orchid talk logo

2006 Archived Messages


Click on the week you require.
To return to the main Archive index, click the button at the bottom of the page.
Links to all the Photos and other images accompanying the list messages can be found on the Images page.

MONTHDATEDATEDATEDATEMONTHDATEDATEDATEDATE
January 1-7 8-14 15-21 22-31 February 1-7 8-14 15-21 22-28
March 1-7 8-14 15-21 22-31 April 1-7 8-14 15-21 22-30
May 1-7 8-14 15-21 22-31 June 1-7 8-14 15-21 22-30
July 1-7 8-14 15-21 22-31 August 1-7 8-14 15-21 22-31
September 1-7 8-14 15-21 22-30 October 1-7 8-14 15-21 22-31
November 1-7 8-14 15-21 22-30 December 1-7 8-14 15-21 22-31

1—7 October

From: Tina Stagg
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: Storing bark
Date: Sun, 01 Oct 2006 16:20

Greetings from a new subscriber.

I have recently managed to get some good quality bark in 70 litre poly sacks. Being new, it has a certain moisture content. As I now have a dedicated orchid shed with shelving I would prefer to decant it into rigid polythene boxes, where it will gradually dry out as the (optional) lids do not fit well. Does this really matter? I am going to soak it before use anyway to remove any tannins etc. I have always kept bark in its original sack before, with the tops folded over to conserve moisture. Comments would be appreciated.

Tina Stagg

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: Geoffrey Hands
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: Re: [OrchidTalk] Unwanted guest.
Date: Sun, 01 Oct 2006 19:45

I wish I knew !

I use Ms Outlook 2003 - because the side-by-side diary function and
›contacts“ are so convenient , and also all will then sync‹ with my Acer
hand-held which is the diary I take away when I go on holiday etc ; if I put
a new contact or a reminder into that, then again it sync‹s in reverse to
add it all to my PC . I did try to use Outlook Express , but couldn‹t get
the sync, and it was a nuisance going back and forth between two different
programmes.

But why it should start ( and stop) inserting code into messages, is not
understood . It definitely has a mind of its own „ for example it used to be
set up so as to show me the first 2 lines of each message in the ordinary
view pane , but now has gone back to just showing me the name of the sender
and the subject „ and I can‹t get it back to where it was. I even bought
this thick ›OUTLOOKŶBible“ „ 800 pages of it „ but on any subject
whatsoever, I read until my eyes glaze over and I‹m never any wiserŶ

Roger Grier wrote:

Geoff, just what is wrong with your messages ???

Rocky.

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: John Stanley
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: Re: [OrchidTalk] Geoff's problem emails
Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2006 02:00

Hi Geoff,
Re. ; your problem. You've almost certainly been around this circuit but
just in case not, are these any use? I stumbled upon the second when trying
to find why I have occasional cursor lock-up with any mouse on any machine
(virus? − apparently not. Spy/adware? no problem. Mouse failure? Tried five
diff ones! Could be a case of an ill wind . . .
http://www.microsoft.com/office/outlook/prodinfo/tour/manage.mspx
http://www.bullguard.com/forum/11/Outlook-2003_17626.html
http://www.slipstick.com/outlook/sync.htm
Off topic I know but there must be someone out there who can get English out
of Geoff's mails and us all back to orchids.
John

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: Gordon Walker
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: Re: [OrchidTalk] Unwanted guest.
Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2006 07:10

Could it not be that your computer is accepting automatic updates from
source and this is what can cause changes to occur? Gordon.

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: Geoffrey Hands
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: Re: [OrchidTalk] Unwanted guest.
Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2006 10:05

Certainly a possibility − I am surprised at how often, when I shut down,
there is a delay whilst a number of updates are installed...

I will certainly follow up the lines suggested by John and others , to try
an eliminate this nuisance , but the odd thing is the way it seems to come
and go in a single session . Incidentally, the other day was the first time
I read it in a message as I was composing it − usually it only appears when
I read my own messages after relay by Tricia , which had previously led to
doubt as to where the code originated , i.e. in my PC, in virgin.net, in
Tricias PC etc... but there seems no doubt now , that it down to my machine.

Geoff

Gordon Walker wrote:

Could it not be that your computer is accepting automatic updates from
source and this is what can cause changes to occur? Gordon.

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: Ron Newstead
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: Re: [OrchidTalk] Unwanted guest.
Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2006 12:10

I use Outlook, Geoff, and have had no problems with it but I am not sure
about which version it is.

