CITES amendment

[gonewild]

A quote from Jerry Lee Fischer of Orchids Limited
"If illegal aliens come into the US and have a child that child is an automatic US citizen. Plants IN VITRO should be considered in a similar light".
more from his website:
http://www.orchidweb.com/cites_orchids.aspx
BD

If you extend "human" rights to plants you will have to consider that it may be immoral to keep them as slaves in your collection. Or perhaps plants have a right to not be eaten?

 

[NYEric]

OY!

 

[John M]

If you extend "human" rights to plants you will have to consider that it may be immoral to keep them as slaves in your collection. Or perhaps plants have a right to not be eaten?

That's not the same thing at all. Being a US citizen is not a human right. It is a legal status; which is Jerry's point.

Jerry is skillfully using a relatively extreme example to show that in far more important issues, the US authorities even grant legal status to the offspring of illegal aliens. If it's done with people, then why on earth should it not be done with something as relatively benign as flowers? Jerry makes a VERY good point!

 

[parvi_17]

I'd just like to say that I love Jerry's position on this matter, and I fully support it. I agree that he makes a very good point.

 

[gonewild]

I like Jerry's point also and I have tried to argue for it in the past.

But plant seedlings in a flask are not the same as a fetus inside a pregnant woman. They would be the same as a nursing infant which if it entered the USA would qualify for citizenship only after meeting certain requirements of law.

Under Jerry's theory the person that transports the flask is in the same position of the coyotes (human smugglers) that transport illegals across the border.
And the orchid collector that possesses the seedlings is in the same position as someone who knowingly harbors or employs illegal aliens. So Jerry's comparison does not help really.

Maybe the theory does help the seedling become legal but it would become a ward of the court just as does the child born to an illegal mother if it remains in the USA after the mother is deported. The child becomes a citizen but the mother can not stay legally in the USA.

But seedlings produced from illegal plants in the USA would qualify for citizenship under the Jerry plan but what breeder is going to sign the birth certificate?

Citizenship is a "human" right in that it only applies to humans.

 

[Lanmark]

Isn't bureaucracy grand?!
Maybe someday the sun will explode and this planet will be vaporized.
It would be a wonderfully efficient simplification of everything humankind has ever complicated beyond all logic or remedy. oke:

I'm also thinking if orchid enthusiasts were as dedicated as the Christmas Day Crotch Bomber, we might all be growing hangianums today. :rollhappy:

 

[Clark]

Anchor seedlings? just wanted to be first to coin the phrase.(hehehe)

 

[baodai]

Maybe the theory does help the seedling become legal

That is the point, If there is legal seedling then i will be happy to deport the mother. I will be happy to work on legal seedling and wait some years to cross again.

BD

 

[Michael_Toronto]

CITIES needs to be clear and concise so that when regular people like me can buy flasks or plants that I choose from where ever I choose.

Less bureaucracy and more faith in the people who love orchids enough not to be buying collected plants and plants on CITES lists that are not grown in a green house! Cultivated plants raised and grown with respect to the species should be the priority to help beat orchid poaching!

 

[NYEric]

1. You probably live in Toronto - CITES restrictions don't cause you many problems.
2. I think no one here would say CITES is clear, concise, or free of bureaucratic bumbling!

 

[tenman]

Cites is perfectly clear: it encourages smuggling and removal of plants from the natural habitat. What could be clearer?

 

[baodai]

Cites is perfectly clear: it encourages smuggling and removal of plants from the natural habitat. What could be clearer?

Tenman,
Did it work or getting worst? ... law should be change depend on situation in my opinion.
BD

 

[Eric Muehlbauer]

CITES worked perfectly well.....for ivory. Its kind of hard to smuggle 10 foot tusks. As for small plants that can pass for any of a number of other plants, not to mention hybrids, its easy to smuggle...so when you make it harder to legally import plants, you just make smuggling that much more profitable.

 

[tocarmar]

I can see Cities used for plants,animals ect. to help cut down on invasive plants, pathogens in dirt & potting mix, ect. that is what quarintene(?) time is for when importing.. But I also agree with Eric Mue. that to identify plants & their hybrids, orchids or other it is nearly impossible unless they are in bloom, & even then you cannot tell the difference sometimes!! That is why alot of people all over the world smuggle plants, animals, people ect. because of the money to be made!!

 

[Rick]

I can see Cities used for plants,animals ect. to help cut down on invasive plants, pathogens in dirt & potting mix, ect. that is what quarintene(?) time is for when importing..

This is an APHIS function not a CITES function.

 

[Kavanaru]

I can only add that the problem is not the regulation itself but the way it is interpreted... any lwa or regulation, no matter how well it is written, will alway be interpreted different (if wanted)... CITES works better in some countries than other, and personally, I think that the way it is interpreted in the USA is more on the "negative" than on the "positive" side...

 

[NYEric]

The issue is that in any bureacracy it's easier to take the lazy way out and classify more stuff as not legal than to learn about individual species and do research on the effects of trade in those species caused by differing CITES interpretation by individual countries.