What's new
TerraForums Venus Flytrap, Nepenthes, Drosera and more talk

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

A nagging question in the back of my head

While visiting my friends shop the other day he was talking about CITES paper work and proof of his plants origins and full documentation of his propagating the plants in his own nursery and TC lab.

After getting home and chilling out a while I  got to wondering. Do persons such as I (and the traders on this board) need this paper trail when mailing App. 1 and App 2 species within US borders even though they are artificially propagated? N. rajah and N. khasiana are both App. 1 Nep species and the rest are App. 2.

I wonder even more after hearing the rumors of the AOS having people arrested for presenting Slipper orchid species plants for judging at shows without a corraborating paper trail and accompanying paperwork for their plants.

...just  paranoid and looking for someone to dump gas on my fire!  
biggrin.gif
 
i was quite worried about that too because in the book "A guide to carnivorous plants of singapore", i read that it is illegal to import or export Cps to or from singapore. Ill try to find the book and quote it.
now im not so worried about it because i found out that almost every cper ships Cps around.
 
I'd only be worried about overseas shipping. Shipping within the US of Nepenthes is not a concern, only with our NATIVE CP's, S. oreophila for example. But if and when the CITES people barge in my greenhouse and claim my plants are illegal, then I'll worry about it!
 
When I mailed a N.Ventricosa to the U.S. earlier this year, I had a CITES document completed eventhough it's not listed on CITES. It was free and only took 5 mins... but then I had to make the trip to the inspection office anyway for a phyto doc. My 2 cents.
 
Charles,

Was there any question from the Wildlife Dept as to the validity of the parent plant being artificially propagated? That's what I'm most concerned about since some of my plants are no longer TC plantlet sized "babies" how can I prove these larger plants have not been poached and smuggled to me? I have no documents proving that my plants are from TC or other artificial propagation means. I have invoice receipts for them from the US distributors but no government paperwork stating thier exemption from CITES due to being TC or Art Prop.

Is it enough to have a list of where the plants are from stating that the plant originated from Borneo Exotics as a TC clone or is it necessary to have proof of it being a TC clone to be allowed to legally cultivate and propagate it?

All species of Nepentheaceae plants are included on CITES Appendix 2 except for N. rajah and N. khasiana which are on Appendix 1. At least, that's what my general import permit paperwork says.

How about you Nursery fellows, Tony or Rob what can you tell us?
 
CITES are for international trade only so you don't need them for shipping within a country. The importer must however keep all documents for proof of proper importation. It is not necessary to include them along with the plants when sold/traded within the destination country. People purchasing listed plants should keep the receipts of where they purchased them. If US officials had any questions there would be documentation they came from someone else then.
The problem with the Paphs. and AOS is that there are a number of Paphs. (and Phrags) which have been discovered AFTER CITES was implimented. So the situation arrises how these plants got into culture when they should not be (yet). There can be only one explanation when a recently discovered plant protected by CITES shows up in a show or on a judging table fully mature and in flower.

BTW artificially propagated N. rajah and N. khasiana are classed as appendix 2, not app. 1. In this instance it is the overseas grower required to prove to the CITES people they are artificially propagated in order to get this classification. Tony
 
Thanks Tony!
That clears up much of what I've been worrying about. I still have questions about the availability of certain species of Nepenthes and Orchids then, since CITES was developed some 20-30 years ago and these "new" plants are widely available. Is there some kind of "special dispensation" given by member countries for botanists or nurseries to do legal TC of new orchid and nep species?

I know, I'm likely asking some "dangerous" questions here which probably should be asked privately but I think it may be important for all growers to know one way or another.

One more:
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]]...artificially propagated N. rajah and N. khasiana are classed as appendix 2, not app. 1.  In this instance it is the overseas grower required to prove to the CITES people they are artificially propagated in order to get this classification.[/


Does this mean I (the "overseas grower") may need documentation for my N. rajah or do you mean solely the place where they are being TC'd and subsequently exported?