Ron

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: Andy Mckeown
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: Ascocenda Sennezauber
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2006 12:30

Ascocenda Sennezauber

I bough this plant some months ago but can find no reference to it − however I spell it- in the RHS register. Anyone know it's parentage?

Andy

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: Andy Mckeown
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: vandas and light direction
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2006 12:35

I am new to growing these. When I hang them up should they be orientated in any particular way with regard to the light to keep the fans growing evenly?

Andy

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: John Stanley
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: Re: [OrchidTalk] Ascocenda Sennezauber − eureka!
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2006 17:40

Andy,
Have you tried using Yahoo or any other search engine and simply donging in the name? I find loads (OK Many!) (well several) (at least more than a few) references and also a lovely photo so that you can check that it is what your label says! at;

http://search.yahoo.com/search?pAscocenda+Sennezauber&fryfp-t-500&toggle1&cop&eiUTF-8
www.roellke-orchideen.de/Preisliste/Van_Index/Van_Quick_Info.html −

Hope this is useful
John

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: nancy
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: Re: [OrchidTalk] Ascocenda Sennezauber
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2006 17:40

Hi Andy -
A googlesearch produced a few hits
http://www.google.com/search?hlen&qAscocenda+Sennezauber&btnGGoogle+Search
including a very lovely photo.
None, unfortunately, in English.
Cheers − Nancy

~~~~~~~~~~~~
"If it's beautifully arranged on the plate, you know
someone's fingers have been all over it."
-- Julia Child

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: John Stanley
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: Re: [OrchidTalk] Ascocenda Sennezauber
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2006 18:15

Andy,
Apologies; my earlier email was a red herring. As you will have found there are many crosses using it as a parent but, like you, I couldn't find its parentage when I looked more closely.
John

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tina Stagg
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: Ascocenda Sennazauber
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2006 18:55

You have the correct spelling, Andy.

The parents are Ascda. Guo Chia Ling x V. coreulescens var. flava − I found this out from a Yahoo search.

As for the orientation, I don't think it matters much as long as you always hang the plant the same way round.

Tina

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tina Stagg
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: Storing bark
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2006 22:25

Thanks, John
I always soak bark (or coco) for three days before use, changing the water each day and giving it a good rinse through. Then I let it dry out for a day or two. Maybe I'm too fussy.
Tina

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tony Watkinson
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: Ascocenda Sennezauber
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2006 10:10

Hi All

You may find Ascocenda Sennezauber mentioned in various places on the internet, but as far as I can see, it is not a registered name. I have OrchidWiz 3 which shows no Sennezauber for any genera. I would suggest that it is a German name, but that's only a guess.

Many orchid nurseries, particularly in Asia, have this nasty habit of giving an orchid a name and then breeding with it. The plant you have is most likely very pretty, and a rose by any other name etc.....

Tony

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: Roger Grier
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: Name that plant.
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2006 19:00

This is for Sharon from Calgary,

Hi Sharon.

Can you please try to identify the plant [see attachment] that my friends in Niagara falls have.

Many thanks, Rocky.

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: John Stanley
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: Re: [OrchidTalk] Ascocenda Sennezauber implications
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2006 19:10

Hi everyone,
Having become embarrassingly (I was wrong!) caught up in the Ascocenda Sennezauber origins issue I am very puzzled;

Tina Stagg has uncovered the parents used to create the hybrid and Tony thinks it might not be registered. Yet the hybrid is (apparently) used as a parent in yet other hybrids, some of which appear to be registered. Personally I am not as interested in hybrids so much as in species and I haven't chased up registrations. However, although I am quite aware that the hybrid nomenclatural rules are different from names for the natural world, do I understand correctly that a registered hybrid can have an unregistered parent?

If so, it seems an odd situation that could lead to gaping holes in knowledge of the ancestry of some hybrids. Or are parents (and their parents) implicitly registered with their hybrid offspring? Can anyone explain or clarify?

"Curiouser and curiouser!

John

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: jns tropic
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: Re: [OrchidTalk] Name that plant.
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2006 23:05

It looks like a form of of pig weed in the portulaca
family. And sometime the name persalain is used for
plants like this one in your picture. Not an orchid,
but it did look pretty good.

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: Sharon Williams
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: Re: [OrchidTalk] Name that plant.
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2006 00:30

Hi Rocky: I have never seen this before -is it an orchid? I could send it around to some friends if it is really important
Sharon

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: Geoffrey Hands
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: Re: [OrchidTalk] Ascocenda Sennezauber implications
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2006 08:35

A hybrid cannot be registered unless both parents are also registered ( or
one or both are listed on the official list of species ).

Whilst I have not followed this thread , and don’t intend to go back and try
to follow it, I wonder if the suggestion of ‘unregistered’ comes from
looking at an incomplete / not up-to-date list ? It is not uncommon for
someone trying to register a new hybrid to come up against the problem that
one or both parents are un- registered, and then go on to register both the
parents and the offspring all on the same day.

And new hybrids are being registered all the time , probably only the
Registrar himself knows the absolutely latest position ! I have certainly
met the situation when trying to register a hybrid that I find it already
has been registered, but the register entry has not yet appeared in any
list.

It is of course also the case that unregistered names are in use . If I
use such a name I add ‘URG’ to the label „ meaning unregistered grex,

Geoff

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: Gordon Walker
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: Tubers
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2006 10:05

Advice on Habenaria tubers please.
Can anyone tell me how deep I should pot up Habenaria and Pecteilis tubers?
Gordon.

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: nancy
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: Re: [OrchidTalk] Name that plant.
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2006 14:05

Hi Rocky -
Looks like Purslane to me − pretty common annual,
reseeding succulent. Some people think it's a weed,
others (me) think it is a nice attractive groundcover.
Cheers − Nancy

