|
(Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of
wild fauna and flora)
Last updated 6-3-02
The 12th meeting of the CITES Plants committee
has occurred! As soon as I have time, I'll be reworking a
new document as well as recapping the news! Stay tuned!
After extensive research, I have discovered
exciting news for Paphiopedilum lovers regarding the status
of CITES regulations. I have broken
this down into several sections; you can use the links directly
above to immediately jump to topics on this page.
All CITES documents referenced below are
available in (.PDF) format and Microsoft Word (.DOC) format.
You can view these documents by clicking their links, or save
them by right clicking on the link and choosing "save
target as" from the menu. Some documents are not available
in .HTML (web) format; in these circumstances I have reformatted
these documents into .HTML for easy viewing via your web browser.
Most other links on this page point directly to the CITES
website, and all links open in a new window.
Currently, there are approximately 30 new
species and varieties of Paphiopedilum which are Illegal to
trade in. All species of Paphiopedilum are now listed on (and have been since the early 1980's) and
trade is restricted via the terms set forth in the CITES convention.
Legal trade in Paphiopedilums is allowed under and provided these plants are in compliance
with which allows for the legal trade of Paphiopedilum species
which were produced "artificially" (the well-known
flask exempt rule in trading and shipping orchids internationally).
However, the parents must also be collected legally, which
(for all practical purposes) is not allowed under , and therefore newly discovered species are
not legally available.
Fellow Paphiopedilum & Phragmipedium
Enthusiasts, it's time to act.
Below is important information for anyone
interested in seeing the over 30 "illegal" Paphiopedilum
species become
available. Together we can encourage a positive change in
CITES for the good of species survival, the economies of developing
countries, species diversity in captivity, and the enjoyment
of our hobby. The next and 12th meeting of the CITES Plants
Committee is scheduled for May 13th to 17th, 2002 in Lieden,
the Netherlands.
At the last meeting (3-7 of September, 2001
in Lankawi), Agenda Item 24.4 - Illegal Trade in Paphiopedilum
spp. (prepared by the United States)- was reviewed:
Links to the text of PC11 Doc. 24.4 ("Illegal
Trade in Paphiopedilum spp."):
- on the CITES website in
and
formats.
-
version on SlipperOrchid.com
In essence this discussion revolved around
the current status and black market trade of newly discovered
Paphiopedilum species. Points were made that the "flask
rule" and other aspects of Resolution Conf 11.11 were
being abused and the parentage of many black market species
could not be legal - thus the resulting progeny are not legal
either. This discussion was supplemented by information document
PC Inf. 8 (prepared by the Management Authority of Switzerland),
which contains a list of "some recently described taxa
in the genus Paphiopedilum".
Links to the text of PC Inf. 8 ("Some
Recently Described Taxa in the Genus Paphiopedilum"):
- on the CITES website in
and
formats.
-
version on SlipperOrchid.com
The second topic was enforcement issues,
primarily dealing with failures in the control of illegal
Paphiopedilum appearing on the black markets. This section
promoted one key solution which receives little mention in
the document, but is potentially a valuable tool for ALL Paphiopedilum
growers - the development of genetic testing to identify non-blooming
Paphiopedilum species. Remember the problem with sanderianum,
"Is it a true sanderianum or just another Prince Edward
of York?!" I believe there could be commercial value
in developing these methods as well, especially if these tests
could be performed at a reasonable expense.
This document concluded with 5 recommendations
to the CITES Plants Committee. In my layman's terms, they
are:
- Either improve the "flasked
seedling" exemption to eliminate the public's "perceived"
loopholes, or "[the flasked seedling exemption's] use
should be reconsidered altogether."
- Talk with the countries where these
new Paphiopedilums occur. Find out if they can actually
produce them and are allowing legal exportations of them.
If they are producing these species legally, encourage this
effort further in order to reduce black market trade.
- Work with these countries to exchange
technology and raise capacity to a level where they could
commercially produce these species. Train individuals /
countries to raise these species in a manner which doesn't
harm the existence of wild populations.
- Examine CITES nursery registration
guildines () and see if we can use these rules to more
closely control the trade of "illegal" Paphiopedilum
species.
- Develop a system to notify CITES
registered ranges of which species are 100% illegal.
The results of these discussions are simple.
