'. They say that anyway they are dead, and it is very good to eat for couples that cannot have childs.

How the F**c you want such people to care about some freaking very rare frogs, or paphiopedilum helenae ? It is a completely different world, period.

I guess people will say that it's a cultural matter. However, I firmly believe that archaism has to be changed, and is in no way a 'cultural matter'. When people are more 'evolved' (no racism or whatsoever intended, don't worry), they can start to understand the plants and animals, etc...

Otherwise, if this is culture, raping young boys, like the Greeks did 2000 years ago to teach them, should be allowed, and killing the neighbor to take his wife too. 

( just had a look at the neighbor's wife, finally it's not a good example AT ALL )

There is another concept, the one of the 'kind savage'. We think that collectors are poor, we want to help them. They are in small houses, they do not have the DVD player, they need us... WRONG.

In fact, most of the collectors in Vietnam, China, Thailand, are locally very rich. They don't need us, and they make easy money. 

'If we can bring them 500US a month to make conservation, education, survey, they will stop, sent their children to the university, blabla...' NO, they DON'T CARE. I have seen it with the rothschildianum collectors in Sabah. They get money from the governement to stop, help the authorities, more money from NGO to survey, and they get... most of their money from selling wildlife, like before. Because the latter is the best, highest income.

The collector of paph emersonii, until quite recently when the resource went extinct ( now he collects frogs...), was doing about 50.000.000 VND a months. That's 2500USD guys, just to go to the forest, and dig up plants. 

In more remote areas, poorer, where people earn 200-300.000VND a month maximum, that's 15USD, someone dealing in wild plants will earn some millions per months, he is the king of the area. In wild animals, some dozen millions.

There is a culture problem, or lack thereof as I say, and a lot of economic problems. I have no idea about South America, apparently it works better in term of preservation, at least in some areas. But in most Asian countries, I don't think this kind of scheme can be successful.

BTW, the spicerianum 'Monster' at best is a polyploid, or could be a Bruno progeny... The teeth on the petals are typical of non-diploid plants. Here Guido could tell us if he thinks it is a spicerianum still, when there are artificial genetic mutations, or something else...


----------



## Braem (Jun 2, 2011)

Roth said:


> Well, Baodai summed up very well how it works. On the other side, there are a few points that need to be explained:
> 
> - animal trade has indeed nearly all the time officials involved. Because an animal is easy to identify ( take a tiger, a turtle...) so a complete network needs to be arranged. Plants, most enforcement people have no idea if they are orchids or not, and if they know it, anyway, they do not know which species, the value... So there is no 'big boss' as a result, as plant smuggling is the poor parent of animal smuggling, and does not generate enough money. Only smuggled cycad are manged by complete networks, however, but they are far more expensive than any orchids for some species.
> 
> ...


There are some statements in your posting that could be very much misunderstood, especially when quoted out of context. I strongly advise that you be somewhat more careful.

About the "spicerianum 'Monster' ... I have discussed that plant with several people and we think the plant is a hybrid (of whatever provenance) .... But at the end, I have too little information to make a final (scientifically valid) judgment.


----------



## Dokmai Garden (Jun 2, 2011)

In spite of CITES and national parks, we fear the Thai orchids are highly endangered. In fact, people who want to follow the law ask me where they can find information about who is certified and who is not, but CITES is not interested in helping. To us, a network of orchid arks would create safety:www.dokmaigarden.co.th/orchidark.php

Eric Danell


----------



## Braem (Jun 2, 2011)

Dokmai Garden said:


> In spite of CITES and national parks, we fear the Thai orchids are highly endangered. In fact, people who want to follow the law ask me where they can find information about who is certified and who is not, but CITES is not interested in helping. To us, a network of orchid arks would create safety:www.dokmaigarden.co.th/orchidark.php
> 
> Eric Danell


It takes time ... but eventually you will ALL understand that CITES is nonsense and CITES authorities in many countries are nothing but crooks. 
anout 15 years ago I was talking to the Minister in charge of CITES in Tanzania, when I asked him about CITES, he said ... "what is that?" ... That same night in the Hotel I overheard a conversation ... one of the people was an the assistant of the minister. He was talking to two men who wanted an enormous amount of Hippo teeth ... the minister's assistant said" No problem" ....


----------



## Mark Sullivan (Jun 2, 2011)

*Hybrids and show "species"*

Whether Phap spicerianum 'Monster' is a hybrid or not, it helps illustrate two problems with ex situ conservation:

1. It is a hybrid masking as a species all subsequent prodigies will also be hybrids. People try an improve the species by adding pollinating with another species thus propelling species extinction in ex situ. It only takes once and you can never go back. Many people do not keep good records. Orchids get moved around. Tags get lost. Someone declares something a species puts a new tag in. Someone unknowingly creates more "species" mot knowing they are using a hybrid. Over many years you soon have all hybrids in ex situ and extinction of a species in ex situ and in situ.

2. The push for bigger, rounder and flatter flowers of species eventually leads to species flowers which there original pollinator would not recognize. Line breeding can lead to all sort of problems. And both lead to less genetic diversity as the plain Jane flowers get tossed from collections for the new improved species.

Both 1 and 2 will lead to the extinction of a species in ex situ with no chance of reintroduction. Reintroduction is a pipe dream if habitat continues to destroyed at the rate it is.


----------



## Mark Sullivan (Jun 2, 2011)

Eric Danell,

I think the Dokmai Garden is a very good idea. Feel free to contact me if you think the Orchid Conservation Coalition could help you.


----------



## gonewild (Jun 2, 2011)

Mark Sullivan said:


> There are good organization like Ecominga in Peru. http://www.orchidconservationcoalition.org/hl/ecuadorecominga.html
> with trustworthy local guards that believe in what they are doing:



Is this in Peru or Ecuador?