~~~~~~~~~~~~
"If it's beautifully arranged on the plate, you know
someone's fingers have been all over it."
-- Julia Child

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: Roger Grier
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: Name that plant.
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2006 14:05

Thanks to all of you who suggested a name.

It does look as though Portulaca may be the winner especially as there are about 200 different types.

JNS........this side of the pond we spell it...Purslane, just wondered if your side spell it different.

If a variety name comes up then I will be very pleased.

It's not an orchid related question, but them we are all here to help.

Many thanks, Rocky.

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: Roger Grier
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: Very doof reading.
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2006 15:50

Hi all,

Do yourself a favour. Key in the following web address:

Dutch Orchid Growers Association and have a good look.

When it opens you will see KNOP.

Open up the LINKS, and then have a look at the KNOP Members list. It's in alphabetical order, but look at the website of the twelfth one, Klinge Orchideen. CITES, eat your heart out because you don't have a clue.

I had a look at most of the members and was amazed at the size of the growing areas.

I did know that Holland exported some 23 million orchids each year but their growing areas and cleanliness, coupled with their expertise is magnificent. That's why I and many other people in the orchid world know that any endangered orchids should be allowed to flower, set seed pods and have some of those pods collected and the seed distributed to laboratories all over the world. That certain orchid would never be endangered again.

But CITES will say that is commercialism......so what, it does the job excellently.

Rocky.

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: John Stanley
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: Re: [OrchidTalk] Tubers
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2006 17:05

Hi Gordon,
According to my wife, Margaret, who grows Habenaria with what I would call 'success', she has them just below the surface of the compost. The important thing, she believes, is to keep them free of added water when they start to die back and while they rest until they display a few mm of green growth around May-June. Ours are kept under the staging while resting and are left in their compost. (although, I guess the time will come for re-potting).

However, we grow H.rhodocheila and this may not be typical. We find that the pink variety of this sp. is less vigorous than the deeper red one.

Hope this is useful and answers your query − or are we missing something in your phrase 'pot-up' are you 'resting' them out of their compost?
John

Gordon Walker wrote:

Advice on Habenaria tubers please.
Can anyone tell me how deep I should pot up Habenaria and Pecteilis tubers?
Gordon.

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: Geoffrey Hands
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: Re: [OrchidTalk] Tubers
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2006 17:40

I find that wherever I plant them, when I repot, the tubers are at the very
bottom of the pot − which is where I put them now, when repotting.

Geoff

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: Roger Grier
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: Habenaria tubers.
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2006 18:55

Hi Gordon,

The only help that I can give you is some knowledge on the U.K. Habenaria types.

I would say that the least measurement of soil above the top of the tuber would be about one quarter of an inch.

Maybe an inch of soil above the top of the tuber would do it no harm.

More than that and I would start to worry.

But this is just my observations on various types of our U.K. orchids.

For sure, the Dactylorhiza types, Common spotted, Marsh orchids etc, have their tips of the tubers only just below the surface.

Regards, Rocky.

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: John Stanley
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: Re: [OrchidTalk] Tubers − getting to the bottom of it
Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2006 01:30

But how deep are your pots Geoff?
John

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: jns tropic
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: Re: [OrchidTalk] Name that plant.
Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2006 02:50

JNS........this side of the pond we spell it...Purslane − you caught me for the wrong reason.

Rocky half way through I added an extra a in purslain but I would stand by the lain part. I checked the spelling both ways with gmail spell check and they didn't like either.
Check this site: http://www.illustratedgarden.org/mobot/rarebooks/page.asp?relationQK99A1B5441737V2&identifier0093

I'm a congenital speller and was told that I would never graduate from my college. That was in my sophomore year. I have a Bachelors in psychology and a Doctorate in dentistry. I am now the family gardener. But I still can't spell and with out spell check I really do look like a jerk.

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: Gordon Walker
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: Habenaria
Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2006 07:10

Thanks to all who gave me information.
Gordon.

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: Gordon Walker
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: Re
Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2006 07:15

To John Stanley.

I would like further information regarding the tubers but I do not have your e-mail address.
Gordon.

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: dennis READ
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: Re: [OrchidTalk] Very doof reading.
Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2006 14:55

Roger, I was surprised that nobody responded to my posting of 20th sept when I showed your argument was possibly proven.
Regards from Devon

Roger Grier wrote:

Hi all,

Do yourself a favour. Key in the following web address:

Dutch Orchid Growers Association and have a good look.

When it opens you will see KNOP...

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: John Stanley
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: Re: [OrchidTalk] Very doof reading.
Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2006 18:35

Hi Roger, Dennis but really everyone of us!

CITES is flawed . . agreed.

However, while in broad sympathy with a lot of what you have to say and being equally impressed with the website and links you cite, there is one small flaw in your arguments 'knocking' CITES. . at least as far as wild regeneration is concerned.

Many plants have been collected to extinction (hence CITES in the first place for over-hunted, over-trapped, over-collected, over exploited and over-enthusuastically destroyed (sometimes inconvenient 'pest') species both animal and plant). However, the problem isn't simply the removal or loss of a species from the ecosystem but the implicit destruction or serious alteration of environments themselves.

Like it or not, we are all involved in the orchid industry and, hopefully, most of what we responsible growers collect are artificially propogated or aren't endangered. However, how many industries can raise an honest hand for primary concern for the environment rather than short-term profit? Fishing? Timber? Pelts? Agriculture? Coffee?, Rice? Soya? Rubber? Sport fishing? Shipping? Air transport? Road transport? Oil? Coal? Quarrying? Tourism? And on and on . . . Is the orchid industry unique in its environmental concerns? Or is it simply that we are rather fonder of it than of garbage disposal or wet fish? This isn't to attack these industries (after all, we all have a standard of living ultimately derived from their successes in profit-making). But that is surely the conundrum.

Trouble really is that there are too many of us wanting too much of what is wrecking the system. We are the first species that has consciously acquired the ability to change nature to suit ourselves at whatever cost to our non-human neighbours and yet now we collectively cry crocodile tears at the chaos successive generations have caused in the process. What makes matters worse is that we are getting better and better at being more and more environmentally destructive for benefits that are fewer and fewer and more trivial!

I remember, in 1996, being astonished at the lunacy (in my simple view) of an establishment in the Arizona Desert with outdoor (yes, OUTDOOR ) air conditioning! Yet now, I have neighbours with outdoor patio heaters and outdoor jacuzzis while our government discusses ways of avoiding wasting energy. Can I, like most in this forum, really justify heating a greenhouse to tropical conditions all winter? Am I any less wasteful than my heated patio jacuzzi wallowers? Life is uncomfortable if we make it bearable!

Maybe we ought to 'get real' and respect CITES for its aims rather than its imperfections. I wish I knew some solutions. It's all very depressing for the generations to come.

John Stanley

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: Geoffrey Hands
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: Re: [OrchidTalk] Very doof reading.
Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2006 08:50

Your suggestion was that if exporting of wild-collected orchids were
allowed, orchid species would be safe because after a bit , no-one would be
interested in collecting because better ones are available from nurseries.

That may be true with P.besseae ( although not within my knowledge „
personally I have found it such a difficult subject that if I were in
Ecuador or wherever, and saw it growing as commonly as suggested, and if it
were legal to do so, I would certainly take a bagful home to experiment on.
I did say IF., but I doubt that P.kovachii would be safe , because the
population is so small and it could all be gone long before seedlings were
widely available.
The suggestion is certainly true with say Vanda coerulea, which has been in
cultivation so long , and seed-bred through at least half a dozen
generations, that no-one is interested in collecting it any more . But this
illustrates that there is no general basis for a policy. The needs differ
from species to species.

