Post by jshuey on May 23, 2012 12:23:25 GMT -8
Here's a question (perhaps naive!) That I wish I had an answer. If we stick to butterflies favorites of collectors (the "beautiful" butterflies):
- In Asia, we have the Troides, the Trogonoptera, the Ornithoptera: all protected CITES (although many of them are very abundant and not threatened);
- Central America and South America, we have Morphos, as far as I know, they are not registered to CITES (it is true that many are abundant, as M. menelaus in Guyana).
Why these protections especially on Asian butterflies and not on the American?
In Europe, some gossips tell (I doubt this is true!) That in CITES negotiations, U.S. officials were intended to counter the Japanese entomologists by reducing the possibilities of exploration in Asia ...
It sounds silly! But the rumor ...
I'd speculate that:
Because CITES came out of IUCN red lists, early decisions were in fact dominated by European scientists (IUCN is not a big thing on this side of the pond - even now there are just a few members here and there, but not the heavy buy-in that is present in Europe).
Those early participants knew the "huge market" for certain groups of bugs. Plus, European lepidopterists are more tied into eastern tropics than western tropics.
They made bad decisions based on incomplete understandings of things they thought they understood but didn't really understand. Understand?
I base this on the fact that I participate in a couple of IUNC committees - and the number of north Americans on those is very small relative to the rest of the planet. The odds of me being able to advance my strategies for world domination seem diminished to the point that curbing Japanese entomology would be impossible..
Just informed speculation on my part...
Shuey