----------



## Braem (Jun 2, 2011)

Mark Sullivan said:


> Whether Phap spicerianum 'Monster' is a hybrid or not, it helps illustrate two problems with ex situ conservation:
> 
> 1. It is a hybrid masking as a species all subsequent prodigies will also be hybrids. People try an improve the species by adding pollinating with another species thus propelling species extinction in ex situ. It only takes once and you can never go back. Many people do not keep good records. Orchids get moved around. Tags get lost. Someone declares something a species puts a new tag in. Someone unknowingly creates more "species" mot knowing they are using a hybrid. Over many years you soon have all hybrids in ex situ and extinction of a species in ex situ and in situ.
> 
> ...


To some extend you are right ... people cross just about every trash they have in their greenhouse as soon as it flowers ... 

BUT that does not change anything to the fact that CITES is nonsense as long as you don't protect the habitats, and you can't protect the habitats.


----------



## Mark Sullivan (Jun 2, 2011)

*Correction and Cites*

Lance, Sorry my mistake- Ecominga Foundation is in Ecuador. Thanks for catching that.

Guido - I agree "CITES is nonsense as long as you don't protect the habitats, and you can't protect the habitats." and you may be right about habitat protection in the long run. It certainly doesn't look good. There will be lots of casualties.


----------



## Howzat (Jun 3, 2011)

This is the mistake with CITES. From Mark Sullvan's posts, it sounds like that CITES USA has never had any submission from his organisation or perhaps none from the orchids world, organisations. (Orchid conservationcoalition and other orchids conservation organisation, also AOS and others). If CITES is convened again with representatives from CITES member countries and most of them have not got any submissions from their own orchids organisations, how the hell can CITES convention produce anything that is relevant to Conservation??( in practical and pragmatic way). The more I learn about CITES and its activities, the more resentful I am towards CITES. Just one thing, after the publication of E.Hansen's book, has CITES produced a list of plants that were seized and where they were located and looked after????. If they cannot look after the seized plants, in fact killing them, then dismantle CITES. Let's start all over again and concentrate with regional conservation. Like Mark's org or Dokmai Garden.


----------



## Roth (Jun 3, 2011)

Braem said:


> It takes time ... but eventually you will ALL understand that CITES is nonsense and CITES authorities in many countries are nothing but crooks.
> anout 15 years ago I was talking to the Minister in charge of CITES in Tanzania, when I asked him about CITES, he said ... "what is that?" ... That same night in the Hotel I overheard a conversation ... one of the people was an the assistant of the minister. He was talking to two men who wanted an enormous amount of Hippo teeth ... the minister's assistant said" No problem" ....



Can only support this kind of statements. In Madagascar, everyone knows who arranged a lot of CITES and strange exports... CITES officers. 

Speaking of rhino horns and 'culture'/tradition, I have heard countless people, including CITES officials in Asia saying that when a relative gets a stroke they use Ang Kung Nihung Wan, a Chinese medecine made with rhino horn ( more efficient with Sumatra rhino according to them). I have even seen educated people using it in Asia. Funny too, in the receipt there is as well mercury,arsenic and antimony. Nevertheless, many people in Asia (most?) believe that rhino horn for strokes is a real remedy, more efficient than any chemical.

If you have a look at the CITES trade database, that's some hundreds TONS of wild collected dendrobium that are traded for medecine ( explicitely 'W' for wild) between Burma, Vietnam, Laos, China, Korea. They say it is nobile, but in fact I have seen a Vietnamese shipment ( with CITES at that time), it included falconeri, strongylanthum, bellatulum, etc.. From Burma, it is pretty much anything with bulbs. What few people know, the old bulbs have no value, so they collect the whole clumps, but for the medecine ONLY this season's bulbs are sent. Remaining is thrown away. 1kg of nobile in the CITES trade database for traditional medicine purpose makes for about 7-10 kg of wild collected plants. I have photos somewhere of half a ton of new bulbs of dendrobium aff. moniliforme. Cannot imagine the quantity of plants collected to prepare that shipment.


----------



## Braem (Jun 3, 2011)

Howzat said:


> This is the mistake with CITES. From Mark Sullvan's posts, it sounds like that CITES USA has never had any submission from his organisation or perhaps none from the orchids world, organisations. (Orchid conservationcoalition and other orchids conservation organisation, also AOS and others). If CITES is convened again with representatives from CITES member countries and most of them have not got any submissions from their own orchids organisations, how the hell can CITES convention produce anything that is relevant to Conservation??( in practical and pragmatic way). The more I learn about CITES and its activities, the more resentful I am towards CITES. Just one thing, after the publication of E.Hansen's book, has CITES produced a list of plants that were seized and where they were located and looked after????. If they cannot look after the seized plants, in fact killing them, then dismantle CITES. Let's start all over again and concentrate with regional conservation. Like Mark's org or Dokmai Garden.


Some of plants (I will not say which as it will make lots of people weep bitterly) that were seized at the Popow raid perished in the Botanic Garden (Palmengarten) in Frankurt/Main and others disappeared to Kew (Cribb) and Leiden (de Vogel). The Botanical Gardens in Hannover refused to harbour plants because they did not want any part of the illegal confiscation.

Some of the plants turned up on the Market. The President of the DOG at that time (Gerd Röllke) got best of show (at Marburg) with chinese Paphs that came from Popow a few months after the Popow raid. These plants were awarded in the presence of CITES authorities that were a part of the Popow raid. When I openly complained about this, I was told "None of your business".


----------



## s1214215 (Jun 3, 2011)

Roth.. I am not sure where these UAE streets are you talk of.. Never seen such a thing in all my years here. Also UAE residents are a small amount of tourists here. It was reported on the big cats case that big politicians were involved (Thai and English papers), but thats dropped off the radar now after a week.

Friends in a few SE Asian countries have told me you can waltz into the local CITES and get a cert for a phal lobbi for example with a complex hybrid seedling. They say most offices regard CITES as a joke, but follow things to keep the job.

