Read an interesting article about Gibson's certified lumber program. Pretty impressive on Gibson's part.
Modern woodworking magazine
Read an interesting article about Gibson's certified lumber program. Pretty impressive on Gibson's part.
Modern woodworking magazine
Thistle,
That is an interesting article. I'm glad Gibson is trying to be a good corporate citizen... and really, they're helping the company stay in business in the long run. As they point out, wood is a renewable resource and if we use it in ways that maximize profits today we will likely destroy the businesses that rely on these woods in the long run. Too often businesses are run for short term profitability with no regard for the costs to society, the environment, and the long-term viability of the business. It's refreshing to read about companies as big as Gibson that have a corporate conscience.
If anyone is interested in reading more about wood certification, you may be interested in the following link. You may also want to make note that LMII offers several woods that are certified by the Forestry Stewardship Council (FSC). They may be a little more expensive... which is hard for the small builder to absorb... but if everyone starts moving this direction we will all benefit.
Paul Doubek
"... beauty is not found in the excessive but what is lean and spare and subtle" - Terry Tempest Williams
We think this is a good program also. It does raise the price on the instruments some but in the long run it will be worth it for all of us. This affects not only Bluegrass instruments, but all instruments made by Gibson.
Have a Great Day!
Joe Vest
How much more really is this wood? I wonder if the price increase will be a direct corrolation of costs to price increase or them trying to tack on a few extra bucks for themselves. A lot of times these environmental deals are done for the right reasons but get kind of messy afterwards. Bottom line it's good for companies to go this route. I'm just scared because we're already hearing a Gibson guy say it's going to mean an increase in price (we all know what a small part the wood actually is in overall prices).
Paul
What Big Joe refers to is what I meant by "if everyone starts moving this direction, we all benefit"; these programs do cost more and that cost has to be passed on to the consumer. If some businesses are competing by purchasing cheaper, non-sustainably harvested woods, they will drive the more responsible companies out of business if price is the only consideration. Part of the responsibility falls on the consumer to decide whether the increased price is justified to support what the company is trying to do.
Paul C. is right... there are unscrupulous business people that will take advantage of the situation by selling uncertified products at the certified prices. That is why it's good to look for a reputable certification or educate yourself about what companies like Gibson are doing. In the late '80s when I became concerned about these issues, there were no certifications and you had to jump through some serious hoops to find socially responsible and sustainably harvested hardwoods.
For comparison: LMII lists their FSC certified Euro Maple guitar back & side sets for $153, whereas their non-certified Euro Maple sets go for about $97 and $147 depending on quality. I don't know if the certified wood compares more to the low figured or highly figured non-cert set, and I'm not endorsing LMII's products or prices. I just thought I'd throw it up there for comparison.
Paul Doubek
"... beauty is not found in the excessive but what is lean and spare and subtle" - Terry Tempest Williams
"LMII lists their FSC certified Euro Maple guitar back & side sets for $153, whereas their non-certified Euro Maple sets go for about $97 and $147 depending on quality."
Since when is European Maple endangered?
It's a #######' weed...
I dunno...
There's a ton of BS and bogus claims going on right now by logging companies wanting to appear "green", but who are in fact the same old cut-and-run operations...
Here's one example....
"As they point out, wood is a renewable resource"
Well, a conifer with old-growth characteristics (which is what we want for mandolin tops) certainly isn't. #
Yeah, it's renewable in the sense that some semblance of a Sitka or Engelmann will reappear at some point from a clear-cut, but not with the old-growth characteristics that we need to build an instrument with...
That might occur in 1000 years or so...
I recently looked at some fresh old-growth Engelmann logs that were supposedly "certified"....
Yeah, right....
Bruce is absolutely correct! This is the same "politically correct" Barvo Sierra (that's Marine lingo) that we hear from PETA, the Sierra Club, and other marginal (or worse) advocacy groups. It's not about wood, it's about their version of how the world should operate. I will not buy a new Gibson as long as they participate in this ####.
Please guys, use a little sense in this. If Brazilian Rosewood is truly endangered, don't use it, but good grief, use some sense. Believe it or not, there are more forrested acres in the United States now than when Columbus arrived. Heck no, I can't prove it! Can you prove otherwise?
Linksmaker
Sorry about the ####. It wasn't a bad one - it began with C.
Linksmaker
I can't spell, it's Bravo Sierra!
Linksmaker
An FSC certification isn't about whether or not it's endangered... it's about whether it's harvested and sold in a socially responsible fashion. I used the Euro Maple as an example because somebody asked what the price difference was and LMII happens to carry both.Originally Posted by
The mentality that we will never run out of any particular wood is the same one that has helped put Brazilian Rosewood on the protected list. I recall in the early '80s listening to a woodturner that had a booth next to mine at an arts festival rant about how he'd been to Brazil and there's so much wood there we'll never run out! Whatever!
