Hi friends!
So many words were told on P.vietnamense - lack of substance,pure color,short leaved flowers in mass,only few good to choose. And how about P. hangianum - it is also big, and how about substance, long life and others for evarage plant?
Any good news?

Just call me Schulz Paphic

I have no hangianum but the Paph book I have says " Although it's colour is rather dull, P. hangianum will definitely become a favourite breeding parent for its enormous flower on a relatively small plant."

Does that help?

Stephan

It will prove to be a stunning parent... Some have clear nice color, but the plant size is not small ( ca.15-20").

I see helenae becoming much much more popular than hangianum for flower:vegetation ratio.
Hangianum... perhaps we can breed it with emersonii and correct some of natures mistakes! Good looking emersonii are so few and far between. All jokes aside, hangianum is an okay species, but I don't really care for it for hybrid breeding purposes... it is outclassed in all of its characteristics by many other species.

I think hangianums are very pretty! Don't really have one so I really don't have any experience with them. I have only seen photos of them. Are they available in the U.S.?

When grown from flasks, they appeared to be more hardy than vietnamense. I think they could be warm tolerant as well - flowering it in the lowland tropics is another issue.

Dear Paph-friends,
I had the good luck to see many many vietnamense in flower, in Taiwan taken from the nature, in Europe also from seed and I must say that this is one of the most beautiful species of the genus. You can find many plants with flowers in good substance and color. They grow very well and flower very easy. Especially the plants made by artifical propagation looks very hard and easy in culture.
The second species Paph. hangianum looks at first like a complexhybrid, but when you get the first time the fragrancy of the flower in your nose then you know why this species will be so necessary for hybridizing. There are so many beautiful clones in culture, especially in Taiwan, and there were made so many seedlings that we will have the opportunity to see many nice clones in th efuture.

For this time best greetings

Olaf

I see helenae becoming much much more popular than hangianum for flower:vegetation ratio.
Hangianum... perhaps we can breed it with emersonii and correct some of natures mistakes! Good looking emersonii are so few and far between. All jokes aside, hangianum is an okay species, but I don't really care for it for hybrid breeding purposes... it is outclassed in all of its characteristics by many other species.

I don't see too many people choosing helenae over hangianum, if given a choice. The popularity of the parvis is among the keenest in the genus.

I see helenae becoming much much more popular than hangianum for flower:vegetation ratio.
Hangianum... perhaps we can breed it with emersonii and correct some of natures mistakes! Good looking emersonii are so few and far between. All jokes aside, hangianum is an okay species, but I don't really care for it for hybrid breeding purposes... it is outclassed in all of its characteristics by many other species.

I don't see too many people choosing helenae over hangianum, if given a choice. The popularity of the parvis is among the keenest in the genus.

Where, in China?
I'm sure nearly everyone would rather have some excellent multiflorals if price and environment permitted.

I can see helanae being more popular in the long run...if it turns out to be an easy grower and bloomer. Multiflorals are spectacular, but they take up space and grow slowly....The parvi's may be (for me at least) the modst DESIRABLE of the paphs, but eventually a grower runs up against the harsh reality of of trying to bloom them! Except for delanatii, which is pretty easy, the other parvi's are either slow growers, reluctant bloomers, or both. Once in 20 years I got an armeniacum to bloom....and that plant took me over 10 years. micranthum will spike, but the buds blast....malipoense doesn't do anything, and I have several clones....emersonii turns out to be possibly the easiest to bloom, outside of delanatiii, but its also the slowest grower...but what a fragrance! I hope that hangianum has the same...needless to say, in my situation, the new parvi's will have to wait before I have experience....Take care, Eric

I can see helanae being more popular in the long run...if it turns out to be an easy grower and bloomer. Multiflorals are spectacular, but they take up space and grow slowly....The parvi's may be (for me at least) the modst DESIRABLE of the paphs, but eventually a grower runs up against the harsh reality of of trying to bloom them! Except for delanatii, which is pretty easy, the other parvi's are either slow growers, reluctant bloomers, or both. Once in 20 years I got an armeniacum to bloom....and that plant took me over 10 years. micranthum will spike, but the buds blast....malipoense doesn't do anything, and I have several clones....emersonii turns out to be possibly the easiest to bloom, outside of delanatiii, but its also the slowest grower...but what a fragrance! I hope that hangianum has the same...needless to say, in my situation, the new parvi's will have to wait before I have experience....Take care, Eric

If you buy good quality micranthum and armeniacum, they flower every year like a clockwork, and no bud blast. Hangianum is the fastest growing of all the parvis when properly grown, and the hunglanae variety of emersonii have some surprisingly speedy plants.