Dr. Braem I am not surprised by your post on the Botanic gardens/raid

Brett


----------



## Marc (Jun 3, 2011)

Braem said:


> Some of plants (I will not say which as it will make lots of people weep bitterly) that were seized at the Popow raid perished in the Botanic Garden (Palmengarten) in Frankurt/Main and others disappeared to Kew (Cribb) and Leiden (de Vogel). The Botanical Gardens in Hannover refused to harbour plants because they did not want any part of the illegal confiscation.
> 
> Some of the plants turned up on the Market. The President of the DOG at that time (Gerd Röllke) got best of show (at Marburg) with chinese Paphs that came from Popow a few months after the Popow raid. These plants were awarded in the presence of CITES authorities that were a part of the Popow raid. When I openly complained about this, I was told "None of your business".



Guido,

You refer to "de Vogel", I asume that you mean Ed de Vogel who is connected to the Hortus Leiden. Any idea if plants that were captured in this raid might still be alive in the greenhouses of Leiden?


----------



## Roth (Jun 3, 2011)

Braem said:


> Some of plants (I will not say which as it will make lots of people weep bitterly) that were seized at the Popow raid perished in the Botanic Garden (Palmengarten) in Frankurt/Main and others disappeared to Kew (Cribb) and Leiden (de Vogel). The Botanical Gardens in Hannover refused to harbour plants because they did not want any part of the illegal confiscation.
> 
> Some of the plants turned up on the Market. The President of the DOG at that time (Gerd Röllke) got best of show (at Marburg) with chinese Paphs that came from Popow a few months after the Popow raid. These plants were awarded in the presence of CITES authorities that were a part of the Popow raid. When I openly complained about this, I was told "None of your business".



I would say that they all died, for sure. Leiden did not have them anymore in 1999 when I visited. They told me that they were poorly grown when they arrived. The only problem, whether people like it or not, Popow was one of the best growers of paphs in Europe... so it is sure the plants were in excellent condition.

In England some sanderianum appeared after the Azadehdel story here and there, but no way to know their proven source.

What I know, as I had a big official fight about that, one of the people involved in the experts went to expertise a large batch of wild collected plants in France. He found all the plants to be 'hybrids' (in fact philippinense, supardii, roths, sands...). When he was shown letters that he was one of the sellers, he shut up,rewrote his report for the defense half-half, stating that they were species, but he did not know if they were from the wild or artificially propagated, as he was not a grower. :rollhappy:



s1214215 said:


> Roth.. I am not sure where these UAE streets are you talk of.. Never seen such a thing in all my years here. Also UAE residents are a small amount of tourists here. It was reported on the big cats case that big politicians were involved (Thai and English papers), but thats dropped off the radar now after a week.



About three years ago I had a discussion with the JW Marriott manager in Bangkok, at a time there were many UAE tourists inside his hotel, he told me at that season, they would go to most of the 5* hotels in Bangkok and spend like crazy.

Here they say it is over 95.000 and even the Thai minister wanted to make a visa exemption for them, don't know how it works now:

http://www.siasat.com/english/news/thailand-bid-boost-tourist-arrivals-uae

One UAE tourist is equal to a dozen EU/US tourists if not more in term of cash spent per day.



> Friends in a few SE Asian countries have told me you can waltz into the local CITES and get a cert for a phal lobbi for example with a complex hybrid seedling. They say most offices regard CITES as a joke, but follow things to keep the job.



Smugglers do the opposite in fact, get a CITES for phal hybrids and export species. But that's true that in some Asian countries, they know so little about orchids that you have to write for them what to put on the CITES and the equally important phyto...

About Popow, Azadehdel plants, they all died, period. I know that from one of the former directors of the Leiden Botanical Garden directly. They claimed that the plants were very poorly grown, so they could not survive anyway. In fact, there are some pictures of plants grown by Popow here and there, and they were in excellent condition. Popow was an excellent grower, so it was just the botanical gardens that screwed up the culture.

I cannot comment too much, as the story has been classified now, but one of the English people involved had to come to France to defend a grower. He went to see the seized plants, a massive batch. Angrily he told the customs these were hybrids. Then he has been presented with TELEX, and letters that himself and two of his close friends wrote, where to pick up the plants, who to pay. As a bonus, I appeared. He left the job quickly... but he was clearly involved in smuggling.


----------



## Howzat (Jun 3, 2011)

There are more and more postings here that reinforce my belief that CITES 
1. has been created on false ideas. 2. Delegates from countries all over the world to CITES convention are just a bunch of people who do not get consultation from respective plants organisation. Ex. If they have the balls to put all Paphs species into Appendix 1, they do not know why they do it as they did not have a good enough data (how would they have it without consultation with respective paphs organisation?? What would delegate from Africa or middle east know anything about Paphs???), What are the consequences, how to police them, how to check their enforcer agents credibility. I think they did it because of pressure from extreme greenies. 
Raeding G. Braem above made me sad, and if that can be verified we should all take actions against Cribb, de Vogel and Gerd Rohl for complicity. But the only sensible action now is to dismantle CITES first and start a new one. Lay down the fact and figures before we plan a policy, then get (for god's sake consultation from interested and knowledgeable people). Not Cribb or de Vogel as their names have already been tainted, according to E. Hansen and Braem. How on earth can they still live peacefully knowing they were instrumental in that infamous raids supported by soldiers with automatic rifles , then let all the plants to die. They did not even have any account on the name and numbers of confiscated plants and where they went or die (above Roth's). And if some of the still alive plants turned up on the market as suggested by G.Braem, did CITES enforcers make any money??? This is nothing short to say that CITES people are daylight robbers. The only refreshing thing from G. Braem's post above is that there was one botanical garden (Hanover) who did not want to participate in that infamous raid. So I renew my call that CITES should be disbanded. Start all over again with proper consultations.