I'm certainly not going to argue about whether there are more forested acres in the US than when Columbus arrived... it would be pretty easy to research, but it's not the point. It's about giving back what we're taking from the planet and harvesting lumber in a responsible manner. If you want to know what that means, there's reading material at the links I provided earlier in this thread.
Human populations continue to grow and utilize (read: waste) more of the Earth's resources... I'd like to live in such a way that there will be something left for my grandkids.
I applaud Gibson for being a socially responsible organization, at least with regards to their wood. I hope there's enough of a concerned market to make it profitable. I will certainly do what I can to promote their efforts.
Paul Doubek
"... beauty is not found in the excessive but what is lean and spare and subtle" - Terry Tempest Williams
It's very easy to find fault with someone's attempt to do a good thing...it's much harder to recommend an alternative solution. I would be the first one to admit that the certification process cannot possibly be foolproof and on some level is just smart marketing. I still feel like it's a solid step in the right direction. Taylor's NT guitar necks have gotten a lot of bad pub for one reason or another but I think they also represent a step towards more responsible practices.
Andy
Mpls, MN
This is not new to Gibson. THis has been in process for some time. The cost is already factored into our products. It is a fairly complicated process starting with the forester being certified, the lumber certified and serial numbered. Then the wood has to be tracked all through the manufacturing process until completion. It's really not much about marketing on our part, and it is a good thing in the long run. You will not see any Gibsons with Brazilian Rosewood being produced again. Those ended in 2003. The only ones left are the ones hanging in stores and they are getting pricey as everything Brazilian is. As for mandolins, there really isn't that much that is endangered except some of the Ebony, but all the wood must be certified from now on. It will not result in further price increases for that. That was a good part of the price increase last year. THis is not new for Gibson, but no one really cared then. They just were mad because prices went up. Now that has passed and life goes on, the behind the scenes stuff can surface. Like many things, certified wood may not make some excited, but there are plenty of choices and Gibson is not the only one. If one prefers not to buy a certified lumber product, that is their choice and fine. For the rest of us, we can appreciate the good it may do for the generations ahead of us.
While there are still good North American forests, much of the wood is not as useable for instrument production as it was a hundred years ago. Lots of houses, paper mills, and furniture, charcoal, fireplaces, etc. compete for the same wood as instruments and much of the forestry products today are not sufficient grade, size, or quality for what is needed. There may be pleny of wood, but that does not mean it is the right stuff for what is needed in instrument manufacturing. Of course, we could go to alternative woods that may not sound as good or be very poor in the visual department or may not be stable or hold together for long. That may be one of the choices the future generation will face if we don't do something now. I'm not a tree hugger, but I'm also not for wasting the resources we have and jeapordize the next generation or the one after. Just my opinions.
Have a Great Day!
Joe Vest
I will. That's complete nonsense.
Upon European contact, north America was covered with forest from the atlantic coast to the edge of the great plains, some distance past the mississippi. Apart from scattered remnants, all that land--formerly forest--is either cornfields or subdivisions today.
Well I guess I'll just go ahead and offend everyone!
Oh yeah #- #The truth #- #it's not about doing something that really works, it's about doing something that makes you feel good! PC at it's finest!
[QUOTE]Upon European contact, north America was covered with forest from the atlantic coast to the edge of the great plains, some distance past the mississippi. Apart from scattered remnants, all that land--formerly forest--is either cornfields or subdivisions today.
OK, yep that's definitive proof. I didn't realize we had established cornfields, shopping centers, and subdivisions!
Sorry for the sarcaism but this stuff drives me nuts. I too agree that we should be good stewards of what we have been given. However, I will not be duped into a "feel good" solution because of some group of folks who worship nature. Certainly, I am not implying that anyone on this thread falls in this catagory, but I am afraid some may have fallen prey to their propaganda.
OK. let me have it!!!
PS: I love you Joe, but I will only buy pre-certified wood Gibson's. Please let me know how I can identify them!
Linksmaker
In the eastern US, forests have recovered in the past century. For example, Indiana originally had 20 million acres of forest. By the year 1900 the area was down to 1.5 million acres. Now, it's about 4.5 million acres. New England was about 80% deforested 200 years ago, but now it's close to 80% forest.I will. That's complete nonsense.
Upon European contact, north America was covered with forest from the atlantic coast to the edge of the great plains, some distance past the mississippi. Apart from scattered remnants, all that land--formerly forest--is either cornfields or subdivisions today.
However, young second growth forests don't produce large pieces of tight-grained wood.
D.H.
Thank you Paul
I agree totally and I applaud any attempt to reverse the waste that we have brought on ourselves whether it has an immediate impact or not is not the point as were most of the points brought up.