I see helenae becoming much much more popular than hangianum for flower:vegetation ratio.
Hangianum... perhaps we can breed it with emersonii and correct some of natures mistakes! Good looking emersonii are so few and far between. All jokes aside, hangianum is an okay species, but I don't really care for it for hybrid breeding purposes... it is outclassed in all of its characteristics by many other species.

I don't see too many people choosing helenae over hangianum, if given a choice. The popularity of the parvis is among the keenest in the genus.

Where, in China?
I'm sure nearly everyone would rather have some excellent multiflorals if price and environment permitted.

I was talking about helenae. unless of course you can get a better price for that at a show table than hangianum. multiflorals? yeah they're popular, but they're limited by their large size and relatively uniform color and shape. and I don't see stuff like gigantifolium and ooii causing that craze you saw with the initial flood of parvis from Yunnan. or maybe you don't remember that far back, it was the early 1980s. you don't think a flat of legal hangianum, or jackii, or vietnamense wouldn't be snapped up by the paph growers now? I beg to differ.

[quote="BozoI was talking about helenae. unless of course you can get a better price for that at a show table than hangianum. multiflorals? yeah they're popular, but they're limited by their large size and relatively uniform color and shape. and I don't see stuff like gigantifolium and ooii causing that craze you saw with the initial flood of parvis from Yunnan. or maybe you don't remember that far back, it was the early 1980s. you don't think a flat of legal hangianum, or jackii, or vietnamense wouldn't be snapped up by the paph growers now? I beg to differ.[/quote]

Ooii can be very amazing... Jackii has no potential it is a poor malipoense for most of them ! hangs and viets are really excellent for some selected plants; hangianum has the greatest potential of all !

Dear pauamum,
you wrote that Paph. ooiii ca be very amazing. Have you a better picture of. The pictures published in the first description were very bad and it is impossible to imagine how beautiful or bad the the species flowers.

Best greetings

Olaf

Dear pauamum,
you wrote that Paph. ooiii ca be very amazing. Have you a better picture of. The pictures published in the first description were very bad and it is impossible to imagine how beautiful or bad the the species flowers.

Best greetings

Olaf

I can post one quite soon. Taiwanese imported 600 plants in 2004 but to the best of my knowledge, most of the died or are heavily set back to seedling size.

The best have praestans-like flowers but many more flowers, up to 12-15 and a very long stem. The exporter of the 600 plants did not care in the species, only the money, and he did not take any pîctures, but some were really large and beautiful. Some are still alive in Peninsular Malaysia.

[quote="papuanumI can post one quite soon. Taiwanese imported 600 plants in 2004 but to the best of my knowledge, most of the died or are heavily set back to seedling size.

The best have praestans-like flowers but many more flowers, up to 12-15 and a very long stem. The exporter of the 600 plants did not care in the species, only the money, and he did not take any pîctures, but some were really large and beautiful. Some are still alive in Peninsular Malaysia.[/quote]

yes, please do if you get a chance. the only photos I've seen of ooii are these little flowers with short petals and an oversized pouch. 12-flowered praestans-like sounds quite intriguing though.

Hangianum hybrids will soon become popular. Good form, good size, nice fragrance, long lasting .. I can't see anything that isn't attractive ....

Plant size of hangianum is not that large (as papuanum mentioned 15-20") Somtimes you can select plant of that size but that is simply unrelated with flower size. Most of my flowering sized hangianum are below 12" leaf span and I cannot consider these as large ...

