shipping to europe

[Gwallogwyn]

CITES and Global Climate Change

The disenchantment of the orchid-growing public
with CITES (Convention on Trade in Endangered
Species of Wild Flora and Fauna) is well known.
Despite arguments that monitoring orchid hybrids and
artificially propagated species consumes resources bet-
ter spent on actual conservation, the U.S. and some
other governments clearly view this differently. They
see their job as promoting species protection in the wild
in their native ecosystems. This view has not changed
even though it is apparent that enforcement of CITES
has done nothing to protect wild populations. The
black market in species of slipper orchids has flour-
ished to the point that some wild populations are now
extinct. The apologists point out that the role of CITES
is to monitor or prevent international movement of
these plants and not to protect them inside their home
ranges. But the rationale underlying CITES is that pre-
vention of trade should promote in situ protection of
species. Even though this is clearly not what happens
in practice, an official reluctance remains to loosen the
reigns on artificial propagation.
Like the term "trade"-which CITES takes to mean
any movement across an international border-CITES
has also redefined " artificial propagation" to serve its
own agenda. They see artificial propagation only as
propagation from legally obtained stock. This is a
shame, because the very existence of species such as
Paphiopedilu.m helenae, Paph. henryanum and Paph vietna-
mense now depends on ex situ propagation of plants
that were never legally collected. The progeny (by arti-
ficial propagation) of these species are now several
generations away from wild plants, which no longer
persist in nature. By its reluctance to face reality, the
U.s. Fish and Wildlife Service does conservation a seri-
ous disservice.
Worse is to come. With global climate change lies the
real possibility that species are no longer safe in pre-
serves or in their native ecosystems. When climate has
changed in eons past, ecosystems were able to migrate
and keep pace with their favored physical environ-
ments. Climate change is now so rapid that species can-
not move fast enough to keep pace with their required
conditions, and time is too short for them to evolve
adaptations that would protect them in their original
location.
In addition, in the past there were vast stretches into
which species could migrate. Man has now perturbed
the world to such an extent that no room exists to grow
new .forests artdother ecosystems. There are very few
places fer the species to migrate to. Mountain ecosys-
tems fare the worst. Cloud forests are very rich in
orchid biodiversity put they are also among the most
fragile. With global warming the orogenic forces (pro-
ducing clouds as moist air is forced up a mountain
side) now do so at higher and higher altitudes. Cloud
forests at the tops of mountains have no higher
ground to migrate to, and they are extremely vulnerable.

How do we maintain orchid biodiversity? There are
two approaches, and we need to follow both. We must
try to reverse global climate change. The technology to
do so already exists, but each person also needs to do
his/her share. We must reduce our own carbon foot-
prints significantly and that starts at home. The second
approach is to bring as many specIes into ex situ con-
servation as possible, and this is where CITES needs to
be adjusted. We must do everything possible to pro-
mote real artificial propagation, whatever the s9urce of
the pollen and seed. One can only nope that the feder-
al officials responsible for enforcing CITES will one day
recognize their responsibility and follow the spirit of
the law rather than the letter of the law.
-Harold Koopowitz

Orchid Digest, April, May, June 2008

[calvin_orchidL]

Hear hear!