----------



## Hien (Jun 3, 2011)

Howzat said:


> And if some of the still alive plants turned up on the market as suggested by G.Braem, did CITES enforcers make any money??? This is nothing short to say that CITES people are daylight robbers..



you have great insight.
This is an ancient idiom that vietnameses love to sing:
"cuop dem la cuop, cuop ngay la quan"
here is the translation:
"the bandit who works at night is just a bandit, the bandit who comes in day light is your king's oficer'


----------



## Howzat (Jun 4, 2011)

Hien said:


> you have great insight.
> This is an ancient idiom that vietnameses love to sing:
> "cuop dem la cuop, cuop ngay la quan"
> here is the translation:
> "the bandit who works at night is just a bandit, the bandit who comes in day light is your king's oficer'



How appropriate!!
Perhaps Cribb and de Vogel can wear this mantle until they die.
However I would retract this if they can show the world that all the plants confiscated are in save hands.


----------



## Howzat (Jun 4, 2011)

Hien said:


> you have great insight.
> This is an ancient idiom that vietnameses love to sing:
> "cuop dem la cuop, cuop ngay la quan"
> here is the translation:
> "the bandit who works at night is just a bandit, the bandit who comes in day light is your king's oficer'





Roth said:


> I would say that they all died, for sure. Leiden did not have them anymore in 1999 when I visited. They told me that they were poorly grown when they arrived. The only problem, whether people like it or not, Popow was one of the best growers of paphs in Europe... so it is sure the plants were in excellent condition.
> About Popow, Azadehdel plants, they all died, period. I know that from one of the former directors of the Leiden Botanical Garden directly. They claimed that the plants were very poorly grown, so they could not survive anyway. In fact, there are some pictures of plants grown by Popow here and there, and they were in excellent condition. Popow was an excellent grower, so it was just the botanical gardens that screwed up the culture.
> I cannot comment too much, as the story has been classified now, but one of the English people involved had to come to France to defend a grower. He went to see the seized plants, a massive batch. Angrily he told the customs these were hybrids.
> 
> ...


----------



## Roth (Jun 4, 2011)

Howzat said:


> This is a good insight provided by ROTH (Xavier) as well as all the posts from Guido Braem. CITES confiscated then killed all the plants. All in the name of "conservation". To be fair to Cribb and de Vogel, I like to see both of them send in their posts here with justification of their actions.
> Xavier, why are the stories now classified??



I do not know much about de Vogel. I know that a few years ago, some staff at the Leiden Botanical Gardens used the collect permit and CITES for research to supply the trade in rare PNG species, and went busted. 

For classified, that's easy. 

I was an officer in many of those cases, when the people choose not to go to the court - that's about 3/4 of them in wildlife cases for EU, if not more - they are offered to pay a fine by the law, and the case is closed. Very rarely I have seen a case going to the court (even the final part of Popow case, they made a settlement with the court, Popow could not prove he was right, the court knew that they could not prove they were right, the possible evidences/plants were all dead, so no expert could see them, it started to smell shitty, so they decided to close the case against a fine).

There is one case still pending in Germany against another orchid grower, that promise to be interesting. The orchidist wants... his plants back, but they died in custody. Government offered him money, but he refused, stating that then he wants the government to replace the PLANTS. They know that legally they cannot get those plants, so that was a deep ****. Have not heard about that for about 2 years, but promised to be interesting.

On the other side, for the public, the case never happened if there is an agreement between the parties, that's the law, and it is forbidden to comment or give the name of the people involved. In some other countries, even if the case went to the court, after some years, 5-10-20 depending on the case, the circumstances, etc... it is forbidden to mention, and the records of convicted people are blanked.

Now, from what I learned hard core as an official, many societies that are involved in 'conservation or protection' are attracted like flies by a ****. They hunt the money, and make a good business. I know the salaries of some of Greenpeace and WWF workers, well... it is not benevolent, to say the least. Whenever the customs in France would seize something, WWF France would appear and try to get money at the court for the 'immense damage done to wildlife'. We turned them down each time because:

- First WWF France NEVER did anything to protect species.
- Second, between crazy travels, outrageous expenses and high salaries ( we are talking about salaries in the 100.000 euros/year and way more, jobs granted through friendship, with salaries roughly 10x the normal salary according to the experience and diplomas, and I know VERY well what I am talking about.), there is not much left for any project, believe me. I know that first hand.
- Third we tried some join operation with WWF France experts, they were so close to some the smugglers that they would warn them before the raids... WWF had politic support too, so they have been granted access to the Customs database and facilities, which was the worst mistake ever done.


----------



## Howzat (Jun 4, 2011)

> Now, from what I learned hard core as an official, many societies that are involved in 'conservation or protection' are attracted like flies by a ****. They hunt the money, and make a good business. I know the salaries of some of Greenpeace and WWF workers, well... it is not benevolent, to say the least. Whenever the customs in France would seize something, WWF France would appear and try to get money at the court for the 'immense damage done to wildlife'. We turned them down each time because:
> 
> - First WWF France NEVER did anything to protect species.
> - Second, between crazy travels, outrageous expenses and high salaries ( we are talking about salaries in the 100.000 euros/year and way more, jobs granted through friendship, with salaries roughly 10x the normal salary according to the experience and diplomas, and I know VERY well what I am talking about.), there is not much left for any project, believe me. I know that first hand.
> - Third we tried some join operation with WWF France experts, they were so close to some the smugglers that they would warn them before the raids... WWF had politic support too, so they have been granted access to the Customs database and facilities, which was the worst mistake ever done.



Thanks Xavier. It sounds like there are many many more than a handful of extreme greenies who are not just extreme in ideas but also like to make dirty money as well.


----------



## Braem (Jun 4, 2011)

Marc said:


> Guido,
> 
> You refer to "de Vogel", I asume that you mean Ed de Vogel who is connected to the Hortus Leiden. Any idea if plants that were captured in this raid might still be alive in the greenhouses of Leiden?


Yes I refer to Ed de Vogel ... a croonie of Cribb. As far as plants still alive ... I doubt it ... 
And Cribb and de Vogel will never comment on this. Cribb is as arrogant as ever. I did not hear anything about de Vogel since the raid ... so that is a long time ago.


----------



## Mark Sullivan (Jun 4, 2011)

*CITES, ex situ and in situ conservation*

Weird, there was a post by Swamprad /Mark asking about what could be done and interest in the thread. Can post be rescinded or disappear? 
Anyway what can be done.