If anyone remember what I posted in the photo album a couple of month before about hangianum hybrids ... you can see how hangianum behaves in breeding. Almost all hybrids are compact in size and easy to flower then their parents .

Prices of selected hangianum are simply the most expensive paph species now owning to its great breeding potential. No way a great multifloral can compete with its price. That is the difference between old species and a brilliant new star.

I want one! When I win the lottery! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$:evil:$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Dear Paph friends,
I believe and expect that Paph. hangianum will be one of the best parents for breeding in future.
Because the flower must be the biggest in Paph’s species. It is not the length.
Although the color is not so clear as many Paph fans pointed out, we can recognize the week pint to be strong. In this case, we can expect the color of next generation to be dependent on the counter partner’s color. We can make the color as we like. At the first generation, it will be difficult to achieve the color we expect. But the purpose of breeding is not expecting the results of the first generation, F1. F1 is one step’s stage for our ideal results. We can enjoy so long time…continue to expect the better results. (Paphpaph)

Hrumphh, good things may be coming but I would settle for a single species plant of it.

Hrumphh, good things may be coming but I would settle for a single perfect species plant of it.

[quote="avery"]Hangianum hybrids will soon become popular. Good form, good size, nice fragrance, long lasting .. I can't see anything that isn't attractive ....

Plant size of hangianum is not that large (as papuanum mentioned 15-20") Somtimes you can select plant of that size but that is simply unrelated with flower size. Most of my flowering sized hangianum are below 12" leaf span and I cannot consider these as large ...

[quote]

Here is a pic of some of my hangianums :

http://cjoint.com/data/ipveOnGK0T_hangianum.jpg

Pot size is 14 cm, and those are not my largest one.

Beautifully grown plants!

Nice and healthy well grown plants.

Pretty bold to post photographic proof of illegal plant possession! Hoping for all sakes that the Feds can't hack into subscriber info... Nonetheless, your plants appear well-grown indeed -- if you have experience with Paph emersonii, how does size and leaf character compare? B. :shock:

I think it is legal where papuanum is located.

I don't think so.........

I don't think so.........

I think that I have a copy of the import CITES... and that several growers in Europe have got legal export/import CITES permits for that species. That for others matters, unless you insist heavily, some of them prefer not to make a copy of the CITES import and a proper invoice is another problem, namely tax fraud, but it is possible to buy flowering-sized plants that are totally legal in Europe, with all the proper documents.

There were 2 times where vendors brought to Europe legal hangianum plants, mature, and many others species. One in Dijon WOC, but the plants were sold with proper documents the day before opening to some others growers, and another one in Roma, by the Taiwanese, still sold legally, but to professionnal growers for most of them, the day before opening.

Some others export have been made from Thäiland to Europe, at least 4 that I know of, with proper CITES traced back to their country of origin ( Vietnam...)

One must not forget that hangianum comes from Vietnam and Mainland China, the latter has exported large quantities of flasks to Taiwan about 3 years ago. Vietnam itself exported a lot of flasks, with proper paperwork, to Germany, that had to recognize it after a single year battle, and to Taiwan.

Paph hangianum, and other slippers of its ilk, are only legal in countries which ACCEPT the original CITES export permit from Vietnam as legitimate under that country's stringencies for CITES export permits.

Such tringencies vary from one CITES import country to another. For example, Paph hangianum may have entered Taiwan legally if Taiwan chose to accept a Vietnamese CITES export permit. Hangianums exported from Taiwan, including flasks, will not be legal legal in the USA (for example) unless the USA is willing to accept the original Vietnamese export permit.

IN OTHER WORDS, plants imported legally into one country can be sold legally to a third party country ONLY under the particular regulations of that third party country. Needless to say, that holds for fourth, fifth, sixth....etc. parties down the export chain.

So if you bought Paph hangianum in Dijon (France) that originated in Taiwan (e.g.), and France does not accept the Vietnamese export permits ostensibly permitting the plants' cultivation in Taiwan, then you have in fact bought plants that are illegal.

