|
Post by timmsyrj on Jun 13, 2013 5:45:42 GMT -8
CITES does not make it illegal to own these species or even photograph pinned specimens it's only the Trade in Endangered Species.
|
|
|
|
Post by Adam Cotton on Jun 13, 2013 7:01:44 GMT -8
Actually I have nothing whatsoever against collecting or trading in CITES appendix 2 specimens through the Insectnet classified ads, as long as there are accompanying certificates of course.
I only think that advertising CITES appendix 1 species should be banned on Insectnet, as there is no way these could be legally traded.
Having said that, this in no way suggests that I am in favour of CITES, it is a total waste of resources that really could be used to protect habitats and thus the species, but that's not really what CITES is about ... sadly. We all know it's about cushy jobs, and governments giving the impression they are doing something, and of course Joe Public doesn't realise that what they are doing doesn't actually help real conservation (and I don't approve of those businesses such as Greenpeace who earn $$$ posing as conservationists).
Adam.
|
|
|
Post by Adam Cotton on Jun 13, 2013 7:02:03 GMT -8
double post due to Proboards server error edited out, but I couldn't delete it.
Adam.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 13, 2013 8:42:21 GMT -8
"CITES does not make it illegal to own these species or even photograph pinned specimens it's only the Trade in Endangered Species"
yes that needs to be clarified, CITES are only interested in trade, hence the name, I wonder what input they have into such sites as ebay selling CITES listed specimens, it does seem to be more common now.
|
|
|
Post by Adam Cotton on Jun 13, 2013 9:03:44 GMT -8
Actually there is an I in CITES as well as a T for trade. The I stands for International. You can buy and sell CITES listed species within your own country at will, subject to local restrictions of course, but it's only when sending them between countries that the paperwork is really necessary.
Local restrictions generally mean that you must have proof of legal origin of all CITES listed species in your possession.
Adam.
|
|
|
Post by nomad on Jun 13, 2013 9:37:56 GMT -8
In the last month we have had both chikae and hospiton on ebay, I just hope this does not alert the authorities to come down on all insect collecting like a ton of bricks. its the same like this forum, Dunc ! How many posts and photos of alexandrae, chickae or appolo is here ? And ALL about the words - fortune, $$$...big..small...more money... (puke)Authorities are not stupid, they know where to look What a incredulous silly statement, its not illegal to write about or study protected species. Neither is it illegal to post photographs of them. It not illegal to own specimens from old collections that were collected before Cites one or two was put in place. My avatar is a A.S. Meek specimen bred by him in 1905 and given by Walter Rothschild to the Manchester museum, there are a number of other males including the type specimens that he collected in the British Museum, you could perhaps see them when your are next there. Information courtesy of one of those common people!
|
|
|
|
Post by nomad on Jun 13, 2013 10:23:45 GMT -8
It not illegal to own specimens from old collections that were collected before Cites You are completely wrong!!! No metter if it was collected in 10000 B.C. or in 2013 you STILL need permits, the legislative is very clear about this. CITES permits are significant for all specimen after CITES and BEFORE CITES as well. There is no expectation for old specimens. If it would be so, we would have thousand of freshly caught CITES specimens with a printed label saying "collected in 193X". So, yes, it is not illegal to study/write about CITES species, it is not illegal to post photos of them, but it is ILLEGAL to own them without permits no matter on the date of collecting. That it is legal to own specimens collected before CITES is only an excuse of collectors who have such specimens without permits... "Let He Who Is Without Sin Cast The First Stone" Radovan Are you saying if you inherit a old collection from 1896 that has species that are protected you need to apply for a permit to own them!!! I thought you would only need a permit to sell old specimens of protected species. Are you actually saying that all the hundreds and hundreds of specimens in private collections that were collected before cites of species that are now protected need a permit. What about all those museums that own such specimens. This all sounds very bizarre.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 13, 2013 11:11:39 GMT -8
"You are completely wrong!!! No metter if it was collected in 10000 B.C. or in 2013 you STILL need permits, the legislative is very clear about this. CITES permits are significant for all specimen after CITES and BEFORE CITES as well. There is no expectation for old specimens. If it would be so, we would have thousand of freshly caught CITES specimens with a printed label saying "collected in 193X"
I have no idea if this is right or wrong but if it is then it is the most stupid law ever invented by man, how the hell do you go about obtaining a permit for a specimen that is 150 years old, please tell, looooooooooool. What is the bloody point of protecting a specimen that has been dead for a centuary and a half, I know, lets ask the collector where he got it from and if he knew that by taking said specimen he was breaking the law, oh wait he has been dead for 100 years, that could prove difficult, get a spiritual medium to contact him, and what are you supposed to DO with these old specimens that require a permit to own, have a mass burning session, forgive my cynisism but this is just plain stupidity.