Slippers are usually something of an exception I think, whatever the
situation may be with besseae. For example, Paph rothschildianum has only
ever been known from 3 sites , according to my information , and there never
were as many as hundreds in any one site . In fact in recent years, one site
was destroyed by the Ministry of Tourism building a new golf course ( you
must get your priorities right „ jobs are more important than funny plants
that no-one has ever seen, apart from a few botanists and a stone-age tribe
- who like to dig them up and fry them for breakfast ) ; another site was
virtually stripped by collectors . ( You can still buy them openly at one or
two nurseries in Singapore I have been told) and the third site had as few
as 25 flowering plants − which is quite a common size for a colony of paphs
in the species I have seen , if not rather large for a paph colony. A three
or four growth plant of this species would be worth maybe a couple of
thousand pounds . The nearest westernised locals perhaps earn a hundred
pounds a year. What would happen if there were no CITES ?

It must be well known by now that I am not an apologist for CITES , my
objections to it are the way the systems are administered and governed, not
to the principles involved.

So now your mail has drawn at least one reply Dennis . If I didn't answer
before I can't remember why . Perhaps I thought that everyone was getting
bored going round Rogers endless track .

Geoff

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: dennis READ
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: Cites
Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2006 09:25

I agree that Cites as a base idea and document is a good and required principle, but like all principles, if carried to the extreme, end up ridiculous. My observation was that Phrag besseae was discovered before Cites and was , in it's time, more fabulous than Phrag. kovachi. Seedlings were on sale in three years and the wild plant can be seen in Ecuador growing by the roadside.
If P. kovaghi had been immediately had pods harvested and given, under some form of agreement, to major American, European or Asian laboratory the pressure would have been reduced on this plant. It would not have stopped the fanatics but most people would have been satisfied.
I used to work with all nationalities and the one expression I hated was ''en principe''. When principals come through the door common sense goes out the window.
Regards from Devon on a Fantstic sunny morning

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tricia Garner
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: [OrchidTalk] Geoff's emails
Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2006 10:20

I tried an experiment with Geoff's email of this morning (on the 'Very doof
reading' thread) where I put his message through a text converter whilst it
was still in the outgoing queue. I hope I haven't changed the meaning of
anything vital in the process! By the way, I still can't get rid of the
symbol − Geoff, maybe you could advise what it is supposed to be?

Also, Geoff, I wonder how you actually compose your messages? There may be
a clue to it all in the method.

Regards,

--

Tricia

Time flies like the wind... Fruit flies like bananas.

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: Barbara Larimer
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: Propogation of species
Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2006 12:05

If a species is in danger of extinction, whether by encroachment or
over-collecting, surely the world benefits from SOMEONE being given access
to seeds. Even if the plants are years in the growing, at least they
exist. Am I being naive or could, for example, the World Orchid Congress,
whose interests have been well demonstrated, administer some sort of a list
of "certified" or expert growers who are capable and willing to grow the
plants. It seems that solutions to problems can be quite simple, but the
logistics of making them happen render solutions nearly impossible.

A positive example of this is the ghost orchid from Florida. Polyrhizza
lindenii, popularized by the book The Orchid Thief and the movie Adaptation,
once coveted as an extremely rare orchid, is now growing (or not as is more
commonly the case) in homes and greenhouses around the world. I must admit
that I am unaware of how this proliferation has occurred, but fortunately it
has.

There are groups that transcend political issues to do good work.. Doctors
Without Borders for example.. Is it too optimistic to envision Botanists
Without Borders? Are the obstacles more political or capital?

Barbara

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: Roger Grier
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: CITES.
Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2006 12:20

Hi all,

Here is a question that I would like a true answer to.

There is an Orchid Nursery in Holland that makes a huge amount of orchid hybrids and species. All are produced in their own laboratory/nursery.

The same can be said for many such establishments the world over.

If I wished to buy Paphiopedilum Rothschildianum x malipoense and Paphiopedilum javanicum from their catalogue, I could do so without the need for CITES and I think any import papers..........because Holland is an E.U. member state.

If I then wished to buy exactly the same orchids from an Orchid Nursery in the U.S.A. which produced their plants in exactly the same way as the Dutch nursery, then I would need CITES etc.

Pick the bones out of that one !!!!!!!!

I will keep chipping away at the wall.

Regards, Rocky.