If France had in fact not chosen, formally, to accept a Taiwanese 3rd-party permit, then their customs (or whatever) authorities were in the "wrong" in letting the plants into the country for further sale. I guess some of the hangianums mentioned made it to other EU countries, causing further potential legal problems.

IT MUST BE STRESSED that CITES is merely a set of guidelines that signatories to the convention accept; each individual member country establishes its own legal system for enforcement.

:? It would be easier for everyone, as well as extremely conservation friendly, if propagated (flasked) plants of new species were immediately exempt from CITES! :?

Can you also believe that, according to CITES, selfed or sibbed seed-propagated Paph species are considered "hybrids"? Of course they are not from a layman's taxonomic point of view, but from the conservation point of view, the gene pool existing in such plants is not natural. Divisions of wild-collected plants that have been "grown on" past any actually wild-collected growth are, of course, NOT considered hybrids. Still, Paph hangianum sibling-cross "hybrids" will be illegal if my above points apply.... :ohmy:

If you don't believe me on the above, go read the CITES code carefully, or give a ring to their education/outreach department in Geneva!

...................but to the issue, you are of course most likely to get into trouble if the rules are unclear in your country, or if you are uncertain of them. You take your own risk if you broadcast that you have the plants.

:!: :!: :!: I PROPOSE THAT MEMBERS OF THIS FORUM QUERY THE AUTHORITIES IN THEIR HOME COUNTRIES REGARDING THEIR ACCEPTANCE OF VIETNAMESE CITES EXPORT PERMITS FOR PAPHS, I.E., WHAT CONSTITUTES OK/NOT-OK, AND IF VIET CITES PERMITS HAVE *EVER* BEEN ACCEPTED FROM EITHER VIETNAM OR A 3RD PARTY COUNTRY FOR VIET PAPH SPECIES.

If they haven't been accepted, it's then time to petition for acceptance, or at least clarification of what it takes for acceptance to be given. IF YOU ARE A COMMERCIAL GROWER, this is even more important!

What does everyone think?

I really had no idea but what do I know! :confused:

[b]Paph hangianum, and other slippers of its ilk, are only legal in countries which ACCEPT the original CITES export permit from Vietnam as legitimate under that country's stringencies for CITES export permits.

Definitely no. Others countries do not have to accept the original CITES export permits. If Country A sends plants to country B with proper permits, and country B send them to the USA, actually the Scientific Authority from the country B has to testify that the plants are legally artificially propagated as per the terms of the convention. That's all... USA do not have to investigate the country A usually. If there is a mess, then USA have to complain against the Scientific Authority of the country B. That's the CITES rules.

I personnally know of at least 3 dishonnest countries that made permits, either CITES or permits to export flasks of paphiopedilum from legally wild-collected plants, and tried to invalidate them after a while, in order to get the market back to them... They lost control of some of their native species and the linked income.

Such tringencies vary from one CITES import country to another. For example, Paph hangianum may have entered Taiwan legally if Taiwan chose to accept a Vietnamese CITES export permit. Hangianums exported from Taiwan, including flasks, will not be legal legal in the USA (for example) unless the USA is willing to accept the original Vietnamese export permit.

Wrong, USA do not have to be "willing to accept". If they are faced with such a document, either they accept it, and that's CITES rules which applies, or they refuse it, and have to justify why, because the plants, if artificially propagated, have Appendix II rules that apply to them. They are not Appendix I anymore ( but the permit must mention they are Appendix I, artificially propagated).

Then the refusal reason can be challenged. On the other side... many importers have somewhat dirty hands, or not that clean hands, and they are not willing to make a court trial...

So if you bought Paph hangianum in Dijon (France) that originated in Taiwan (e.g.), and France does not accept the Vietnamese export permits ostensibly permitting the plants' cultivation in Taiwan, then you have in fact bought plants that are illegal.

No, if the plants are artificially propagated according to the CITES regulations, and that is proven, they are legal, period.

If France had in fact not chosen, formally, to accept a Taiwanese 3rd-party permit, then their customs (or whatever) authorities were in the "wrong" in letting the plants into the country for further sale. I guess some of the hangianums mentioned made it to other EU countries, causing further potential legal problems.