1. Talking about conservation is good. Talk and educate fellow orchid growers.

2. Ex situ conservation will ultimately fail if unorganized for reason I have outlined in past posts. For it to have any chance of success there must be an organized ex situ orchid conservation effort involving orchid hobbyist, commercial growers, and botanical gardens. Good record keeping and cross pollination effort to keep species genetic diversity up and hybridization out.

Orchid Societies could do this: 
"The National Council for the Conservation of Plants and Gardens in the United Kingdom has a Program called the National Plant Collections, which is to be “as complete a representation of a genus or section of a genus as possible.” Some orchid genera are in this collection. A similar program could be set up with orchid societies. Orchid societies could choose to be the keepers of as complete a representation of a genus or section of a genus as possible. The collective members of the society would maintain the genus representation in their various growing situations. They could help guarantee the genetic diversity of species in the genus. Societies could choose to be the keepers of several genera. If different societies overlap by keeping the same genus, this would be beneficial. It could promote interaction between societies. An easy way to begin would be for orchid societies to assess which species their members grow. This would be an indication of the genus the society could become involved in with an ex situ conservation effort. Then orchid society members would become direct participants in orchid conservation. The effort would give orchid societies another dimension of interest in keeping and attracting new members."

Slippertalk Orchid Forum members could also do this by having a virtual sliiper orchid collection made up of all it's member (or those that want to participate) to safeguard slipper species orchids. A database could be set up like the Living Orchid Collection http://www.livingorchidcollection.org

2. In situ orchid conservation can be looking around locally trying to volunteer or save orchid habitat locally. Get your orchid society involved. Get your orchid society to join the Orchid Conservation Coalition and 1% for Orchid Conservation. An orchid society agrees to donate 1% or more of net revenue each year towards the in situ orchid conservation organization or project of* its choice.* Orchid conservation should be as integral to an orchid societies activities as show tables and judging. http://www.orchidconservationcoalition.org/program.html

3. As far as CITES you can try and change it, but this maybe a bigger effort 
than setup an ex situ conservation program or definitely harder than joining 1% for Orchid Conservation. CITES is a trade agreement, not a conservation agreement. You have to remember that. The CITES website is http://www.cites.org/

CITES Contact information to write letters or e-mails:

CITES Secretariat
International Environment House
11 Chemin des Anémones
CH-1219 Châtelaine, Geneva
Switzerland
Tel: +41-(0)22-917-81-39/40
Fax: +41-(0)22-797-34-17
Email: [email protected]


----------



## quietaustralian (Jun 4, 2011)

Howzat said:


> Thanks Xavier. It sounds like there are many many more than a handful of extreme greenies who are not just extreme in ideas but also like to make dirty money as well.




What are extreme greenies?

Mick


----------



## Howzat (Jun 4, 2011)

quietaustralian said:


> What are extreme greenies?
> 
> Mick



I refer to a group of greenies who have pie in the sky ideas but who also engage in making dirty money out of the misery of plants and animals they champion to protect.


----------



## Howzat (Jun 4, 2011)

CITES is a trade agreement, not a conservation agreement. You have to remember that. 

Mark,
Yes it is true CITES is a trade agreement, but a trade agreement that is designed to protect endangered plant and animal. So its main goal is the preservation of the plant and animal. Which has been and is will still be, abused by its officials.


----------



## Mark Sullivan (Jun 5, 2011)

*Cites and Conservation*

Guido is right when he says (and I am paraphrasing here) CITES is nothing or useless if you don't have habitat protection. Habitat protection is key to conservation and CITES has nothing to do with habitat protection. I think the people at CITES are very well aware of the limitations of CITES to affect conservation. It is hard to say that something is a conservation initiative when all it can do is be implemented when a endangered species crosses a border already removed from habitat or the habitat is already destroyed. What kind of protection is that for endangered plants and animals? Not much.

You are very correct about the unevenness of which CITES is administered by different countries. Bribes and corruption are also not surprising as in many countries this is the norm for all aspects of life. I don't know if you can blame CITES in Switzerland for governments and their officials that are suppose to implement CITES. It is an international law (treaty) that is interpreted and enforced by each government a party to it not by the central organization. Do you think any government would give CITES.org jurisdiction and control within their borders or their resources?

And yes there are problems with the actual treaty in regards to plants and orchids, but people in past post on this thread have covered those aspects very well.


----------



## Mark Sullivan (Jun 5, 2011)

*CITES and Conservation*

Howzat,

We really don't have any disagreement. The difference between us is I don't expect much out of CITES or government official in countries where bribes are common. You seem to expect more from it then it can deliver. The fact that CITES has nothing to do with habitat protection, it is hard to get me riled up about it. CITES is what it is.
Would I change CITES if I could? Yes. But I can't. So I move on and try and protect habitat and orchids in situ and ex situ the best I can.


----------



## emydura (Jun 5, 2011)

Howzat said:


> I refer to a group of greenies who have pie in the sky ideas but who also engage in making dirty money out of the misery of plants and animals they champion to protect.



This statement makes no sense to me. On one hand you are saying these decisions are made by environmentalists whose motives are well intended if not a little misguided. But then you say it is all about greed.

David


----------



## Roth (Jun 5, 2011)

emydura said:


> Can you give some examples. This statement makes no sense to me.
> 
> David



I think I understand Howard easily on that...

Some people talk about conservation to pay themselves deluxe travels and high salaries. They broadcast to the public sad stories of a poor bird that is dying, or pictures of rhinos with their horn cut off ( I do not speak about the very interesting and well done movies on National Geographic about Thailand smuggling that is broadcast now). They get YOUR money, and pay themselves first nice cars, big salaries, deluxe hotels and travels. After, they are just hunting the next sad wildlife story to get more money, but at the end, they never complete or DO anything.

If you look at the WWF, the huge amount of money spent inside, the big salaries and dream life of some of its staff (not the ground one), let me know, compared to all the money they got, which success they achieved if any ??? 

