New CITES info ?

[Dobe]

Don't know if there's anything new here, just stumbled across it:

https://reverb.com/news/new-cites-re...&utm_medium=FB

https://reverb.com/news/guitaronomic...st-of-tonewood

[Tavy]

That looks new to me, and rather alarming. I'm unable to find any information about this on CITES own website though - just that Indian Rosewood (for example) is not listed at present.

[Nbayrfr]

There is a Fretboard Journal pod cast about this.

[JeffD]

Yes its troubling, but there is an opportunity here, I think.

It opens the door to documentation as a verification. Someday, maybe an internationally respected document could be generated, by a manufacturer or an official inspector, that certifies a mandolin or guitar as entirely CITES and Lacey compliant. Like a mandolin passport. The passport takes the decision out of the hands custom's inspectors, and removes all perceptions of arbitrary and capricious enforcement, mistakes due to incomplete knowledge of wood, and the fear of a custom's inspectors ability give one a hard way to go by impounding your instrument till you can prove it complies.

From the enforcement angle there are advantages to. It puts proof of compliance at a more convenient time, when it can be done right without pressure, as opposed to inspections at borders with a long line of folks have been waiting on line for two hours.

Prove it complies, generate a passport, and we are good to go.

To catch subsequent non conforming alterations or repairs, they could have a passport expiration date, just like a regular passport, requiring some kind of re-inspection for renewal.

Obviously, international policy is way outside of my knowledgeable and professional purview, and it is surprising how good an idea sounds after three cups of coffee. But that doesn't mean its a bad idea either.

[fscotte]

This includes the East Indian rosewood and Honduran rosewood - as well as woods like cocobolo (Dalbergia retusa) and African blackwood (Dalbergia melanoxylon) - that are widely used in the manufacturing of stringed instruments, marimbas and some woodwinds.

A beautiful wood.

Anyway, it seems they are cracking down on many african originated woods, some of which are used in luthiery. Countries allow a certain amount of harvesting, even if under CITES. But this new regulation requires documentation.

I don't see ebony in there...

[HoGo]

Don't know if there's anything new here, just stumbled across it:

https://reverb.com/news/new-cites-re...&utm_medium=FB

https://reverb.com/news/guitaronomic...st-of-tonewood

That is ugly....
99% of stringed musical instruments contain some kind of rosewood... In many cases cost of the certificate may exceed value of the guitar or mandolin...
I also wonder hy ebony is not there... it is certainly MUCH more endangered than EIR...

[peter.coombe]

There has been much discussion about this on the guitar forums because rosewood, especially Indian Rosewood is used to a much greater extent on guitars than mandolins. It is ugly because Indian Rosewood is not the problem. Just about everyone who should know what they are talking about tell me that Indian Rosewood is abundant and sustainably logged. Some of it is FSC certified, which is about as good as it gets in terms of sustainability. The major problem is severe depletion of rosewoods from south east Asian forests to feed the insatiable demand for rosewood furniture in China. Apparently China imports around 300 logs of rosewood per hour (!!), and much of it has been illegally logged. National parks are being raided for rosewood logs. China does not have a very good record of policing illegal imports of Ivory, so I doubt these new rules are going to cause much change in what is a fairly dire situation for rosewood in some countries, but it is necessary and is a good start.

Although the CITES Appendix II annotations have not been published yet, it is likely that personal musical instruments will be exempt, so travelling musicians don't need to worry. However, apparently Japan, India and China do not recognise personal effects, so don't travel to those countries with a rosewood guitar without CITES documentation. The rules will apply to commercial transactions, so Luthiers, music shops and anyone selling internationally will be affected. This is a BIG deal, millions of guitars have been made from rosewood! It is also the first time that finished products have been included in Appendix II. CITES now does have a passport for music instruments, so JeffD the passport already exists. Unfortunately not all countries have caught up with the passport and it is not available in all countries that have signed on to the CITES treaty yet. CITES passports are available in the USA.

Indian rosewood is likely to be still available for guitar makers, but suppliers will need to cover the extra costs of CITES permits so cost will increase, and the USA suppliers will no longer be able to send rosewood internationally. I buy Indian Rosewood (mostly bindings and guitar B&S) from the USA so this is a major problem for me. It is also going to be a really big problem for Indian rosewood suppliers in India, many of which may go out of business.

[Ivan Kelsall]

From JeffD - "It opens the door to documentation as a verification." Absolutely !!. I put a similar argument forward a few years ago on here in a discussion about Rosewood & mentioned that the ''passport'' should be carried forward to the owners of any instrument containing wood from 'that' consignment. That way,the users of 'that' Rosewood, & also the instrument owners have absolute documented proof that it's ''legal'',much as Peter Coombe suggests.