Hangianums from legal permits are legal everywhere, and spread all over EU. There is no challenge from the authorities, and no further potential legal problems. Even Germany, who initially challenged legality of vietnamense, had to allow this species because indeed they were artificially propagated as defined by the CITES convention and EU laws... and they were satisfied that Viet Nam actually issued export permits for flasks of those species.

:? It would be easier for everyone, as well as extremely conservation friendly, if propagated (flasked) plants of new species were immediately exempt from CITES! :?

They always are, if they are "artificially propagated as defined in the convention". Of course plants from illegal materials are not legal. But plants from seized material are indeed legal, providing the country of origin did not ask for the plants to be sent back, that's the AnTec Vietnamense source actually.

Can you also believe that, according to CITES, selfed or sibbed seed-propagated Paph species are considered "hybrids"? Of course they are not from a layman's taxonomic point of view, but from the conservation point of view, the gene pool existing in such plants is not natural. Divisions of wild-collected plants that have been "grown on" past any actually wild-collected growth are, of course, NOT considered hybrids. Still, Paph hangianum sibling-cross "hybrids" will be illegal if my above points apply.... :ohmy:

I can not believe it, because it is nowhere in the CITES convention. Plants of Appendic I species ( Paph species) that are clearly and undoubtly artificially propagated have Appendix II rules that apply to them, that's all. Paph species nowhere are considered as hybrids. On the other side, USA has been the only country for several years to make Appendix II CITES for Paphiopedilum species and hybrids, in severe infringement of the CITES treaty...

As for wild-collected plants, propagation parts from wild-collected plants CAN be considered as artificially propagated, if the Scientific Authority from the export country explicitely considers them as artificially propagated AND the motherplant stock is cared in a way not detrimental to its survival. You collect, grow a growth, remove it and sell it is not considered as artificially propagated.

If you don't believe me on the above, go read the CITES code carefully, or give a ring to their education/outreach department in Geneva!

...................but to the issue, you are of course most likely to get into trouble if the rules are unclear in your country, or if you are uncertain of them. You take your own risk if you broadcast that you have the plants.

No risks as long as there are back-ups records for the said plants.

:!: :!: :!: I PROPOSE THAT MEMBERS OF THIS FORUM QUERY THE AUTHORITIES IN THEIR HOME COUNTRIES REGARDING THEIR ACCEPTANCE OF VIETNAMESE CITES EXPORT PERMITS FOR PAPHS, I.E., WHAT CONSTITUTES OK/NOT-OK, AND IF VIET CITES PERMITS HAVE *EVER* BEEN ACCEPTED FROM EITHER VIETNAM OR A 3RD PARTY COUNTRY FOR VIET PAPH SPECIES.

You forget the flasks, always the flasks... they are not tied to the CITES permits at all ! Then CITES do not have to know anything about flasks of helenae or hangianums, as long as the parent plants are legal, or legally obtained.

If they haven't been accepted, it's then time to petition for acceptance, or at least clarification of what it takes for acceptance to be given. IF YOU ARE A COMMERCIAL GROWER, this is even more important!

The text is quite clear, but many commercial growers who do have access to such material will never want a petition. They can sell at blackmarket prices plants that are not, at least in Europe. They do not make invoice, do not pay taxes and so forth.

At the Dijon WOC, some stands who had legal hangianums, helenae, tranlienianum were sold out minutes after they displayed the plants. The professionnal growers who bought the plants have got the proper permits then, and they still sell those species without any invoice, because it makes them more money, they do not risk anything in selling those species, and they do not help their competitors to launder/get a clean plants...

Only one has the balls to make proper invoices with CITES numbers and copies of it.

Even ooii is legal for an handful of people around the world... There are legal plants of ALL the species in cultivation, the only point is "are the people who get these permits willing to share them with their competitors by releasing "fully legal" plants ( with an invoice I mean) " ? Answer is : NO

A further paradox is that selfed or sibbed Paph SPECIES "hybrid" flasks officially DON'T EXIST according to CITES iif their parents are of illegal provenance -- but, still, for import purposes, these non-existing plants must be considered illegal if the export permit(s) are not validated by the importing country! So, still no way out for Paph hangianum without making sure your country has accepted a Viet export permit as valid.

BTW, all Mexipedium plants outside of Mexico, which have never been legally imported anywhere, "do not exist" under these definitions -- but the US and other governments have not made a case with this plant since Mexico didn't raise cain like Peru did with Phrag kovachii. Actually, by so doing, CITES' turning their head on Mex has turned out to be a fantastic conservation measure for a plant that never existed in more than 6-7 (officially) specimens in a type locality that itself may no longer exist.

A further paradox is that selfed or sibbed Paph SPECIES "hybrid" flasks officially DON'T EXIST according to CITES iif their parents are of illegal provenance -- but, still, for import purposes, these non-existing plants must be considered illegal if the export permit(s) are not validated by the importing country! So, still no way out for Paph hangianum without making sure your country has accepted a Viet export permit as valid.

BTW, all Mexipedium plants outside of Mexico, which have never been legally imported anywhere, "do not exist" under these definitions -- but the US and other governments have not made a case with this plant since Mexico didn't raise cain like Peru did with Phrag kovachii. Actually, by so doing, CITES' turning their head on Mex has turned out to be a fantastic conservation measure for a plant that never existed in more than 6-7 (officially) specimens in a type locality that itself may no longer exist.

Paphiopedilum states that "(For all of the following Appendix I species, seedling or tissue cultures obtained in vitro, in solid or liquid media, transported in sterile containers are not subject to the provisions of the Convention)" There is no additionnal rules about legal or illegal parentage in the appendix...

There must never be a CITES permit for a flask anywhere, because this would not be legal indeed... flasks are always legal. National laws hoowever may change things from country to country.

Mexipedium, yes... but this was not in great danger. On the other side, kovachii is actually the best example of "how to make money a lot and quickly" with a very dirty story behind... and not Kovach's one !

As an addon, here is an offer for legal seedlings of hangianum :

http://cgi.ebay.de/Orchidee-Paphiopedilum-hangianum_W0QQitemZ7707490956QQcategoryZ28734QQssP ageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

Those are from the first batch of legally imported hangianums a while ago... and are publicly offered by now.

I also found Paph. hangianum here:

http://www.orchideen.com/Shop
On this page go to "Fundgrube".


B.T.W. I have to confess that I ordered one.
The only thing that is puzzling me is that these very young plants have a clonal name. Could be a mericlone I guess.

I also found Paph. hangianum here:

http://www.orchideen.com/Shop
On this page go to "Fundgrube".


B.T.W. I have to confess that I ordered one.
The only thing that is puzzling me is that these very young plants have a clonal name. Could be a mericlone I guess.

No, Flying Tiger x self is the correct label. Flying Tiger is a red type hangianum from Taiwan, flasks of 30 seedlings were on sale for 50$ a year ago. The price is actually excellent ! Paphs can not be mericloned commercially. Expect seedlings to grow faster than delenatii actually.

I really think we need clarification on CITES from CITES itself. The rules are contorted due to CITES guidelines and individual countries' legal structures for CITES enforcement. Thus, my previous statements and those of "papuanum" concur in mnay ways but use different language and therefore contribute to lack of clarity. I've tried one more attempt, but I won't try another: please see below a slightly edited excerpt of a letter sent by me to a third party:

"I'd been eager to respond this AM to "papuanum" 's comments on my points about CITES in the Slipper Orchid Taxonomy section. But, after some thought, I'm not sure that repeated exchanges are the best way to settle the issues. Still, I consider it very important that the convoluted regulations of CITES not be misrepresented on the Forum. Certainly it's possible that I've also made misrepresentations, although I have participated in (and helped teach in) a regional course given by CITES for police officers, Customs officers, and national CITES reps.

I think the most responsible thing the Forum could do is contact the CITES Secretariat in Geneva and ask for clarification. Stephen Nash (stephen.nash@unep.ch) is the Chief of the Capacity Building [training] Unit.

But for now, I'd like to comment based on what I learned from my training. I consider many of papuanum's statements well informed, but I think "he" is not clear enough. For example, consider this statement by papuanum: "You forget the flasks, always the flasks... they are not tied to the CITES permits at all ! Then CITES do not have to know anything about flasks of helenae or hangianums, as long as the parent plants are legal, or legally obtained."

True, flasks are legal only so long as the importing country accepts the parent plants as having originated from a legal exportation. But this oversimplifies to Forum readers. Let's construct an example (and this may be a little repetitive for clarity): Taiwan may have accepted an import of Paph hangianum as legal, but then flasks imported to the US via Taiwanese growers are legal in the US only so long as the USFWS is willing to accept that hangianum has been properly exported from Vietnam to Taiwan. That is, hangianum plants (and their flasked progeny) legal in Taiwan are not AUTOMATICALLY legal to import to the US. The US has its right not recognize the same export-granting Viet authority that Taiwan did. The US has the explicit right to investigate the "chain" of export/import permits to assess legality in the US. Very importantly for clarity: flasks do NOT automatically legalize plants! If that were so, then "legal" Paph vietnamense flasks and their occupants would have been actively sold in the US (e.g., originating from Taiwanese exporters) long before Antec got propagation and sales permission from the USFWS.

One MUST make the distinction between CITES *guidelines* signed onto by member countries and the *laws* used by member countries to enforce the CITES guidelines. This is where most confusion comes from. If, hypothetically, a Customs officer mistakenly permits import of Paph hangianum flasks in contravention of regulations set by the US CITES Scientific Authority, that does not change the legal breach -- the plants in flask will be illegal by US law, and with reference to CITES guidelines signed onto by the US, they will in fact "not exist".

The same general reasoning above applies to papuanum's claim that artificially propagated plants out of flask are Appendix II. True, they will be, but ONLY if the USFWS (e.g.) agrees that they were properly exported by the home-range country (and any further countries through which they may have changed hands). My comments about species Paphs being considered "hybrids" according to CITES follows directly from this propagated plants rule, i.e., drop from Appendix I to Appendix II provisions if all else is considered OK. Hybrid individuals are always Appendix II.

So, if we go back to the Dijon argument: If someone bought hangianum flasks there that had Viet CITES permits to Taiwan for the mother plants, but if then these permits were NOT acceptable to France (let's assume this for the sake of argument), then these persons are in possession of illegally obtained plants (under legal provisions of the CITES signatory country) that do not exist (according to CITES' way of considering them). "

Papuanum,

Thank you for this extra information. Also when it comes to mericloning and what is possible or not my knowledge is close to nothing, so forgive my mistake.

A red type hangianum hé.....................Yippe :-dance:.................... Ahum. Sorry I let my self go. :D
No serious. I have done some searching on the Internet but was unable to find a photo or describtion of 'Flying Tiger', so I didn't know what it looked like. Any hangianum would do for me, but I like the red types best.

Again thanks.

When it arrives I will take some photos to show what the specimen looks like.

All the best,

RZu.

[quote] Still, I consider it very important that the convoluted regulations of CITES not be misrepresented on the Forum. Certainly it's possible that I've also made misrepresentations, although I have participated in (and helped teach in) a regional course given by CITES for police officers, Customs officers, and national CITES reps.

I am teaching as well for 8 years now, courses with officers from several different countries actually...

I think the most responsible thing the Forum could do is contact the CITES Secretariat in Geneva and ask for clarification. Stephen Nash (stephen.nash@unep.ch) is the Chief of the Capacity Building [training] Unit.

Sometimes they are not the best to ask for that purpose. Read the convention and the resolutions, see the dates the resolutions have been published ( they are not valid BEFORE but only after), and judge by yourself. Implementation by countries can be wrong however, and you ar eright, local laws can make matters more complicated.

True, flasks are legal only so long as the importing country accepts the parent plants as having originated from a legal exportation.

Or flasks have been imported by the exporting country prior to the Res 11.11 CoP13, that is April 2000. Before, all flasks, of any kind, were legal...