In France at least, we got big fights with the WWF, because when the customs ( with the public government money) completed any big operation successfully, the WWF would pop up, ask to make a TV broadcast under a supposed WWF-Customs partnership, and ask the court to get a percentage of the fine because the poachers did a lot of damage to the wildlife, etc... but indeed they did nothing else than watching when the customs would complete an operation and come to try to pick up the benefit and eventually profit.


----------



## Braem (Jun 5, 2011)

Roth said:


> I think I understand Howard easily on that...
> 
> Some people talk about conservation to pay themselves deluxe travels and high salaries. They broadcast to the public sad stories of a poor bird that is dying, or pictures of rhinos with their horn cut off ( I do not speak about the very interesting and well done movies on National Geographic about Thailand smuggling that is broadcast now). They get YOUR money, and pay themselves first nice cars, big salaries, deluxe hotels and travels. After, they are just hunting the next sad wildlife story to get more money, but at the end, they never complete or DO anything.
> 
> ...


And talking about WWF ... just search for their act "cats over Borneo" ... if you don't find it, I will explain


----------



## Braem (Jun 5, 2011)

Mark Sullivan said:


> Weird, there was a post by Swamprad /Mark asking about what could be done and interest in the thread. Can post be rescinded or disappear?
> Anyway what can be done.
> 
> 1. Talking about conservation is good. Talk and educate fellow orchid growers.
> ...


Just something to think about:

if you have a pile of sh... or cr... ...it does not make any difference what you do it --- make it look better, make it smell better, put a nice redhead on top of it ... whatever ... but at the end, you still have a pile of sh.. ot cr.


----------



## quietaustralian (Jun 5, 2011)

Braem said:


> And talking about WWF ... just search for their act "cats over Borneo" ... if you don't find it, I will explain



Whats the story about WWF cats over Borneo?
Mick


----------



## Braem (Jun 5, 2011)

quietaustralian said:


> Whats the story about WWF cats over Borneo?
> Mick


It actually was the WHO ... they parachuted cats over Borneo ... That was in the wake of overusing DDT ... The DDT was in the food chain and the cats had dies ... and now the rats took over ... and thus, some brilliant dude decided to drop cats by parachute over Borneo ... of course that was a disaster and they kept it secret until someone spilled the beans ...
So far for Nature and Health organisations protecting our world ...


----------



## Shiva (Jun 5, 2011)

I don't mean to insult everyone but I have a condition I would call ''reader fagigue''. It would be greatly alleviated if people kept their post shorter and to the point. If you can, make your argument simply. What I try to read would go very well and would be very stimulating in a face to face debate. But overloading the arguments in writing, though they might have great value, make them difficult to follow especially with the typos accumulating, words missing, intempestive contractions and differences in language. Just a few lines of text at a time would do, just like Dr Braem does.

As for CITES, It's a failure. You just can't legislate human greed and people everywhere will do whatever it takes to feed themselves and their family. 
The opposite is to make plants easily available to all. In any case, forget about reintroducing plants in their original environment. Once an orchid is gone from it's environment, chances are the pollinator agent is also gone. So, unless you're willing to go in the woods with toothpicks, just enjoy them at home. 

Michel


----------



## NYEric (Jun 5, 2011)

Cant do that. I cannot acquire them legally!


----------



## quietaustralian (Jun 5, 2011)

Braem said:


> It actually was the WHO ... they parachuted cats over Borneo ... That was in the wake of overusing DDT ... The DDT was in the food chain and the cats had dies ... and now the rats took over ... and thus, some brilliant dude decided to drop cats by parachute over Borneo ... of course that was a disaster and they kept it secret until someone spilled the beans ...
> So far for Nature and Health organisations protecting our world ...



I thought you were drawing a long bow trying to pin that one on the WWF. 
Now it’s time to give the WHO a kicking. 
I don’t know much about the WHO, are they corrupt?
Thousands of parachuting cats made me laugh and then I thought where was the Animal Welfare League (AWL)?
Regards, Mick


----------



## Braem (Jun 5, 2011)

quietaustralian said:


> I thought you were drawing a long bow trying to pin that one on the WWF.
> Now it’s time to give the WHO a kicking.
> I don’t know much about the WHO, are they corrupt?
> Thousands of parachuting cats made me laugh and then I thought where was the Animal Welfare League (AWL)?
> Regards, Mick


I don't think they are corrupt ... but I think that at time they employ people that are not endangered of being suspected of getting a Nobel prize. What I note is that we biologists, especially taxonomists and ecologists have trouble finding good jobs (if I would not have been supoorted by a very good wife, I would be in real trouble) whereass these organisations like WHO, WWF, CITES etc seem to employ (at least in part) a number of sh..h..ds.


----------



## Howzat (Jun 5, 2011)

Roth said:


> I think I understand Howard easily on that...
> 
> Some people talk about conservation to pay themselves deluxe travels and high salaries. They broadcast to the public sad stories of a poor bird that is dying, or pictures of rhinos with their horn cut off ( I do not speak about the very interesting and well done movies on National Geographic about Thailand smuggling that is broadcast now). They get YOUR money, and pay themselves first nice cars, big salaries, deluxe hotels and travels. After, they are just hunting the next sad wildlife story to get more money, but at the end, they never complete or DO anything.
> 
> ...



Roth
Thanks for explaining that in response to David's. My original post was based on your in depth knowledge of WWF, CITES personnel.
Howard


----------



## Braem (Jun 5, 2011)

Roth,

I sent you a few more emails ....


----------



## Rick (Jun 5, 2011)

Braem said:


> Just something to think about:
> 
> if you have a pile of sh... or cr... ...it does not make any difference what you do it --- make it look better, make it smell better, put a nice redhead on top of it ... whatever ... but at the end, you still have a pile of sh.. ot cr.




Dr. Braem

Do you know that you are listed as one of the consulting taxonomists on the 1% virtual collection website?


----------



## Braem (Jun 5, 2011)

Rick said:


> Dr. Braem
> 
> Do you know that you are listed as one of the consulting taxonomists on the 1% virtual collection website?