It is a cause for concern,not least because CITES have seen a need for such a change in the law. I'm not a builder myself,but i certainly hope that as far as being able to obtain the woods covered (legally), that things are made as easy as possible for the folks depending on the material to earn their living. Some serious consultation is in order i think in order to 'smooth the path',
Ivan

[Tavy]

Let me give a couple of example of why this is an issue:

* This summer I built a rosewood backed guitar for a client - I discovered yesterday evening that he's in Australia for 6 months with said guitar - he left before this change was announced, and won't be back to the spring, by which time his guitar will have become "illegal". He might or might not get away with it as a personal possession, but it's a risk. Should his guitar get seized, I'm going to have one very unhappy customer on my hands.
* From my point of view, trading in vintage instruments across borders is going to become next to impossible: it's over £70 per item for an export licence (and after several hours research last night I still don't understand the forms - they even come with a caveat from HMG acknowledging that they're difficult to fill in!). That may be doable on a £1K item but not on a £200-500 item IMO. Worse, you need the actual shipping address before you can apply for the licence - so lets see, the buyer has to pay me, then sit around and wait for a couple of months while I go off and get a licence? Sorry, but no sensible buyer will do that. I realise there are cheaper "master file" licences available - but they only apply to everything you have in stock at the time of application - IMO they're not going to work for folks that typically trade items on quickly. On the other hand they'll be just fine and dandy for the big companies trading large quantities at a time.
* The EU has an instrument passport available, but you know what.... there's no guarantee that anyone outside the EU will honour it: the US in particular is known not to do so.
* Shipping with an export certificate via the post isn't easy either - you have to notify UK border force in advance so they can study the paperwork and dissect your parcel at the border - I haven't determined yet whether there is additional cost involved, but they do say that you have to use a special ParcelForce service to ensure that BorderForce is correctly notified in advance. Oh and if they're not notified in advance, the shipment is illegal even if all the paperwork is otherwise in order.
* On the plus side, you don't need certificates to trade within the EU, but Oh wait.... someone went and messed that up too.

Distinctly not in a good mood yours, John.

[JeffD]

Very frustrating.

[Bertram Henze]

Shipping with an export certificate via the post isn't easy either - you have to notify UK border force in advance so they can study the paperwork and dissect your parcel at the border - I haven't determined yet whether there is additional cost involved, but they do say that you have to use a special ParcelForce service to ensure that BorderForce is correctly notified in advance. Oh and if they're not notified in advance, the shipment is illegal even if all the paperwork is otherwise in order.

My Fylde OM is getting more valuable every minute

P.S. Just in time, Roger Bucknall wrote about this in his email newsletter today:

Rosewood Regulations: Don’t panic. I’ll tell you when to panic.

From January 2nd 2017, international trade in all “Rosewoods” will be illegal unless you have an export permit.

That means a guitar with a Rosewood fingerboard, bridge, head veneer or even a bridge pin will require a license to be sold abroad. Anything brought here from the USA, or China etc., will require an export license from that country, and probably an import license at this end. It isn’t all clear just yet. The restriction applies to ALL Dalbergia Species, i.e. Indian Rosewood, Madagascar Rosewood, Cocobolo etc., and even African Blackwood. Bubinga has been added for good (?) measure. There are going to be very wide implications, Blackwood is essential for many of the instrument makers based in the UK.

I understand the logic, but I don’t agree with it all, and I’ve been trying to fight it, with endless emails to various authorities and involving lots of other concerned people, trying to change one small detail of the interpretation. I’ve even put MBE after my name in some communications, it hasn’t made any difference. They just put NOTIMPRESSED after their names in their replies.
In case I’m quoted, that isn’t true.

But - Don't panic, this DOES NOT stop export - it is just another complication and set of papers to deal with. What it will do to conservation projects such as this one is anyone's guess.

Why doesn't anybody THINK?

Musicians travelling with their instruments are “not affected”, and anybody who emigrates in any direction has a reasonable “allowance”. So that’s all ok then.

The new restrictions are under CITES Appendix II, while Brazilian Rosewood remains on the even more strict Appendix I.

And that comes after the Brexit vote, and the value of the pound. It’s bad news if you want to buy wood, because it’s all becoming rather expensive, but it’s good news if you have good stocks, and for exports from the UK, because we are now more competitive. Imported instruments are fast becoming much more expensive. What will happen in future trade relationships? - nobody knows. Already, the regulations are being interpreted differently in different parts of the EU.

I think the last six months have seen the biggest shake up in guitar making that I’ve seen since about 1980 - certainly for UK makers, but it’s a mixed bag. At Fylde we have good, legal timber stocks and are well used to the paperwork involved. I’ll probably make some small changes to the instruments where I can to make things easier, I’m “a little angry” with the people involved but otherwise reasonably ok with it all. Other makers might not be.

