other arrests!

[Shueyi at aol.com]

<< 
 Doug wrote:
 
 > That is not the criterion, and you know it. Quite honestly, all that
Brazil
 > really requires for permits, as far as I can see, is that you have a
 > scientific reason for collecting, and that you agree to deposit any
primary
 > types in a Brazilian institution. 

 Then Mark Walkr added:

< I understand the problem from Brazil's standpoint, I really do.  It's my
< standpoint that I'm arguing on behalf of, and there aren't many speaking on
my
< behalf.  You've mentioned:
 
< This is not anti-collecting policy, it's
 > anti-COMMERCIAL collecting policy, and anti-EXPLOITATION policy. 
 
< I, too, am against commercialized exploitation of Leps and other fauna.  It
is
< very bad for my hobby.  But you haven't made an exception for
non-exploitive or
< non-commercial collecting of common species by amateur hobbyists like me.
 Can
< you explain?  Can you justify?
  >>

There is another complete side to the commercial exploitation issue that does
and does not apply here.  Bio-propecting.  As the economic argument to save
biodiversity is pushed, many use the example of drugs derived from
plants/animlas, genetic material for recombinant work, etc as one of the key
reasons to save rainforests.  This has created some nervousness in developing
countries.  They are asked to "conserve" their resources, but they see all
the money going to big US and European companies.  Thus, they want to assure
that they get their share of potential profits.

 For example, we were trying to identify lianas from Belize.  To do this, we
needed to cut a wedge of wood, bring it back to the US, polish the wood and
examine it under a microscope to look at the grain characteristics.  Our
collecting and export permits cover insects only, so these tiny pieces of
wood required an ammendment, and they are still laying in a little box
somewhere in Belize - all because of very tight regulations designed to
protect the future rights to bioloical products derived from the native
species of Belize.  Essentially, we had to jump through the same hoops to get
our insect permits, but we were viewed as sluggards interested in dead
insects.  The lianas however, were headed to the University of California,
which is not home to sluggards, and which is the source of our problems.

The bottem line is that many countries are trying to develop regulations that
protect their future earnings potential from biologically derived materials.
 Anyone asking to transfer genetic material (= dead insects) from their
country to your  home country is likely to be viewed from this perspective in
the future.

John Shuey