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: Gordon Walker
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: Re: [OrchidTalk] Cites
Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2006 12:20

I think most if not all sensible orchid hobbyists would whole heartedly agree with what you say Dennis but of course those that make and implement the CITES regulations are not allowed to use common sense.
You must always remember that many of those making and applying regulations have a vested interest for there own purpose.
Gordon.

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: Gordon Walker
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: Re: [OrchidTalk] Cites
Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2006 14:30

Apologies for wrong spelling of their. Naughty spellchecker.
Gordon.

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: Roger Grier
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: CITES.
Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2006 19:05

Hi Barbara, John, Dennis and all,

Nice to see Barbara's article which I doubt if any of the top brass in CITES either does not know about, or as John leans towards, does not want to get involved because of losing any income.

I do even wonder if the absolute truth about how orchids can be mass produced from either seed or by cloning has ever been explained to the CITES people and also that their must be literally hundreds maybe thousands of orchid nurseries that do this.

This then of course brings up the question:

If any orchid nursery/laboratory grows its own stock from either seed or by cloning and is REGISTERED with CITES after being visited by them or their representatives then I see no reason why a CITES permit should be required by the purchaser. It is then up to the seller to pack and post the plants to the purchaser. If the seller is ever found to be trading outside of the CITES requirements then that nursery would be struck off of the list.

I do not see why this could not be put into action.

Rocky.

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: John Stanley
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: Re: [OrchidTalk] CITES. n all that
Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2006 20:25

Rocky,

If you were administering CITES you would be opening a huge loophole if, simply because one country can supply within its trade boundaries you permitted your different country to trade the same goods outside your boundary. In any case, imagine the cost of policing the less scrupulous individuals who'd use the facility for species they'd gamble couldn't be distinguished except by an expert who would rightly charge a professional fee few of us could afford anyway. It would be simply unworkable.

Some would be tempted to ask why you'd need to buy from USA (phytosanitary, CITES, VAT, exemption from State Tax, customs scrutiny etc) when you can get the identical thing within your own trade area without restriction or paperwork other than your Barclaycard receipt! Personally, I'd be suspicious of your motives. And if you couldn't get it in your own trading area then that could well be the reason for the restriction!!!

The problem is Rocky, you are scrupulously honest and sufficiently informed to know what you are buying and how endangered or dangerous it is. Sadly, the world is full of less scrupulous individuals who are quite prepared to make a fast buck by pretending to be likewise. Consequently, we finish up with an almost all-or-nothing situation in which it is easier and cheaper to simply say "No!".

CITES isn't simply for orchids nor even just plants. As you say, chip away to make sensible changes but your example isn't one (in my opinion) and we aren't a forum that has teeth for this purpose. (Are we?).Sure, there are problems with CITES, there are anomalies, but there are changes that are occasionally made to our advantage (or disadvantage) but, overall, we are better with it than without it. (All in my 'umble opinion of course!).

Even our own lawmakers manage to involve themselves in importing illegal timber I read. So it ain't as simple as we'd like to think.

John

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: John Stanley
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: Re: [OrchidTalk] Propogation of species
Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2006 20:40

Barbara,
A rather refreshingly better example of a CITES anomaly than Rocky's, I think. On the other hand I don't know what the detailed history was. And has the proliferation done anything for the original wild plants that were depleted by over collecting or habitat destruction.Having many 'rescued' plants on the world's windowsills isn't a substitute for conservation of the original habitat but it does keep the issue alive so long as the 'rescue' isn't the cause of the depletion!
Certainly it needs a properly recognised organisation to do the pressuring
John

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: Geoffrey Hands
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: Re: [OrchidTalk] Geoff's emails
Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2006 20:55

I USE Microsoft Outlook 2003 ( in Ms Office 2003) as my e-mail client , and
that uses Ms Word for Windows as the text editor.

There are no surplus Ys in either the copy in my "Sent" box ( and no visible
code either ) nor in the group mailing − i.e. the copy in my In-box.

No clues there that I can see .

Geoff

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tricia Garner
To: Orchid Talk List
Subject: Re: [OrchidTalk] Geoff's emails
Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2006 23:10

I think we might be on the trail. It may be down to the encoding selected
in your text editor.

> There are no surplus Ys in either the copy in my "Sent" box ( and no
> visible code either ) nor in the group mailing − i.e. the copy in my
> In-box.

It is displayed as capital Y-circumflex in the received messages. I suspect
from the context you may actually be typing an ellipsis.

Tricia

The sooner you fall behind, the more time you'll have to catch up.

-------------------------------------------------------------

Top

Archive Index

Archive Index


©Orchid-Talk
email.gif - 2501 bytes