|
|
Post by exoticimports on Sept 18, 2013 6:55:54 GMT -8
Adam, you are so right, looking at that list makes me laugh! Last I saw it wasn't that long, and those species new to me on the list would have left me wondering why- but your explaination makes sense, even if the list doesn't. Ha ha.
Chuck
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post by Adam Cotton on Sept 18, 2013 7:16:16 GMT -8
Adam, you are so right, looking at that list makes me laugh! Last I saw it wasn't that long, and those species new to me on the list would have left me wondering why- but your explaination makes sense, even if the list doesn't. Ha ha. Chuck > > > The old list was less specific, but actually contained 2 more species. It listed " Troides spp., Meandrusa spp., Stichopthalma spp., Actias spp." rather than the individual species under protection. It also listed Lyssa zampa, which along with Troides aeacus were subsequently excluded from the protected species list since it was decided that both of these species are actually common. In reality ALL of the listed species are common IN THEIR HABITAT during the right seasons, except Bhutanitis lidderdalii which may now be extinct in Thailand. It just happens that the right habitat is often rather inaccessible and already protected inside national parks or wildlife sanctuaries, so there really is no good reason for applying this law to insects at all (although it is a useful law to protect larger animals). The government would do a much better job protecting these insects by spending their resources on protecting habitats. Adam. |
|
|
|
Post by papiliotheona on Oct 9, 2013 8:11:50 GMT -8
Adam, what was the driving force behind this stupid protected list to begin with? Was it pressure from Western do-gooders or something else?
|
|
|
|
Post by Adam Cotton on Oct 9, 2013 14:10:36 GMT -8
Adam, what was the driving force behind this stupid protected list to begin with? Was it pressure from Western do-gooders or something else? Very much the former, I'm afraid. For many years Thailand was placed on the CITES blacklist of countries not complying with the convention. In order to be seen to be complying with CITES (and thus remove the economic restrictions placed on the country) they not only drew up laws to ratify CITES itself but also initiated separate protected species laws on top. Adam. |
|
|
|
Post by lepidofrance on Oct 9, 2013 14:42:21 GMT -8
"It also listed Lyssa zampa, which along with Troides aeacus were subsequently excluded from the protected species list since it was decided that both of these species are actually common." I know locations where one can see within two hours hundred Lyssa zampa or Troides aeacus. Regarding aeacus, when I was in Koh Chang (Thailand), no need to do do hard walking inside the rain forest to meet the species : every morning, males (and sometimes females) visited the flowers on my hotel balcony ....  |
|
|
|
Post by papiliotheona on Oct 9, 2013 15:35:30 GMT -8
Adam, what was the driving force behind this stupid protected list to begin with? Was it pressure from Western do-gooders or something else? Very much the former, I'm afraid. For many years Thailand was placed on the CITES blacklist of countries not complying with the convention. In order to be seen to be complying with CITES (and thus remove the economic restrictions placed on the country) they not only drew up laws to ratify CITES itself but also initiated separate protected species laws on top. Adam. Wow, that's scary. I had no idea that countries faced international economic sanctions (like Iran or Iraq or apartheid South Africa) for permitting insect collecting. I guess that explains why all these places have instituted such ridiculous and stupid laws, even when we know full well they do not care about wildlife. How is Laos being punished for allowing Steeve Collard to operate his business and collect/sell Teinopalpus? |
|
|
|
|
|
Post by Adam Cotton on Oct 10, 2013 7:07:27 GMT -8
Actually it's not the insect collecting that caused Thailand to be sanctioned by CITES and as a result the international community, it was trade in tigers, ivory, rhino horn, wild orchids from the jungles (mostly from Laos, but traded through Thailand) and other larger animals on CITES. That and tardy drawing up of necessary laws to implement the CITES convention caused all the pressure.
Insects were really an add-on, as when the government drew up animal and plant protection laws the Dept of Agriculture entomology section was also asked to provide a list of insects that they believed should be protected.
Jean-Marc remarked on how common Lyssa zampa can be. Indeed I have even seen large numbers of them on the windows of a hotel in the middle of Bangkok, never mind out in the countryside. They are seasonal, so you won't see them all the time, but often they can be very common in season.
As for Troides aeacus, it is very common across mainland Thailand, but much rarer in the Peninsula, and in places not far from the forest Troides helena is also very common. I often see both sexes of both species feeding on flowers in my garden.
Adam.
|
|
|
|
Post by Adam Cotton on Oct 10, 2013 7:13:39 GMT -8
How is Laos being punished for allowing Steeve Collard to operate his business and collect/sell Teinopalpus? I have often wondered how Steeve Collard manages to get CITES permits for his Teinopalpus from Vietnam and Laos, and indeed how anyone can sell Chinese Teinopalpus legally, since none of those countries normally gives out CITES certificates. One of the people I work with on DNA analysis of Papilionidae asked me to find out if it was possible to get CITES permits for some legs of Teinopalpus and Troides from Laos for DNA analysis, but it was impossible for an individual to apply for a permit, the Lao authorities will only issue them to Lao registered businesses. Adam. |
|
|
|
Post by papiliotheona on Oct 10, 2013 8:05:59 GMT -8
In other words, it is not possible to get legal, new material of these taxa anywhere, in any way, today...?
|
|
|
|
Post by jonathan on Oct 10, 2013 10:59:49 GMT -8
It's very difficult. Most species there are on sale on ebay and on various other sites coming for ex. from Brazil are all illegal even though the species on sale do not fall under CITES. I'm sure that all collectors have somehow infringed some stupid law somewhere.
|
|
