Date: Sat, 17 Apr 99 00:20 EDT From: Dave Evans <T442119@RUTADMIN.RUTGERS.EDU> To: cp@opus.hpl.hp.com Message-Id: <aabcdefg1382$foo@default> Subject: Re: CITES and ICPS
Dear Nigel,
> I can understand people wanting to take a pragmatic approach to
> CITES legislation, but please make such arrangements privately. The
> burgeoning scientific reputation of the ICPS means that one day it
> might be able to negotiate some sort of group licence as the UK's
> NCCPG ahs been able to intra-Europe. To that end it would be
> helpful if this ICPS 'public forum' were perceived to be squeaky
> clean.
I don't understand the point of this letter. Are you saying
that we should not talk about Cites? Well, I sure will. I think
it doean't do any thing to truely protect plants and that this
law should be re-written so that fines incurred against poachers
are used to 'buy' more land for parks as well as underwrite more
protection to such land and plants. But this shouldn't be *the*
source of such revenue. Just a drop in the bucket.
Second, I think it is ridiculous to require people to buy permits
for protected plants when such plants aren't even native to their
respective countries.
Also, I am very curious as to what the money raised from buying
permits is used for?
Again, just what is CITES supposed to do??? If the people
charged with inforcing this law don't understand what plants are what,
how can this law hope to work? Is it even suppose to? Or is it
there so people can pat themselves on the back saying what a great
job we have done to protect natural resources, even as more and more
species go extinct?
Dave Evans
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jan 02 2001 - 17:31:57 PST