Taiwan may have accepted an import of Paph hangianum as legal, but then flasks imported to the US via Taiwanese growers are legal in the US only so long as the USFWS is willing to accept that hangianum has been properly exported from Vietnam to Taiwan. That is, hangianum plants (and their flasked progeny) legal in Taiwan are not AUTOMATICALLY legal to import to the US. The US has its right not recognize the same export-granting Viet authority that Taiwan did. The US has the explicit right to investigate the "chain" of export/import permits to assess legality in the US. Very importantly for clarity: flasks do NOT automatically legalize plants! If that were so, then "legal" Paph vietnamense flasks and their occupants would have been actively sold in the US (e.g., originating from Taiwanese exporters) long before Antec got propagation and sales permission from the USFWS.

Quite not, because some countries never responds, or never publish their yearly reports, so it is impossible to investigate. Phytosanitary certificates are not investigated, yet those documents were enough to export flasks of all paphs from Viet Nam legally... Note that Viet Nam claimed once that they never allowed anyone to collect any orchid. Fortunately, copies of collect permits for paphiopedilum were in proper hands, and they had to cancel that statement...

The same general reasoning above applies to papuanum's claim that artificially propagated plants out of flask are Appendix II. True, they will be, but ONLY if the USFWS (e.g.) agrees that they were properly exported by the home-range country (and any further countries through which they may have changed hands). My comments about species Paphs being considered "hybrids" according to CITES follows directly from this propagated plants rule, i.e., drop from Appendix I to Appendix II provisions if all else is considered OK. Hybrid individuals are always Appendix II.


Quite not, Hybrids Paphiopedilum are Appendix I species in most countries that follow the CITES guidelines...

So, if we go back to the Dijon argument: If someone bought hangianum flasks there that had Viet CITES permits to Taiwan for the mother plants, but if then these permits were NOT acceptable to France (let's assume this for the sake of argument), then these persons are in possession of illegally obtained plants (under legal provisions of the CITES signatory country) that do not exist (according to CITES' way of considering them). "[/b]

The flasks were backed up by proper documentation, so this was not the problem. And no, Viet CITES permits are not the only way to have those species imported legally. Phytosanitary certificates are more than enough to export/import flasks, especially if the name of the species is mentionned on them, in this instance, the vietnamese phyto was correct...

People from outside the US always feel that we are too reactive in our complaints about CITES.....and that propagated seedlings from flask are legal everywhere, including here. However, CITES, as interpreted by the USFW service, is very strict, and follows the "fruit of the poisoned tree" doctrine.....and seedlings, even hybrids, no matter if they are in flask and clearly artificially propagated, are just as illegal as their parents, if the parents cannot be proved to be artificially propagated. Any of the flasked seedlings available in Europe and Australia are still illegal here. Witness our legal vietnamense's- only after confiscated plants had 1) been offered back to Vietnam- and refused, 2) been grown on vegetatively and flowered on the new growths, and 3) pollinated on the growths that had occurred in captivity, only then could flasks of vietnamense and Ho Chi Minh be legally sold. Of all the "banned" paphs, only gigantifolium is making an appearance now...still in flask. There are NO clearly legal hangianums, helenae's, or tranlienianum's. These may be available elsewhere in the world, and legal, but not in the US, given the USFW interpretation of CITES rules for App. 1 plants. Take care, Eric

Hi Eric & friends -

Are we through talking about CITES differences betw. the US and Europe, or? I agree with you last post, Eric.

Best from Beskriver

Hello to all the friends of Paphiopedilum.
Believe not that all that that each pais impose its criterion in the laws CITE is an error? If in their I gave signs the covenant CITE and subsequently other countries are added, therefore, that those countries be received to that regulation and they impose not their own criteria.
I have Paph. helenae and many other with their certificate CITE for EU. We are going to suppose that a commercial grower comes to expose to Dijon (France) and requests its permission to enter plants to France. Once those plants already are exposed in the show, if I buy a plant to this commercial cultivator, my plant is not 100% legal? ????
I believe that all this is an assembly for benefit to but of a commercial grower.