Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2000 20:36:44 +0100 From: Paul Temple <paultemple@ecologycal.demon.co.uk> To: cp@opus.hpl.hp.com Message-Id: <aabcdefg2130$foo@default> Subject: RE: Proposed changes in CITES regulation
I am interested in changes to CITES/import rules, plant movement
controls, etc.
So let me add my two pennies worth.
First, nothing will make me believe that controls wioll apply in the
USA. I have been told by members of the USA botanical community,
spevifically by employees of Botanic Gardens in the USA, that the US
Customs deparetment does not intercept and detain plants imported by
Botanic Gardens that are already contravening Biodiversity conventions.
I have already reported to this group that some Botanic gardens in the
USA regularly send out search and collect groups to third world
countries specifically to collect very large volumes of plant material
in contravention of the biodiversity rules. In addition, most countries
in Europe interpret the biodiversity and other rules very differently
and far more liberally than the UK, which takes an absurdly strict
position.
To add insult to injury, third world (i.e. the source of most plant
material that is controlled by CITES or Biodiversity conventions)
countries are now actively ending donation of new plant material. This
is NOT because they do not want to allow it to be researched outside of
their own country. Agreements already exist to allow this and many
third world countries wish to encourage such research. However, lawyers
(i.e. the legal fraternity in general) are now involved in interpreting
the various controls on behalf of Botanic Gardens and then creating
agreements written in legalise. This legalise in impossible to
understand unless you are trained in legal matters and third world
botanic gardens are therefore refusing to trade as they can not afford
to translate the gibberish that legal people write.
I have moved form being a supporter of CITES/Biodiversity to a hater of
them and the supposed controls they purport to represent. The
individuals within CITES are largely OK, I've no wish to criticise or
offend most of them. It is those who create these absurd controls
without understanding of the actual science that are ignorant pen
pushers who do nothing but damage. The rules are not proventing habitat
loss nor are they controllinga significant prercentage of the illicit
trading. The rules are preventing the science and severely limiting
attempts to protect plants legitimately through their widespread (and
often non-commercial) introduction into cultivation.
Regards
Paul
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jan 02 2001 - 17:35:10 PST