Its an attitude that must begin to be fostered sooner than later, bumps and misteps included
Big Joe, my hats off to you guys for at least trying
Scott
Dave, et. al.,
(Quote)
Bill McKibben, author of several environmental books, writes that the forest cover of the eastern United States today is as extensive as it was before the American Revolution. This renewal of the eastern forest largely is the result of economic accident and generally unremarked.
(Quote)
So if the overall environment greatly has improved in the 20th century, and continually gets better, why all the pessimistic assessments of the environment blaring from the media? According to one U.S. environmental official who requested anonymity, "In many cases you have advocacy groups that make money creating the perception of a crisis. It is a conflict industry."
In all seriousness, I have read numerous articles stating that we have anywhere from 70% of forested acres now that we had in 1630 to more forested acres than we had in 1630. No one really knows for sure, as the documentation is from descriptions in letters, and other writings of the period. Some of the estimates were based on scientists examination of pollen taken from 17th century sites, where they determined that the earlier pollen was from trees and later pollen from grasslands, which would indicate that the area was once forested.
What we do know is that the destruction of the forestd did not start with the Europeans that came to America. The indians often burned and cleared forests for a varirty of reasons. We also know that there are 33% more trees planted each year than are harvested. Certainly, these trees will take many years before they would be useful for tonewoods, but as one of the articles pointed out, there are groups of folks that prosper from the "bad news" that the timber industry is healthy and doing quite well.
You can pick and choose which statistics you want to believe. I guess that is what I am doing, but at least I am honest about it and agin refuse to be duped by science that is not backed up by facts or common sense.
No disrespect to thoie who differ, I just choose not to participate in these "feel good" initiatives.
Linksmaker
Your disgust is duly noted. Can we keep this about mandolins and the wonderful things involved with them? Here are a few companies trying to come up with a constructive solution to a problem that is NOT going away. Telling us we are being duped by "feel good" initiatives is wonderful and I appreciate you lifting the veil of Maya from my eyes, but either offer something as an alternative solution, or don't contribute. I visit this site to read about mandolins- how to pick them, how to build them, how to fix them- not about somebody's worldview . I am not saying I don't like to discuss these things, but I believe in the adage "right time, right place." This is neither. Let it rest or take it to a different message board. Thanks, and keep on pickin.
-Max
I laid the tracks, never rode the train.
MAX:
I agree totally. I did not start this thread, but I guess I can't keep my big mouth shut!
Please disregard anything else I say if it does not directly relate to mandolins!
Big Joe - what I meant to say is I will not buy another Gibson Mandolin made of certified wood unless it it's a real killer and I can't live without it! I guess that does not eliminate many of your new products!
Linksmaker
I did start this thread, and I already regret it. This isn't about US forestry policy. Its about a company looking at a different way of doing business that is a little more enviromentally sound than what they did do. Gibson is doing a lot more than a lot of other companies are doing. If you want to talk forestry policy got to www.woodweb.com.
I love mandolins and I love the fact that manufacturers (whether completely "Certified" or not) are taking a POSITIVE step (note positive) in a consciencious direction. Does this mean that I'm going to sell off everything and go buy one right now, no, but if I could I would. It just means I respect the initiative.
A note to Links, and I by no means want to offend you but, a large percentage (funny irony) of statistics that people quote are very often incorrect. Statistics seem to get negotiated with the passing of people and consequently get watered and muddied (word?) up. I'm not saying what you believe is wrong, but, could very well be propaganda in and of itself. That's all I'm saying on this. Later......
42.7% of all statistics are made up on the spot.
# # # :::::::
---Ryan Stackhouse---
No comment!
Linksmaker
You're missing my point...
I'm not criticizing the intent of the certification process (which I support).
I'm saying that logging companies are circumventing the process in order to appear "green", which is very cool to do these days...
And they ain't that green, pure and simple....
I could give many examples...
Naw, I'm probably one of the only folks around making a living off of old-growth conifers who is in support of preserving every last one of them that remains...
A "windfall" is well-named....
Big Joe said:Very well stated... Joe... that's exactly how I feel.
Thistle... I'm glad you started this thread. I found the interview interesting and it makes me feel good that Gibson is making an effort in the right direction. Thanks for bringing this to our attention.
On the subject of forestry (I know... everybody said shut-up about forestry), I didn't get a chance to read Bruce's linked article until this morning... another good read. Thanks for the post... one more thing to consider.
Paul Doubek
"... beauty is not found in the excessive but what is lean and spare and subtle" - Terry Tempest Williams
good points made all around, and thanks for the article links. it may not apply to instrument building, but there is a LOT of material out there that can and should be recycled/reused. so much ends up in landfills. as long as we continue our consumptive ways in the west, immoral/illegal/hazardous/damaging resource harvests will continue.
<stepping off soapbox>
Proud owner of:
Bill Davis F5 #10502
Martin 000-M
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks