K Barrett spaketh thusly:

I am floored that hagianum etc came through in flasks. Maybe because
they *were* in flasks? Note: I don't believe CITES exempts App I flasks,
no matter what has been written, but sheesh, you've seen it for
yourself, Pat.... maybe its true

Orchids on Appendix I and II of CITES are specifically exempted
under CITES. It's there in the treaty, right there on www.cites.org if
you're so incined. The problem comes with plants whose parentage is under
question for legal purposes, an interpretation the US Office of Management
Authority shares with a small number of other countries.

As a result, Paph. vietnamense from Asia is "probably illegal,"
while containers from Europe may or may not be legitimate, according to my
conversations with the harried folks at Fish and Wildlife. Perhaps this
status has changed recently; it's difficult to keep up with this sort of
thing when the rules aren't exactly written down.

That Appendix I plants are specifically exempted under CITES has a
long background, including lobbying on the part of the American Orchid
Society way the heck back when (early 1970's, I think). Bob Wellenstein,
who once boasted in this newsgroup (if memory serves) that he propagates
more Appendix I species than maybe anyone else in the United States
refers to the exemption in his web pages:

http://www.ladyslipper.com/paphfaq.htm

"Flasks have been exempted from CITES documentation. However, it
is important to note that flasks derived from illegal plants are also
considered illegal. It is also important to note that the concept being
promoted by some of the plant smugglers that once a plant has entered the
country, even if illegally, is now legal to possess is incorrect."

This may become pertinent to the kovachii situation if the
ultimate source of the propagules is ever determined to be outside of
Peru, which seems possible.

The address in the header isn't valid. Send no email there.

-AJHicks
Chandler, AZ