The Plant Committee adopted the recommendations set forth
in the document (PC11 Doc. 24.4) and assigned to the United
States, United Kingdom, and the Secretariat with the job of
"collaborating and preparing a document for the next
Plants Committee meeting". This meeting is scheduled
to occur May 13th to 17th of 2002; about 4 months away. You
can view the "official" statement in 24.4 of E-PC11
("The Executive Summary of the 11th Meeting of the Plants
Committee").
Links to the text of E-PC11 ("The Executive
Summary of the 11th Meeting of the Plants Committee"):
- on the CITES website in
and
formats.
-
version on SlipperOrchid.com
The first recommendation adopted by the Plants
Committee relates to the "flasked seedling" exemption
for legal trade of artificially produced Paphiopedilum species.
The part that "scares" me is the suggestion that
if they can't find a way to change the orchid communities
"misconceptions", they might scrap this exemption
altogether. This would be a disastrous blow to ALL orchid
growers, and would be a step backwards, not forwards.
Simply - We asked "Dad" for the
"car keys" and he let us take them. If "Dad"
believes he can't trust us, he's going to take the "car
keys" away. Do you think "Dad" is going to
trust us with the "keys" again?
If this exemption is repealed, all other
points raised in the Plants Committee discussion are irrelevant
because it would become 100% ILLEGAL to trade all Paphiopedilums
internationally. This would limit gene exchange, creating
captive strains in each country of Paph. species that could
(in the long run) become isolated varieties and substantially
deviate from the natural species.
I am in high praise of recommendation #2.
This plan addresses a few issues with currently available
"illegal" Paphiopedilum species, asking:
- Does this country possess the capabilities
to actually produce the species we are seeing available?
- this gives us all the benefit of the doubt. Rather than
assume that all the illegal Paphs. were illegally collected
in the wild, perhaps they were actually raised in accordance
with CITES guidelines.
- Is this country allowing legal exportation
of invitro (flasked) specimens? If they can legally produce
the species in question, then they "could" show
up legally on the markets, PROVIDED that the country in
question is allowing exportation.
If the above conditions are met, then CITES
should ENCOURAGE the continued and expanded legal production
of these species. We can all agree that legally produced seedlings
can reduce or eliminate the pressure for "black market"
wild-collected specimens. This measure should be strongly
pursued.
Recommendation #3 is the most promising plan,
in essence proposing the setup of a species survival plan
(SSP) with the long term goal of producing commercially available
populations of ALL new Paphiopedilum species. #3 proposes
that in countries where invitro cultivation technology and
materials are not currently available, efforts be made to
put the tools in place for artificial culture of new Paph.
species. Training would be provided ensure the successful
production of seedlings in a manner which is NON detrimental
to the survival of the species in the wild.
The results of this proposition would be
a win-win-win situation. Captive populations of endangered
Paphiopedilum species would be developed (modern cultural
methods almost ensure success), thus ensuring species survival
in captivity, if not in the wild. Regardless of whether we
develop these captive populations, we may LOSE these species
altogether to more common and likely threats such as habitat
destruction, deforestation and pollution. These are the real
threats to the wild Paphiopedilum.
This also has the potential to provide a
great economic windfall for the countries where the new Paphiopedilum
species are found; we all KNOW how much rare species such
as Paph. sanderianum can sell for. I would even be in support
of controlled markets, where prices are fixed to ensure a
GOOD profit to the growers in question. Afterall, given the
chance to obtain these species in a legal manner, I believe
we'd all prefer that method.
The influx of new Paphiopedilum species into
the commercial market is also a great benefit to the industry
as a whole. It maintains interest in the Paphiopedilum genus
among existing growers. Additionally, these new species may
attract MORE growers to Orchids, benefiting the worldwide
Orchid industry as a whole.
It is my belief that this recommendation
is not an option if there are hopes to ensure the survival
and very existence of these Paphiopedilum species. Other Species
Survival Programs such as the Lake Victoria Species Survival
Program have been moderately successful in introducing once
endangered species into the commercial market (in the case
of the LVSSP it was Victorian Cichlid Fish). I believe that
a concept along these lines which included commercial growers
would be much more widely successful considering the expansive
and worldwide interest in Paphiopedilum Orchids among the
general public.
While my understanding of the fourth recommendation
is vague, I believe it implies two basic ideas. First, to
better control the trade of illegal Paphiopedilum simply by
enforcing the rules governing CITES registration of nurseries,
which are already in effect. Secondly, and more importantly,
to turn to these nurseries as an additional option for the
development of new species should the "range countires"
be unable to meet the requirements set forth in recommenndations
2 & 3.
