Well, in all fairness, despite line breeding, ploidy changes, etc. Some of the nicest plants in existence still for many species are wild/field collected. A few examples:

Cattleya violacea 'Muse'
Cattleya violacea coerulea 'Indian'
Cattleya lueddemanniana 'Maruja'
Cattleya lueddemanniana 'Arthur Chadwick'
Cattleya trianaei 'Jungle Feather'
Cattleya trianaei 'Mary Fennel'
and many other trianaei
etc

Additionally, for some collectors, there is a mystique and pride about possessing and being able to grow and bloom field collected plants, sometimes regardless of the flower quality.

Don't get me wrong, I am not making a case for field collected plants. But I would be a hypocrite to denounce them outright. It is possible to do anything in a sustainable manner, especially given other threats to the plants' existence outside of orchid collection. Would I ever buy field plants from a large importer? No. Would I acquire field plants from someone whom I knew well, trusted and knew the circumstances of their collection (rescued from road cutting and deforestation, etc.)? Yes.

The important distincton in collecting plants from habitats being destroyed is what happens to the plants afterward. If the plants remain in country and no borders are crossed, that is altruistic and should be encouraged (and CITES is not a factor). If the plants are removed from the country - especially by Americas, Germans, Japanese, etc. - that is just exploitation under a different name. Better the plants should be left to die in order to create demand for artificially raised seedlings - especially when generated by the country of origin. I get rather sick of Americans - especially - who want to "salvage" a species instead of paying $8, $10, or $12 for an artificially raised seedling. Pillaging another country is still pillaging whether the plants are on the trees or lying on the ground.

It's 2009 and about time to respect other nations sovereignty over THEIR plants.

Eric

You can't be serious. So, allow entire natural populations and gene pools to die in favor of persistence of human-created, inbred, genetically limited gene puddles?

Dear Chris,

I am serious. They are not our plants - they are not ours to do with. It only takes a few years before the wild-collected plants would generally go out of cultivation anyway. Of the hundreds of thousands of wild-collected plants shipped out of places like Thailand and the Philippines, just how many do you think have persisted more than a decade or two in cultivation? We "save" them so they can be wiped out by Hurricane Andrew and Benlate.

As to plants in cultivation being "inbred, genetically limited" - that all depends on the choice of what is propagated. Granted, too much selection is made for round flowers for award purposes. Nobody is stopping anyone from randomly crossing two individuals to mximize heterzygosity.

No, better the doomed plants be left to die, nurseries get established in the tropics, and the people and government learn the value of the plants. Maybe then the Japanese tourists would actually be tourists and buy plants at the local nursery in Brazil - because it would be easier - instead of stripping them from the wild.

There is a lag time to getting an industry started but once started the system does work. Look at the shining examples of Ecuagenera, Floralia, Orquideas del Valle, etc. Once there is demand and the value can be added in the country of origin, the species can be effectively saved by the marketplace.

This is a case where the old conservation line comes in - Think globally, act locally. Salvage and preserve local orchids and let other countries do the same. If they want to destroy their orchids, that is their right.

Eric

I could not disagree more.

Re-elect Bush, invade Brazil, and impose your divine will. Your rights clearly are more important than those of Brazilians. You know better.

End of discussion

just for information, the inbred, genetically limited gene puddles are stay normally within the realm of horticulture and bring almost nothing to the conservation of species in the wild (no matter what AOS, DOG, SOG and Mandrake say) This is a population created to satisfy human needs, and nothing else!

my :twocents:

I'm not talking about my rights. I'm talking about the rights of plants that you think humans have the divine will to be lord and master over:

I do not believe it is anyone's right to destroy entire populations and gene pools of a living organism just because of some man-made political boundaries.

Also, just to throw another wrench in your flippant and poorly thought out argument: if they have the right to destroy all their wild plants, they also have the right to sell them to importers for pennies a plant. No? Which is it?

We are in complete agreement, that's part of my point.

Once again, nobody else can have an opinion!
I'm issuing the infraction here.


We WILL keep this place civil and enjoyable :tapfoot:

Now, it's the end of the discussion, the thread is being closed :(

Mauro, I apologize for closing the thread on your gorgeous plant but this conversation can only go downhill from here ;)