No, I didn't even know that site existed ... so, what am I supposed to do there ??


----------



## Mark Sullivan (Jun 5, 2011)

*Consultation for Living Orchid Collection*

I don't expect Dr. Guido J Braem to remember as the email exchange is from August 16, 2006, when he agreed to be a consultant for the Living Orchid Collection. I sent him the original e-mail exchange via this forums private message. The living Orchid Collection is pretty much just demonstration of concept at this point. Not a large enough virtual orchid collection for it to make a dent in ex situ conservation. People like to talk about conservation, the do is another story.
http://www.livingorchidcollection.org


----------



## Mark Sullivan (Jun 5, 2011)

*CITES is what it is*



Braem said:


> Just something to think about:
> 
> if you have a pile of sh... or cr... ...it does not make any difference what you do it --- make it look better, make it smell better, put a nice redhead on top of it ... whatever ... but at the end, you still have a pile of sh.. ot cr.



True you can not make something into something it is not. Like I said CITES is what its is. Its not going to change. It is not going to stop habitat from being destroyed.


----------



## Braem (Jun 5, 2011)

Mark Sullivan said:


> I don't expect Dr. Guido J Braem to remember as the email exchange is from August 16, 2006, when he agreed to be a consultant for the Living Orchid Collection. I sent him the original e-mail exchange via this forums private message. The living Orchid Collection is pretty much just demonstration of concept at this point. Not a large enough virtual orchid collection for it to make a dent in ex situ conservation. People like to talk about conservation, the do is another story.
> http://www.livingorchidcollection.org


Well ... no one ever consulted me in those five years


----------



## Braem (Jun 5, 2011)

Mark Sullivan said:


> True you can not make something into something it is not. Like I said CITES is what its is. Its not going to change. It is not going to stop habitat from being destroyed.


Yes, but that raises the question why it is kept other than to spend a lot of tax money to annoy people.


----------



## Howzat (Jun 5, 2011)

These postings by Dr Braem and Xavier have been very educational to say the least about government and UN institutions, their personnel , its activities and the criminal acts (taking bribes or even soliciting a cut of the fine imposed by a court????????) by these personnel. I would never ever thought about that. They can be called "greedy greeny fat cats", not just "extreme greenies". This thread is now out of my depth , but I still love to read postings from both Guido and Xavier, and I do hope both will continue to send postings.


----------



## Mark Sullivan (Jun 5, 2011)

*Easy being a consultant for conservation.*



Braem said:


> Well ... no one ever consulted me in those five years



Unfortunately, it is easy being a consultant for conservation.


----------



## Mark Sullivan (Jun 5, 2011)

*Why CITES is what it is.*



Braem said:


> Yes, but that raises the question why it is kept other than to spend a lot of tax money to annoy people.



1. People and countries have a vested interest in keeping CITES the way it is. Money.

2. People are confused about it being a conservation treaty, so it gives countries a "green" image of doing something about conservation.

3. While there are mistakes, misuses, bribes, corruption and problems with how the treaty is written especially for plants, CITES does catch actual smugglers and may do some good. Though I think it is like the war on drugs and we are loosing the war and not really tackling the issue in a effective way.

4. It is a bureaucracy of many countries with lots of *politics*

There are probably other reasons people can list.


----------



## Mark Sullivan (Jun 6, 2011)

*Howzat contributions*



Howzat said:


> These postings by Dr Braem and Xavier have been very educational to say the least about government and UN institutions, their personnel , its activities and the criminal acts (taking bribes or even soliciting a cut of the fine imposed by a court????????) by these personnel. I would never ever thought about that. They can be called "greedy greeny fat cats", not just "extreme greenies". This thread is now out of my depth , but I still love to read postings from both Guido and Xavier, and I do hope both will continue to send postings.



Howzat your contributions are great. Is there anything that can turn your passion to action?
There are people trying to change CITES- tilt at windmills. If you or anyone wants I can try and connect you to that effort or you can start your own.


----------



## Mark Sullivan (Jun 6, 2011)

*Editorial: CITES, A Far Cry from Conservation*

You can read Ted Green's Editorial: CITES, A Far Cry from Conservation
on his website: http://rare-hoyas.com/ted%27s_soap_box.htm

It is about half way down on this webpage. Ted has been fighting to change CITES for awhile. His e-mail is at the top of his CITES editorial article. Contact him maybe if enough people want to do something CITES could be changed.
Talking is fine. Action speaks volumes.


----------



## Braem (Jun 6, 2011)

Suggest to have CITES positions to be purely honorary .... you will see how fast no one will care anymore ... it is all about money and power of position.


----------



## Howzat (Jun 6, 2011)

Mark Sullivan said:


> Howzat your contributions are great. Is there anything that can turn your passion to action?
> There are people trying to change CITES- tilt at windmills. If you or anyone wants I can try and connect you to that effort or you can start your own.



Mark, 
Not that I don't like to, but I know my limitation.
In fact you, Guido and Xavier should continue with your postings on this thread, one that was initiated by Brett and proved to be one of the most enjoyable to read and to participate. It was good of you to show the link to Ted Green's article, which shows that there are other people who share the same opinion on CITES. This gave me a boost in my confidence level that one day CITES will be disbanded and replaced by a fairer and easier and more practical organisation run by fair minded people. Fancy, I just read Guido's post suggesting the positions with CITES to be made honorary. Bull's eye!!


----------



## s1214215 (Jun 6, 2011)

I think there is much to be said on this matter. 

My personal feeling is it is time for some kind of framework to be created just for plants, and one that encourages free-er artificial propagation and trade.
The big problem is always will be to get local governments to take it on. 

Brett


----------



## Braem (Jun 6, 2011)

s1214215 said:


> I think there is much to be said on this matter.
> 
> My personal feeling is it is time for some kind of framework to be created just for plants, and one that encourages free-er artificial propagation and trade.
> The big problem is always will be to get local governments to take it on.
> ...