If this is the intention, then care must
be made in the unbiased assignment of species production to
qualified nurseries. In the long run any new species production/commercial
operation should be "licensed" by CITES or another
governing body as the producer of the species (again, the
"world market" concept") and commercial release
should be made only when captive populations are sufficient
for the support and long-term captive success of the species.
Priority of commercial release should be made first to other
CITES Registered commercial growers. Once the need among these
growers is satisfied, the next stage of release would be made
to non-CITES growers and finally directly to the international
public.
The pricing of these first-release species
could be regulated in such a manner as to provide the original
grower with a reasonable profit for his efforts but to prevent
profiteering and price gouging. This regulation would further
reduce any remaining pressure for illegally collected wild
specimens, as the market prices would be fixed and kept at
a reasonable level. Alternately, in a benefit to CITES and
other organizations, these plants could be released through
auction, wherein base procedes are received by the grower,
but procedes above the base could be put to use to benefit
other CITES efforts with less public interest but of greater
importance.
This is an absolute necessity. After reviewing
the document PC Inf. 8 "Some Recently Described Taxa
in the Genus Paphiopedilum" it was unclear as to whether
all of the Paphs listed are considered at this time to be
"illegal species". Most notable on this list were
species such as P. henryanum and P. lynnae which are quite
commonly available worldwide, despite having been encompassed
by the genus wide listing of Paphiopiopedilum to CITES Appendix
I in the early 1980's. Furthermore, when consulting the Fauna
Database on the CITES website, many Paphiopedilum species
were absent. Those that are present were all listed at CITES
Appendix II species, when in fact they are now all considered
CITES Appendix I !
This set of circumstances illustrates two
key points. First, the effectiveness of commercial growers
in establishing and distributing captive populations of new
Paphiopedilum species (such as P. henryanum and P. lynnae).
Secondly, it illustrates the NEED for current information
as to the status of each Paph. species. The lack of current
information allows for the uninformed consumer to unknowingly
purchase a plant that could in fact be illegal. If CITES provided
a concrete, widely publicized and easily available list of
currently illegal species there would be far less trade in
"black market" species masquerading as legal specimens.
In addition to the 5 currently proposed plans,
I was also very intrigued by the concept of developing genetic
identification methods for non-blooming Paphiopedilum specimens.
These tests would provide valuable enforcement tools to the
agencies in charge of inspecting and controlling trade in
CITES fauna and flora; specifically in the identification
of species "blacklisted" by the recommendations
of #5. Additionally, if such tests could be developed which
were economical enough for the average individual and or commercial
grower to utilize, we would all benefit from this testing.
I encourage the CITES Plants Committee to consider researching
this idea as well.
Finally, we KNOW that illegal collection
and trade in Paphiopedilum species has already occurred. Owners
of currently illegal Paph species should be encouraged, without
threat of legal consequences, to come forward and donate their
plants to the captive breeding efforts set up in recommendations
2 & 3. This action helps to reduce the damage resulting
by black-market trade, and reduces the further need to obtain
wild stock in order to commence with captive breeding programs.
We can do a lot. We can make our voices heard.
It's that simple. I was able to ascertain the US and UK delegates
to the 10th meeting of the Plants Committee, and I am assuming
many of them were delegates to the 11th and will be at the
12th as well. I am also writing the CITES Secretariat (an
office of 27) and Chairman to express my views.
We need to ask the following of the CITES
Plants Committee with regard to the recommendations accepted
in PC11 Doc. 24.4 ("Illegal Trade in Paphiopedilum spp."):
- The exemptions of Article VII, paragraph
4 and provisions of Resolution Conf. 11.11 must not be repealed.
These exemptions and provisions allow for the legal trade
in all Paph species established in captivity (via legal
means) prior to the placement of the genus Paphiopedilum
on CITES Appendix I. These rules also allow for the trade
of all Paphiopedilum hybrids provided they do not consist
of parentage from "Illegal" Paphiopedilum. Additionally
these regulations also affect virtually all commercial trade
in plants from the family Orchidaceae. Therefore, revoking
these rules will shut down all legitimate global orchid
trade.
- Recommendations 2 & 3 are vital
to the long term survival of newly discovered Paphiopedilum
species. Furthermore, these recommendations will serve to
eliminate the illegal trade in Paphiopedilums by creating
a legitimate world market through which new species could
be legally introduced into the commercial Orchid Trade.
