|
|
Post by livingplanet3 on Feb 11, 2021 15:13:31 GMT -8
When was Achillides chikae hermeli added to CITES Appendix I? I just checked the appendices not very long ago, and hermeli wasn't listed at that time, so I assume that this is a quite recent addition?  |
|
|
|
|
|
Post by Crake on Feb 11, 2021 15:29:31 GMT -8
That is odd. It must be new, as there are still specimens of P. chikae hermeli for sale on the Butterfly Company's website.
(revision) My guess is that they moved it up to appendix 1 to avoid confusion between the two subspecies, which seems a bit lazy considering both aren't that rare.
|
|
|
|
Post by livingplanet3 on Feb 11, 2021 15:36:47 GMT -8
That is odd. It must be new, as there are still specimens of P. chikae hermeli for sale on the Butterfly Company's website. Several currently listed on eBay as well (all from Russia). |
|
|
|
Post by Crake on Feb 11, 2021 15:39:14 GMT -8
That is odd. It must be new, as there are still specimens of P. chikae hermeli for sale on the Butterfly Company's website. Several currently listed on eBay as well (all from Russia). Interesting. The demand is going to skyrocket when people find out. |
|
|
|
Post by livingplanet3 on Feb 11, 2021 15:54:42 GMT -8
So, what is the legality (in regard to both sale and possession) of hermeli specimens imported into the US prior to this ssp. being moved to CITES Appendix I?
|
|
|
|
Post by Crake on Feb 11, 2021 16:01:28 GMT -8
So, what is the legality (in regard to both sale and possession) of hermeli specimens imported into the US prior to this ssp. being moved to CITES Appendix I? I’m fairly certain that if the date of capture predates CITES legislation, then it is legal. |
|
|
|
|
|
Post by livingplanet3 on Feb 11, 2021 16:14:33 GMT -8
So, what is the legality (in regard to both sale and possession) of hermeli specimens imported into the US prior to this ssp. being moved to CITES Appendix I? I’m fairly certain that if the date of capture predates CITES legislation, then it is legal. You mean date of import, right? In any case, how could the date of a specimen's capture / import be proven? ADDENDUM: Looks like A. chikae hermeli was moved to Appendix I in late Aug 2020 - www.gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p2/2020/2020-09-02/html/sor-dors179-eng.html |
|
|
|
Post by Crake on Feb 11, 2021 18:32:22 GMT -8
I’m fairly certain that if the date of capture predates CITES legislation, then it is legal. You mean date of import, right? In any case, how could the date of a specimen's capture / import be proven? ADDENDUM: Looks like A. chikae hermeli was moved to Appendix I in late Aug 2020 - www.gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p2/2020/2020-09-02/html/sor-dors179-eng.htmlYes, sorry for the lack of clarity. |
|
|
|
Post by exoticimports on Feb 12, 2021 7:32:40 GMT -8
In any case, how could the date of a specimen's capture / import be proven? Back in the 1990s, Ianni provided with Ornithoptera (and more?) a "CERTIFICATE OF LEGAL DOCUMENTATION FOR PROTECTED LEPIDOPTERA" with the date, species listed, and said it was legally imported. In that I purchased some Ornithoptera from them, I still have those certificates. While they don't actually prove anything, they do demonstrate that I legally procured specimens that are "incidentally" the same species as I retain. When I was selling O. victoriae each pair was accompanied by a similar document, though mine recorded the USFWS import number. While both "prove" nothing, and noting I've had stupider conversations with USFWS, one specimen plus one certificate/ receipt = thrown out of court and great Social Media & journalism fodder. Clearly too, when one purchases protected species one should retain the dated, detailed receipt. Heck, when purchasing ANY specimens, keep the receipts. |
|
|
|
Post by livingplanet3 on Feb 12, 2021 8:30:06 GMT -8
In any case, how could the date of a specimen's capture / import be proven? Back in the 1990s, Ianni provided with Ornithoptera (and more?) a "CERTIFICATE OF LEGAL DOCUMENTATION FOR PROTECTED LEPIDOPTERA" with the date, species listed, and said it was legally imported. In that I purchased some Ornithoptera from them, I still have those certificates. While they don't actually prove anything, they do demonstrate that I legally procured specimens that are "incidentally" the same species as I retain. When I was selling O. victoriae each pair was accompanied by a similar document, though mine recorded the USFWS import number. While both "prove" nothing, and noting I've had stupider conversations with USFWS, one specimen plus one certificate/ receipt = thrown out of court and great Social Media & journalism fodder. Clearly too, when one purchases protected species one should retain the dated, detailed receipt. Heck, when purchasing ANY specimens, keep the receipts. Thousands of Ornithoptera (the more common, mass-produced species, at least) are sold mounted in shadow boxes as decorative items to the general consumer market every year. Needless to say, the vast majority of buyers of such items are not keeping the receipts. Is it the sellers, rather than the buyers, that the USFWS tends to be more concerned with? |
|
|
|
Post by exoticimports on Feb 12, 2021 9:03:11 GMT -8
Back in the 1990s, Ianni provided with Ornithoptera (and more?) a "CERTIFICATE OF LEGAL DOCUMENTATION FOR PROTECTED LEPIDOPTERA" with the date, species listed, and said it was legally imported. In that I purchased some Ornithoptera from them, I still have those certificates. While they don't actually prove anything, they do demonstrate that I legally procured specimens that are "incidentally" the same species as I retain. When I was selling O. victoriae each pair was accompanied by a similar document, though mine recorded the USFWS import number. While both "prove" nothing, and noting I've had stupider conversations with USFWS, one specimen plus one certificate/ receipt = thrown out of court and great Social Media & journalism fodder. Clearly too, when one purchases protected species one should retain the dated, detailed receipt. Heck, when purchasing ANY specimens, keep the receipts. Thousands of Ornithoptera (the more common, mass-produced species, at least) are sold mounted in shadow boxes as decorative items to the general consumer market every year. Needless to say, the vast majority of buyers of such items are not keeping the receipts. Is it the sellers, rather than the buyers, that the USFWS tends to be more concerned with? USFWS focuses on the import. That is, after all, what CITES controls- international trade. Once within a country, it's harder to catch and it's not illegal to trade within country. US Customs personnel at borders are trained to look for the CITES (both I and II) material. If they find any of the "easy" stuff they flag USFWS. If they find ANYTHING they are concerned about, they flag the authorities. Once within USA, CITES II is rarely bothered. CITES I though are the "big ticket" items, and USFWS does watch this board, Ebay, etc. Should they see a CITES I they may well come asking questions. This has been discussed many time on this board. |
|
|
|
Post by livingplanet3 on Feb 12, 2021 9:26:56 GMT -8
I see - thank you for elaborating. I started this thread due to the fact that A. chikae hermeli has clearly now been up-listed to CITES I - era.org.mt/topic/registration-of-cites-up-listed-species/I've seen hermeli offered a couple of times over the past few months, from sellers in the US. As this spp. is now CITES I, is it not legal to sell (or even possess) specimens, even if they were imported prior to the up-listing? I can only assume that, as the new legislation on this spp. is rather recent, there must still be quite a few hermeli specimens in the hands of insect specimen suppliers worldwide. Incidentally, this is not a species that I have any interest in obtaining - I just like to keep totally up to date on all insect-related CITES legislation, in order to avoid any potential issues. |
|
|
|
Post by yorky on Feb 12, 2021 9:56:40 GMT -8
Yes you can possess specimens that were purchased prior to it being placed on the CITES list you just can't sell them.
|
|
|
|
Post by trehopr1 on Feb 12, 2021 12:32:39 GMT -8
I'm pretty happy I got my male specimens of Chikae and Hermeli
a few years ago..
Both species are at or near the top of the list of Achillides favorites among collectors.
The undersides of both are indeed different and the females are particularly spectacular !
I was never able to get a female of either species because they simply were out of my price range even 10 years ago.
So for now, I'm content to see the females pictured in books but, if opportunity to own ever presents itself; I won't hesitate again if the specimens meet my standards.
|
|
|
|
Post by Crake on Feb 12, 2021 13:54:12 GMT -8
I'm pretty happy I got my male specimens of Chikae and Hermeli a few years ago.. Both species are at or near the top of the list of Achillides favorites among collectors. The undersides of both are indeed different and the females are particularly spectacular ! I was never able to get a female of either species because they simply were out of my price range even 10 years ago. So for now, I'm content to see the females pictured in books but, if opportunity to own ever presents itself; I won't hesitate again if the specimens meet my standards. Building on this topic, would you still consider P. chikae hermeli a worthwhile investment? Given the aforementioned developments, it would seem that P. chikae hermeli will become substantially more difficult to obtain, regardless of whether it deserves a spot on appendix 1. |
|