There is only one solution. (1) Pass a law that absolutely forbids the destruction of tropical forests. (2) Allow BOTANISTS to go in and take seed and possibly a few growths for meristemming (3) Have the seedling and merstems made available at cost by the labs .... That is the only way to conserve our orchids ... but (1) will never happen ... thus ....
And don't forget, places like KEW get what they want, so why would they want CITES gone ... Cribb's plants were always "LEGAL" because the CITES office was the one beside his office.


----------



## Mark Sullivan (Jun 6, 2011)

Brett, I agree it is going to take people putting pressure on local governments that are a party to CITES. It will take many people organized in each country. It is going to take a few people to do the organizing. 
I can't I am up to my eyeballs trying to save orchids in situ.
I believe Jerry Fischer at Orchids Limited at one time was trying organize orchid venders and had a petition to try and ask for changes to CITES. Since it was a longtime ago and I haven't heard anything that became of it, I do not know where it stands. 
People could contact him or Ted Green mentioned earlier.
It is definitely going to take people to lead and organize.


----------



## Shiva (Jun 6, 2011)

Braem said:


> There is only one solution. (1) Pass a law that absolutely forbids the destruction of tropical forests. (2) Allow BOTANISTS to go in and take seed and possibly a few growths for meristemming (3) Have the seedling and merstems made available at cost by the labs .... That is the only way to conserve our orchids ... but (1) will never happen ... thus ....
> And don't forget, places like KEW get what they want, so why would they want CITES gone ... Cribb's plants were always "LEGAL" because the CITES office was the one beside his office.



You're right but is there no way to convince Kew and others to proceed that way? This reminds me of the days when collectors picked everything up in a place, wrecked the habitat and refused to say where their plants had came from. Are we still at that stage?


----------



## NYEric (Jun 6, 2011)

as I mentioned at the Paph symposium in Apopka a couple of years ago, the US commercial entities are the ones who would benefit from an amended CITES because then foreign vendors would not be able to openly develope plants that are of questionable legality here! Therefore they should get involved.


----------



## Braem (Jun 7, 2011)

Mark Sullivan said:


> Brett, I agree it is going to take people putting pressure on local governments that are a party to CITES. It will take many people organized in each country. It is going to take a few people to do the organizing.
> I can't I am up to my eyeballs trying to save orchids in situ.
> I believe Jerry Fischer at Orchids Limited at one time was trying organize orchid venders and had a petition to try and ask for changes to CITES. Since it was a longtime ago and I haven't heard anything that became of it, I do not know where it stands.
> People could contact him or Ted Green mentioned earlier.
> It is definitely going to take people to lead and organize.


Man will not live long enough to have that stupid law revoked


----------



## Braem (Jun 7, 2011)

Shiva said:


> You're right but is there no way to convince Kew and others to proceed that way? This reminds me of the days when collectors picked everything up in a place, wrecked the habitat and refused to say where their plants had came from. Are we still at that stage?


I don't know ... but I am inclined to belive that some still do ....


----------



## Roth (Jun 7, 2011)

To be fair, now that they made the CITES, it cannot be undone, at any time or any cost.

Many not-too-educated people, or 'differently educated' people have a behavior way different from any expectation.

Let's say orchids are removed from the CITES. Some bozos in Europe, USA, and Australia will sell and buy plants happily, nothing really changed, that's it, but easier, smoother...

In Asia... well, they will collected much, much more, because if it has been prohibited it will be again, and will try to make stocks way beyond anything one could imagine. Of course too, it is not cocain or jewels, you cannot store wild life like that, but that's something they do not understand, not even in Malaysia, Thailand... and the losses if orchids can be freely traded would be a thousandfold higher.

I still remember that very angry collector, he showed me 50kg of heleneae ( same as the pictures from Cliokchi some months ago...), that were in the box for about two months, All leaves dry, so some were still dry green. He was very angry after me because I was foreigner, did not want to buy any, and told him the plants were dead. He told me 'but there is 50kg'. 

If free trade was to be allowed again, extinction would occur very quickly, with massive batches from Vietnam to Taiwan, Indonesia to Japan, etc... to end up dead in nurseries after some weeks. People would store whilst still legal until it is banned again, hoping for the big bucks. When paphs were placed on App I, some WWF technical advisor actually warned his customers ( it was confidential in the early days), and sent the hell out of Asia to them. Needless to say that those massive quantites could not be cared of, and died after some months.

When they started the CITES, they did not think about the fact that they 'priced' everything on their lists. As a matter of fact, any change or move forward is a permanent one, that cannot be undone anytime.


----------



## Marc (Jun 7, 2011)

NYEric said:


> as I mentioned at the Paph symposium in Apopka a couple of years ago, the US commercial entities are the ones who would benefit from an amended CITES because then foreign vendors would not be able to openly develope plants that are of questionable legality here! Therefore they should get involved.



So you want CITES to include the horror that is called the Lacey act ( if I'm not mistaken ) in it's own rules so that it applies to the whole of the world?


----------



## troy (Feb 19, 2017)

Defenitely worth reading these posts!!!


----------



## PaphLover (Apr 16, 2017)

Howzat said:


> You got to be joking. They are fortified with machine guns aiming at you. Don't you read "Orchid Fever"?? They raided nurseries in Europe with a military precision and personnel armed with machine guns????



Thank you for mentioning this book. I couldn't put it down and was up until 3:30am reading it. Fascinating!

I've read many books on growing orchids, but other than The Orchid Thief, I haven't read many books about the orchid world. Suggestions for others or to a thread listing others would be greatly appreciated.


----------



## mormodes (May 11, 2017)

PaphLover said:


> Thank you for mentioning this book. I couldn't put it down and was up until 3:30am reading it. Fascinating!
> 
> I've read many books on growing orchids, but other than The Orchid Thief, I haven't read many books about the orchid world. Suggestions for others or to a thread listing others would be greatly appreciated.



Craig Pittman's book 'The Scent of Scandal' came out in 2012 - after the dates of this thread, so I don't think anyone had mentioned it. About Phrag kovachii.


----------