Resolutions must be drafted and approved to provide the
framework and guidelines necessary to accomplish these goals.
- Recommendation # 4 should be restructured
to clearly authorize the captive production of newly discovered
species by registered CITES nurseries if the "range
countries" are unable to meet or implement the guidelines
set forth in Recommendations 2 & 3.
- Recommendation #5 is vital for public
compliance with CITES regulations, and therefore must be
implemented in a manner that CITES Paphiopedilum species
information is readily available both to commercial growers
and consumers.
- Encourage enforcement agencies to
research and develop economical methods for identifying
non-blooming Paphiopedilum Orchid species through genetic
testing, and make this testing available to the public and
commercial growers. This public availability will help recoup
the costs of developing this program.
- Once commercial growing facilities have
been established for the culture of new Paphiopedilum species,
growers in possession of illegal Paphiopedilum species should
be encourage to voluntarily relinquish these plants without
legal action to the CITES growers. This concept is not unlike
the successful efforts by US law enforcement to collect
illegal and excess legal firearms.
I have provided the contact information for
MANY individuals who I believe will be discussing this matter
at the 12th Meeting of the Plants Committee. I have also included
the emails of important organizations, specifically the AOS
(American Orchid Society) and the British Paphiopedilum Society.
If you are looking for your local representatives, here is
a link to the Members of the Plants committee as found on
the CITES Website:
I encourage you to email or write them with
your support for creating a legal method of cultivating and
distributing the new Paphiopedilum species for everyone's
benefit. Doing this will eliminate the black market for new
species and ensure their survival for generations to come.
Please also share this with your fellow Paphiopedilum
growers and your local Orchid Societies. Encourage your peers
to contribute to this effort!
For those of you who like things the easy
way, . I have not
included the AOS or BPS in this link. Please do not ABUSE
this feature or SPAM these representatives; to do so would
be 100% counterproductive. Also, please note that you may
receive many "bounce-backs" on emails sent to US
Fish and Wildlife Represenatives as their website is currently
offline.
Not sure what to write? I've provided MY
letter as a starting point for you.
|
CITES Secretariat
International Environment House
Chemin des Anémones CH-1219 Châtelaine, Geneva
Switzerland
Tel: (+4122) 917-8139/40
Fax: (+4122) 797-3417
Email: cites@unep.ch
|
Prof. Dra. Margarita Clemente
Muñoz
Jardín Botánico de Córdoba
Avda. de Linneo s/n
E-14004 CORDOBA
Spain
Tel: +34 (957) 20 00 77
Fax: +34 (957) 29 53 33
Email: cr1clmum@uco.es
|
| |
ALBERT,
Mark
US Fish and Wildlife Service
Division of Management Authority
4401 N. Fairfax Drive Room 700
ARLINGTON, VA
22203
T: (703) 358-2095
F: (703) 358-2298
E: mark_albert@fws.gov |
Lieberman, Dr Susan S.
US Fish and Wildlife Service
Chief, Office of Scientific Authority
4401 N. Fairfax Dr. Room 750
ARLINGTON, VA
22203
United States of America
Tel.: +1 (703) 358 17 08
Fax: +1 (703) 358 22 76
Email: Susan_Lieberman@fws.gov
|
 |
|
ARCERY, John
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service-PPQ
Department of Agriculture
JFK International Airport Building 77, Room 1-27
JAMAICA, NY 11430 Room 750
ARLINGTON, VA
22203
T: (703) 358-1708
F: (703) 358-2276
E: john.n.arcery@usda.gov
|
LYKE,
Julie
Division of Scientific Authority
US Fish and Wildlife Service
4401 N. Fairfax Drive Room 750
ARLINGTON, VA
22203
T: (703) 358-1708
F: (703) 358-2276
E: julie_lyke@fws.gov |
|
BLUNDELL,
Arthur
AAAS Fellow US Environmental Protection Agency
3426 16th Street NW #308
WASHINGTON, DC
20010
T: (202) 564-3303
F: (202) 565-0059
E: blundell.arthur@epa.gov |
PETIT
DE MANGE, James
CITES Programme Co-ordinator
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service-PPQ
Department of Agriculture
4700 River Road, Unit 60
RIVERDALE, MD
20737
T: (301) 734-8295
F: (301) 734-5269
E: bud.petitdemange@usda.gov |
|
GABEL,
Roddy
Chief Consultation and Monitoring Branch Division of the
Scientific Authority
US Fish and Wildlife Service
4401 N. Fairfax Drive Room 750
ARLINGTON, VA
22203
T: (703) 358-1708
F: (703) 358-2276
E: roddy_gabel@fws.gov |
TIEGER,
Maggie
US Fish and Wildlife Service
Office of Management Authority
4401 N. Fairfax Drive Room 700
ARLINGTON, VA
22033
T: (703) 358-2104
F: (703) 358-2280
E: maggie_tieger@fws.gov
|
|
HALL,
Pamela
Division of Scientific Authority
US Fish and Wildlife Service
4401 N. Fairfax Drive Room 750
ARLINGTON, VA
22203
T: (703) 358-1708
F: (703) 358-2276
E: pamela_hall@fws.gov |
TORBETT,
Timothy
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service-PPQ
Department of Agriculture
389 Oyster Point Blvd., Suite 2
SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA
94080
T: (650) 876-9093
F: (650) 876-9008
E: timothy.j.torbett@usda.gov |
|
HENDRICKS,
Robert
US Forest Service
1099 14th Street N.W. Suite 5500
WASHINGTON, D.C.