[peter.coombe]

Yes it is frustrating, especially since Indian Rosewood is not part of the problem, in fact it is probably more of an example of the solution! All rosewoods have been included to make it easier for customs officials to identify the wood. If Indian rosewood had been excluded then we would be seeing all sorts of various rosewood species suddenly become "Indian" rosewood, and customs officials are not wood experts. Myself, I am stocking up on Indian rosewood best quality I can get, photographing my rosewood guitar sets, and most likely won't export anything containing rosewood after 1/1/2017. Sales within Australia is not a problem. We have a lot of choice in hardwoods here, but there is nothing I know of that is a good equivalent to Indian rosewood. Mahogany has been on CITES Appendix II for some years, but that is a lot easier to live with because finished items are excluded.

[Mandoborg]

For years I've been stashing away Cocobolo and Ebony boards . If this trend keeps up, they'll be worthless in 10 years !! Of course I'm kidding, but I can already hear people saying ' you can't do anything with that stuff anymore ' . Maybe in 20 years I'll re-shingle my tool shed with all the Red Spruce wedges I cut and stashed in the loft ! :O)

[Spruce]

There is a Fretboard Journal pod cast about this.

Here ya go...
An interesting listen for sure...

[J.Albert]

Ten years ago, if someone in this forum had posted the regulations in effect TODAY, the general reply would have been, "you're off yer rocker!"

But look at where we are today, and will be on January 2nd.

Think it's getting bad now?
Just wait.

There are many voices out there today, chanting "leave all the coal in the ground".
There are now voices beginning to cry, "leave ALL fossil fuels in the ground".

How long before these same folks discover exotic woods, and start saying that we should leave all the exotic wood trees uncut and in the ground as well....?

[brunello97]

Easy, big fella.

Mick

[Spruce]

How long before these same folks discover exotic woods, and start saying that we should leave all the exotic wood trees uncut and in the ground as well....?

Uhhh--if you were listening--for the past 100 years or so??
(...and I make my living selling tonewood)...

And, apply this to the "non-exotic" conifers as well--old growth spruces, cedars, and of course, redwood...

Think it's getting bad now?
Just wait.

You got that right...

[Dobe]

Thanks Peter, a little sad to read but thanks for all the info !

[Dobe]

Mandoborg: Let me know when I can come get yer worthless Cocobolo !

[Jeff Mando]

I may have figured out the solution.....what if we:

1. Only made instruments from wood grown in our own country. (or respective "countries")
2. Only sold those instruments in our own country.
3. Didn't travel or at least didn't take our instruments when we traveled.

Whew, that was hard! What else ya got for me?...........

[CarlM]

Maybe in 20 years I'll re-shingle my tool shed with all the Red Spruce wedges I cut and stashed in the loft ! :O)

My house is sided with redwood.

One place I used to work would get large iron castings from Brazil and other places. Woodworkers in the machine shop would watch the pallets and skids that these came on closely. Pallets were recovered that were made of purple heart and pink ivory and other exotic woods. I never heard of any rosewood but it is possible. This was 20 years ago. I am not sure if it still happens.

[Ivan Kelsall]

In the previous Cafe discussion regarding Rosewoods which i mentioned in my last post,i suggested that there should be a ''cut-off point'' after the intro.of new legislation ie. ''Instrument build prior to the intro. of the new legislation would still be considered legal''. That would solve the problem for Tavy's customer (hopefully). In his case,the new legislation wouldn't (shouldn't) apply. It would only apply to instruments built after the new legislation is introduced.

Is this how the new legislation will work,or is it an outright,overall ban, effective retrospectively ?. If that were to be the case,then many existing instruments & stocks of wood would be considered to be 'illegal',
Ivan

[Tavy]

Is this how the new legislation will work,or is it an outright,overall ban, effective retrospectively ?. If that were to be the case,then many existing instruments & stocks of wood would be considered to be 'illegal',
Ivan

It's a ban on international trade on the listed items, including finished goods containing said items. So yes it is effectively retrospective in that vintage instruments are just as effected as new ones - there is I will confess good reason for this - without this provision folks pass off new ivory (for example) as old.

[Bertram Henze]

Is this how the new legislation will work,or is it an outright,overall ban, effective retrospectively ?. If that were to be the case,then many existing instruments & stocks of wood would be considered to be 'illegal',
Ivan

It happens. Just like the Cathedral of Chalesm.

The Cathedral of Chalesm was a famous and beautiful building in the Milky Way galaxy. However, not only was it pulled down in order to build a new ion refinery, but the construction of the refinery took so long, and had to extend so far back into the past in order to allow ion production to start on time, that the Cathedral of Chalesm has now never been built in the first place. Picture postcards of the cathedral suddenly became and remain immensely valuable.
(Douglas Adams, Life the Universe and Everything)

[fscotte]

Hold the horses a bit.

Wood is a viable source of income for many countries. Without their harvesting, said countries would lose a good deal of income. The idea behind CITES is to regulate the out of control cutting and poaching of standing exotic woods. We are a long way off from adding spruce or maple to that list, if ever.

So many exotics will still be available, yet require more regulation in their timbering, and documentation in their trade. Others may become so short in supply, you may consider them extinct.

Unfortunately, yes, a guitar built with these woods will have to have documentation on when it was built, where it came from, etc... Not a huge deal.