Legal vs. Illegal

[SlipperKing]

Hot off my email press! Info passed on to me by my local Judging Chair


On Sept 11, 2012, at 6:56 PM, Julius Klehm wrote:
I received the following from Harry Gallis and I figure that it is worth the reading for all of us. I値l need help in this as each team usually checks the background of each orchid awarded. Therefore, you can check with the exhibitor after an award to see if it follows the correct protocol. When in doubt, leave it to me to handle. I知 copying some of our Paph growers with this e-mail so, hopefully, it does not catch anyone by surprise. I知 sure that I致e left someone out so please feel free to send this on to anyone else. Thanks, Julius

The following very useful information was provided to me by Ron b/c I find that I have trouble keeping track of what is what because we see these so infrequently. I have pasted this into my Blackberry for instant access. I suggest that each center post this information where awards entry is done. In addition, it is important that accurate research with regard to the breeding line be carried out by teams judging Paphs that could have these species in their background. This would preclude our having to nullify awards because they were inappropriately judged or documented.

Paphiopedilum gigantifolium and its hybrids are simple - they are considered legal ONLY if they can be connected to a receipt from Piping Rock Orchids. Period.

Paphiopedilum hangianum is simple - NO hybrids are legal and the only species plants that are legal were brought into this country in July of last year. They were mature plants and could be flowering soon.

Paph. vietnamense and helenae - all are considered legal

Paph. wenshanense are considered legal because they entered the country during a period where they were considered to be x conco-bellatulum

ALL other Paph species described after 1990 are not in legal cultivation.

1. Cultivars of species released into cultivation by Hengduan Biotech (Holger Perner) from South China and hybrids between these species and other pre-ban species of Paphiopedilum may be AOS judged. To complete processing of the awards, exhibitors will be required to provide proof suitable to the AOS that such plants are traceable to legally released material. Such proof must include a copy of the CITES document issued to Hengduan Biotech under which the plants were entered into the country in which the exhibitor resides AND a copy of the receipt of sale transferring said plants from Hengduan Biotech to the exhibitor. If the exhibitor has purchased plants from third parties, a complete chain of receipts will be required in order to complete award processing.

2. Cultivars of Paphiopedilum gigantifolium and hybrids between this species and other Paphiopedilum species and hybrids legally in cultivation may be AOS judged only if the cultivar can be traced directly to plants sold by Piping Rock Orchids. To complete processing of the award, the exhibitor will be required to furnish a copy of the receipt from Piping Rock indicating purchase of the plants and a copy of Piping Rock's EXPORT CITES list on which Paph. gigantifolium is listed. If plants were purchased from sources other than Piping Rock directly, for the award to be processed, a complete chain of sales receipts must be provided that trace the cultivar awarded from the exhibitor to a plant originally sold by Piping Rock.

Copies of the above documentation should be forwarded to Ron to keep on file at AOS headquarters and a statement that documentation is on file should be included in the award description. Harry

Harry A. Gallis MD

19401 Mary Ardrey Circle

Cornelius, NC 28031

 

[SlipperFan]

You beat me to it, Rick! I just got this email (from a different judging center) today!

 

[aquacorps]

When did Helenae become legal?

 

[gonewild]

Is this legal status based on fact from USDA or is it simply the "official" judging committee opinion?

 

[NYEric]

This is crap.

 

[kentuckiense]

When did Helenae become legal?

When so many were imported that it became impossible and impractical to try to differentiate, I imagine. Same with vietnamense. And soon to be same with hangianum et al.

 

[SlipperKing]

Is this legal status based on fact from USDA or is it simply the "official" judging committee opinion?

I have the impression its an AOS "policy" with obviously no official rules,status or mandated stance laid down by a governing body.

 

[Cheyenne]

I am not sure how this is supposed to work. When I bought my hangianum from hengduan the CITIES just listed everything they brought in, for example paph species 17 flasks, paph hybrid 20 flasks, paph hybrid 80 plants. It does not list what the species or crosses are. It says no hangianum hybrids are legal, but they could have brought alot of hangianum hybrids in under that cites. Makes no sense.

 

[Justin]

curious what the stance on adductum var. antium is. i would think it is just considered adductum?

 

[Cheyenne]

I have been wondering about anitum too. It should be legal because its a variety, same with jackii. But I have been asking vendors to order some and they won't do it. Also I have been trying to find if I can import them anit has gone nowhere. If Cites doesn't care about varieties then why can't we order them. Glens gigantifolium are legal but he is out of them, so I asked him if he is going to order more and he said it wasn't going to happen. Its ridiculous because Sams gigantifolium came from the same source as Glens. Glens just went to Germany first them imported to the USA. Alot of unanswered questions still and I don't know who to ask.