let he who is without permits burn his whole collection.
|
|
|
Post by nomad on Jun 13, 2013 11:29:52 GMT -8
dunc, I quite agree.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 13, 2013 11:31:08 GMT -8
we will have to start carbon dating all data labels, I should be OK, some of my specimens are so old they have data labels carved out of stone.
|
|
|
Post by zdenol123 on Jun 13, 2013 11:38:58 GMT -8
Silly ? Why ? OWN CITES SPECIMEN WITHOUT PROPER DOCUMENTATION EVEN IT IS 1000 YEARS OLD IS A CRIMINAL ACT ! Dunc, you have to inform the authorities that you have got this or that specimen, say from inheritage. Then you should get the permit. There are 2 types of permits - for tradin and for holding. """ What is the bloody point of protecting a specimen that has been dead for a centuary and a half""" - pouchers could say then, that that Elephant is 100 years ago, well preserved and can sell it...without tests you could NOT tell if its true or not. 100 years old specimens of leps looks like they were caught yesterday...it has a point, dont ya think so ? For me its not stupid at all. Stupid for me are the specie listed in there... Nomad - exactly Museums are museum...they dont belong to that category, but for new fresh specimens they need a proper documentation too. What does sound silly for me...very silly...is talking about private collections and CITES specimens. We are kinda criminals nowadays and posts like how many appolos I have, how much I paid for chikae and how many birdwing boxes I have, doesnt do good at all, at all ! You dont know who is browsing the forum, do you ? Lawmakers making the laws on the basis of things like this. The biggest, the most expensive, the top of what collectors looking for to add to their collection...like Megasoma & Dynastes now....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 13, 2013 11:48:27 GMT -8
"Stupid for me are the specie listed in there"
I completley agree, I also think that if the "authorities" put as much effort into stopping real crime that the world would be a lot safer place to live in, but REAL criminals carry guns and fight back.
|
|
|
Post by nomad on Jun 13, 2013 12:20:43 GMT -8
What I said, was that it is silly to make remarks about posting photographs and information on protected species. Another silly remark " we are kinda criminals nowdays". I do hope you speak for yourself! I do when I buy any fresh cites specimens have all the relevant paperwork especially as I often bring these set specimens back through customs when visiting the insect fairs in Europe. This is indeed the LAW. I still find it rather silly for those that own old specimens to have to apply for permits. That is a opinion of just a common person!
|
|
|
Post by lepidofrance on Jun 13, 2013 12:55:37 GMT -8
In a democracy, in a state of law, we respect the principle of non-retroactivity. Otherwise, we are moving towards a dictatorship. The CITES regulations can not relate to events prior to its enactment! At least that is how I see it ....
|
|
|
Post by nomad on Jun 13, 2013 13:03:05 GMT -8
In a democracy, in a state of law, we respect the principle of non-retroactivity. Otherwise, we are moving towards a dictatorship. The CITES regulations can not relate to events prior to its enactment! At least that is how I see it .... At last, a really sensible statement and one that I fully agree with.
|
|