Apart from the other interesting and important announcements in today's eNews, this one is very significant to those of you who grow recently-discovered Mexican cacti. Especially if anyone gets them from mainland Europe or Ireland.
Therefore, plants of most Mexican cacti such as Astrophytum caput-medusae, Aztekium valdezii, Lophophora alberto-vojtechii, Mammillaria bertholdii and Turbinicarpus graminispinus, discovered since 1997 which are available in Europe have to be considered as illegal. Also, the offspring of these plants, raised from seed or grown from vegetative cuttings are illegal and must not be sold at BCSS events. Mexican cacti discovered after 21 November 1997 may only be sold if the seller can present the necessary documents showing that they descend from plants or seeds that were legally imported into Europe.
Nurseries found to be selling habitat collected plants and plants which are considered as illegal will not be invited back to BCSS events.
I would hope that such nurseries would be named and shamed publicly.
Congratulations to Ian on getting on the CITES Sustainable Users Group and continuing his lobbying on the behalf of succulent growers and succulents.
I get it's something the BCSS has to respect on account of Mexican laws, but I think it is completely counterproductive. As for naming and shaming? Why? What's the point? What's the difference between selling Ariocarpus bravoanus and Lophophora alberto-vojtechii when it comes to conservation efforts? The former is legal because it was discovered before 1997, while the latter is not because it was discovered after 1997. The former is to my knowledge more threatened in habitat.
The only thing banning sales of these will do if it is something that becomes widespread or an EU thing, is that habitat poaching will increase.
Astrophytum Caput Medusae seed was sold by the BCSS on the 2014 seed list for the rather reasonable price of 30p for a packet. Nurseries can't sell the plants but the BCSS can sell the seeds. Probably best to keep quiet about that!
Stuart wrote: ↑Sun Aug 01, 2021 8:58 pm
Astrophytum Caput Medusae seed was sold by the BCSS on the 2014 seed list for the rather reasonable price of 30p for a packet. Nurseries can't sell the plants but the BCSS can sell the seeds. Probably best to keep quiet about that!
Stuart
Only one time (it was my donation), the next time I offered seed it was refused with no explanation at first. Eventually I was contacted to explain the reason. Most of it ended up in the Forum seed pool ironically
Can post-97 Mexican plants (is there a full list of them? or is it just the four mentioned as examples?) be shown in BCSS shows? Can their cultivation be discussed on the Forum or the Society's many, many social media accounts? If seed can't be distributed in the Society's seedlist, does that ban not also apply to the Forum pool? It feels like there are a load of ramifications that need addressing.
Phil Crewe, BCSS 38143. Mostly S. American cacti, esp. Lobivia, Sulcorebutia and little Opuntia
KarlR wrote: ↑Sun Aug 01, 2021 8:47 pm
I get it's something the BCSS has to respect on account of Mexican laws, but I think it is completely counterproductive. As for naming and shaming? Why? What's the point? What's the difference between selling Ariocarpus bravoanus and Lophophora alberto-vojtechii when it comes to conservation efforts? The former is legal because it was discovered before 1997, while the latter is not because it was discovered after 1997. The former is to my knowledge more threatened in habitat.
The only thing banning sales of these will do if it is something that becomes widespread or an EU thing, is that habitat poaching will increase.
A positive step to show the BCSS is serious about the problem of habitat collected plants. Next step is have any known or suspected to be a habitat collected plant banned from any BCSS event/show. The world is changing in many ways ,not all good but this is one issue that needs positive action now not years down the road.
It's certainly been very frowned upon to show photos of Aztekium valdezii and Mammillaria bertholdii on here. I am not sure if it is down to them being rarities and being so called choice little Mexican species, or if somehow people on here hold Mexican laws in such high regard, or if it is assumed that any such plants must be illegally collected from habitat?
A few years ago specimens of those two species would perhaps have been habitat collected, and that was evident in many of the photos of valdezii in particular. But now that is likely not the case any longer. No habitat plants will be harmed by someone producing seeds and growing cultivated plants of these species. Isn't that preferable to the demand being insane and the supply of cultivated material non-existent? How would the international demand be satisfied if no cultivated material was in the trade?
No such worries seem to go with species discovered after 1997 but from other countries. I'm pretty sure that Thelocephala/Eriosyce challensis (2011) is probably not extremely common in habitat, but since that species is from Chile it's ok to sell and show, with the year 1997 not being particularly important.
And I'm quite confident that if Mammillaria chaletii (2013) or huntiana (2014) were to be shown on here or offered on sale at a show that no one would give it a second thought. Good thing Mammillaria luethyi was described in 1996 or we'd suddenly have to tsk and shake out heads in silent disappointment at anyone selling it or showing it off...
Does this also apply for other plant groups? If so Agave albopilosa becomes a planta non grata too.
The way I understand the reasoning behind Mexico banning trade out of the country of (only?) cacti described after 1997 is that it is really to do with attempting to protect potential domestic economic interests in the selling of cacti, and not to do with conservation. I have no problem with them wanting to do this and I would fully back it if they actually were to support Mexican nurseries and work actively to produce plants and seeds for the international market of all their beautiful and rare species. But that's not happening. So in my opinion the only thing banning sales of Mexican species described after 1997 will achieve is to increase illegal poaching, because scarcity drives the demand and hence the price up. This will also have a knock-on effect on other species described before 1997 that will be collected too whenever someone is out poaching.