 

[slippertalker]

Paph anitum is considered a variety of adductum, so it is ok.

These rules are based on USFWS "legality" decisions. Paph helenae was legal by being produced in a rescue center as was vietnamense.

I am trying to re-write the rule to accept all plants regardless of legality with the liability between the exhibitor and the government authorities. We will see how that is received......

 

[Gcroz]

I am trying to re-write the rule to accept all plants regardless of legality with the liability between the exhibitor and the government authorities. We will see how that is received......

Good luck with that!

I think that AOS id performing a CYA service for itself, and I don't blame them. Plus, it is nice to know instead of exhibiting an "illegal" plant so that the plant police know where you are. Eventually, these plants will be legal here, just going to be a long time and many generations of breeding that foreign growers will have a leg up on.

I have a Paph. Chiu Hua Dancer from Glen and the award was nullified and is now being re-instated. Personally, it really doesn't take much to ask for documentation and to store it, digitally or on paper. That way you are "protected" since this is a situation where " Sh*t rolls up hill," if you have a no-no plant with the documents from the seller.

Here are my questions: what will USFWS do about the flasks of illegal plants that the OK'd into the country and were sold at the WOC in Miami? What is USFWS doing about the illegals that according to Roth's CITES database info were legally imported into the U.S.? What is AOS going to do about these?

 

[Cheyenne]

Exactly, that CITES database shows many importations of gigantifolium that someone decided were okay to come into the country. Glen Decker didn't import all of them. He made one imporation, why are only his leagal?

 

[SlipperKing]

I have another listing emailed to me from Anita Aldrich at the same time I recieved this one. I will post it as well. The 2nd listing addresses many other species, paph anitum being one and called illegal! It should be treated as delenatii v. album and vinicolor are currently treated but apparently not.

 

[Cheyenne]

That was another point I was going to bring up. The vendors I have tried to get to order anitum give me the talk about the parent plants have to be collected legally blah blah blah. But you can order as many delnatii var album or vinicolor as you want from whomever you want. They seem like they were all over the market recently after they were found. I may be wrong but haven't some of them been awarded?

 

[NYEric]

Good luck with that!

Here are my questions: what will USFWS do about the flasks of illegal plants that the OK'd into the country and were sold at the WOC in Miami? What is USFWS doing about the illegals that according to Roth's CITES database info were legally imported into the U.S.? What is AOS going to do about these?

LOL! Forget the flasks! What about the pile of hangianum juvies i saw sold with documents at WOC!?

 

[gonewild]

I am not sure how this is supposed to work. When I bought my hangianum from hengduan the CITIES just listed everything they brought in, for example paph species 17 flasks, paph hybrid 20 flasks, paph hybrid 80 plants. It does not list what the species or crosses are. It says no hangianum hybrids are legal, but they could have brought alot of hangianum hybrids in under that cites. Makes no sense.

Probably since the"in-vitro" plants are exempt from CITES there was no need to list the species. In fact there probably was no required CITES certificates for the flasks. Any species entering under CITES would have to have the species name listed.
There should be a Lacey Act document for the importation that lists the species.
So in reality the CITES certificates you mention do nothing to show legality of the plants you bought. What you would need is a document from the importer stating that the hangianum flasks you purchased were in fact part of that specific importation.

 

[NYEric]

I still would like to know how a judge or organization reached such a conclusion. I re-checked the CITES trade database and, in fact, according to CITES, from 2001 to 2009, 14 cultures (flasks) and 56 live gigantifolium plants were imported into the USA. Additionally according to the USFWS hundreds of un-identified Paphiopedilum species were legally imported into the USA. Glen's plants may be in this quantity but I would be willing to bet not all of them went to Glen!

 

[gonewild]

There is a catch to common sense.
Just because plants entered the USA with legal documents does not mean they originated from a legal source.
We now have to abide by the Lacey Act for all plants.

The Lacey Act comes into effect when a plant is commercialized or transported across a domestic or foreign border.
What really screws us up here is the Lacey Act makes it a criminal offense to commercialize or transport any plant that is associated with any violated law in any Country at any time. So technically Paph species from Vietnam could never be legal under the Lacey Act until Vietnam issued export permits and then only those plants exported after that date could be legal.
It is a bad law and a big mess and it is enforced by USFW.

 

[nikv]

So what is the AOS gonna do ten years from now when Paph. gigantifolium has been propagated repeatedly and the seedlings sold? And then again twenty years from now? I don't see how this is sustainable.