Sorry to be so buggy-just wanna know where I stand! I don't know what I'd do if the feds busted in and confiscated all my plants...

My last words would probably be "you'll pry it from my cold dead hands!"
biggrin.gif
 
Npe grac,If the cites people barge into your green house and start tacking\destroying things you have the legal rights in most states to open fire!

Though I wouldnt kill them....just put them into a lot of pain!
biggrin.gif


They aren`t touching my plants!
 
Perhaps in the state or anarchy!
wink.gif


I wouldn't suggest shooting at federal agents arriving on an investigation, especially on a public forum, joke or not!
 
  • #10
Hi all:

This is my favourite kind of topic. What if i have a large rajah and i decided to make cuttings of it and sell them or exchange them for different plants. Can i still get arrested for trading a prohibited species?. If i must be arrested, then the laws are very trashy, because i am not stealing them from the wild nor i am helping with the extinction of a particular species. On the contrary, by propagating them, one is making sure that the species is kept from extinction.

Agustin
 
  • #11
Gus,
This is what I'm concerned about. And I think this is one of those "grey areas" of CITES legislation for the end growers like us. Incase there should ever be any questions about my own plants I have photographed them throughout their growth in my chamber (which can be seen in the background of the photos). Whether this could actually constitute "proof" of artificial cultivation or not would be up to the grand inquisitors.
 
  • #12
Josh,

Since you've brought this topic up... it's given me lots to think about also.

The plant inspector didn't ask me where I obtained the plant. He was more concerned about diseases and insects. He did look up information on the species itself before completing the documentations. If I wasn't there, he might have misclassified the N.Ventricosa.

It is my gut reaction to keep all necessary paperwork when my BUTT is on the line. Call it a natural, white-collar, pencil-pushing habit, but I keep all documents that can prove that I'm innocent of any wrong doing. For myself, I don't own any CITES app. 1 yet (maybe one day?), but I would keep a paper trail to be safe (receipts, invoices, etc)... just so I can sleep at night.
 
  • #13
I guess if the nursery reciepts/invoices are generally all that's needed when only cultivating the plants and selling/trading cuttings incountry then I won't be too concerned as I have no intentions of international shipping.

I have also found out ("through the grape vine") that there are special exceptions by CITES for artificial TC propagation to certain nurseries. I wonder how they swing that? "Donations" I supose! I guess I shouldn't worry about it myself and just be sure to buy from people I am "sure" of importing legal plants!

Ignorance is bliss...
rock.gif
 
  • #14
Dear all:

I think CITES was designed to crack down on illegal seed and plant collection that will lead to the extinction of a particular species. But when it comes to TC, well it should be the opposite. TC plants should be exempted from CITES certificates, but i guess that's not the case.

Agustin
 
  • #15
Actually CITES was designed to crack down on animal exploitation such as: Ivory, Zebra skins, elephant foot umbrella stands and gorrilla paw ashtrays and other sick things. Plants were added to CITES "at the last minute". Even some of the people responsible for helping write the laws have said that when they implemented the treaty they didn't feel it was complete as pertaining to flora. Ammendments are being written as the lawyers who control the treaty are being taught that not all trade in endangered plant species is bad when you take the success rates of Tissue Culture and other art prop means into consideration. But as with all lawyers and politically volitile issues such as wildlife conservation chnge happens very slowly.

For example: if only 50 seeds of Nep rajah out of 5000 germinate and grow to maturity in a wild location but nearly all 5000 germinate invitro in the laboratory, then that is an amazing success! If even only 500 are able to be raised to maturity by competent growers, that is already 10x the success of plants in situ for the same period of time. And this doesn't include any propagation by cuttings by those plants in cultivation.

I have nothing against CITES intentions, it's a fantastic policy that I wish was farther reaching (including shutting down circuses and animal trick shows) but I wish the implementation was speedier in legislation in regards to flora when reliable cultivation methods are known.
 
Back
Top