20005
T: (202) 273-4730
F: (202) 273-4750
E: rhendricks@fs.fed.us |
|
|
Mr Bertrand von Arx
The Scientific Authority, CITES
Canadian Wildlife Service
Department of the Environment OTTAWA, Ontario
K1A 0H3
Canada
Tel: +1 (819) 953 14 29
Fax: +1 (819) 953 62 83
Email: bertrand.vonarx@ec.gc.ca
|
Dra. Patricia Dolores Dávila
Aranda
E.N.E.P. Iztacala
Av. de los Barrios s/n
Los Reyes Iztacala
Tlalnepantla, Estado de México
54090 MÉXICO
Mexico
Tel.: +52 (5) 623 12 19/27
Fax: +52 (5) 623 12 25
Email: pdavilaa@servidor.unam.mx
|
|
|
Dr. Rodrigo A. Medellín
Instituto de Ecologia, UNAM
Ap. Postal 70-275
04510 MÉXICO, D.F.
Mexico
Tel.: +52 (5) 622 90 42
Email: medellin@miranda.ecologia.unam.mx
|
MCGOUGH,
Noel
Conventions and Policy Section
Royal Botanical Gardens, Kew
RICHMOND
Surrey, TW9 3AB
T: (4420) 83325722
F: (4420) 83325757
E: N.McGough@rbgkew.org.uk |
TAYLOR
Kerry Conventions and Policy Section Herbarium
Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew
RICHMOND
Surrey, TW9 3AE
T: (4420) 83325743
F: (4420) 83325757
E: K.Taylor@rbgkew.org.uk |
|
The American Orchid Society
16700 AOS Lane
Delray Beach, FL
33446-4351
phone: (561) 404-2000
fax: (561) 404-2100
e-mail: theAOS@aos.org
|
The British Paphiopedilum
Society
30 Acorn Grove
Ruislip Gardens
Middlesex, HA4 6PL
England
Tel: 01895 632689
E-mail: royjoewhite@yahoo.co.uk
|
If you support the ideas set forth in this
article, there's a couple other things you need to do - email
me (
) and tell me! I will add your name with email and/or web
address to the list below; if the list gets too long I'll
place it on a seperate page and link to it (I HOPE that happens!).
Supporters are listed in the order they contact me. Consider
it a digitial petition.
One last thing...if you have a website, please
link to this page -
and SPREAD THE WORD. Together, we can make
a difference.
In order for these efforts to be sucessful,
you must participate. Why bother? Well, take a look at the
right. Paphiopedilium vietnamense is currently an ILLEGAL
Paph. species to own or trade in. If we are successful in
getting new CITES regulations proposed and accepted, we will
find ourselves with a vast new array of species to breed and
grow. We will also be able to ensure the survival of the species
in captivity, regardless of events in their native country.
If our efforts are successful, YOU may someday be able to
legally own such a charming species as P. veitnamense, at
the same time knowing that wild populations were not harmed
in the production of this plant for you.
For comprehensive information on CITES, visit
the official website at
Also, I encourage you to read Dr. Toshinori
Tanaka's article,
|
