Become a Supporting Member

Go Back   The Gear Page > Instruments > Luthier's Corner: Guitar & Bass Technical Discussion


Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-02-2011, 05:09 PM
gregsguitars gregsguitars is offline
Senior Member
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Atlanta,Ga.
Posts: 719
Just one of mant articles about this insane law

Newsletter #29, March 2007

Endangered woods: Immediate action requested
A proposal currently being considered by the board of CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Flora and Fauna) would restrict international trade in pernambuco wood and would make it virtually impossible for violinists to legally take their bows across international borders. This proposal has spurred NAMM to launch a letter-writing campaign to the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, which administers the CITES treaty in the U.S. While pernambuco restrictions would not affect guitars, mandolins, banjos, or violins (only the bows), the proposal is indicative of increasingly complex, cumbersome and counter-productive CITES regulations that do affect fretted instruments - new as well as vintage - and, moreover, it is indicative of a growing need for sensible, long-range plans for managing wood resources.
Our immediate concern is the CITES proposal, because it would put pernambuco, Nicaraguan rosewood and Honduran rosewood on Appendix II and would include finished goods as well as raw lumber. Until now, restrictions on finished goods have been on items listed in Appendix I (which includes Brazilian rosewood, ivory and tortoiseshell). While there are many guitars that don't contain Appendix I materials, virtually every good violin bow is made of pernambuco. The permits required to cross international borders with a violin bow will make it effectively impossible for a violinist to legally carry his own bow on an international tour. Furthermore, the proposal, if approved, would set a precedent for listing finished goods on Appendix II that could easily carry over to Honduras mahogany, one of the three mahogany species currently on Appendix II but restricted only for raw lumber. Honduras mahogany (Swietenia macrophylla, aka Brazilian mahogany or bigleaf mahogany) is much more prevalent on guitars than Brazilian rosewood, and a restriction on finished goods would all but kill international guitar trade.
NAMM (the International Music Products Association) has a governmental affairs department that effectively lobbied for the guitar industry when Brazilian rosewood was added to Appendix I in 1992, and NAMM has now issued a call to action on the pernambuco proposal in the form of a letter-writing campaign from their website. The email form can be edited and can be printed for fax or regular mail delivery. We urge everyone to go to the NAMM web page now - and send a letter to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife service. We would recommend that you make two points:
1. Finished goods should not be restricted on Appendix II items. 2. A practical process of certification should be implemented so that new and pre-existing finished goods can be permanently certified as to age and materials.
The Fish & Wildlife Service will only accept letters until April 20, so time is of the essence.
We wholeheartedly support the conservation and preservation efforts that CITES represents, and we believe that there are numerous guitar-related woods not yet covered under CITES that are in desperate need of protection and proper management. However, the current state of CITES administration is so cumbersome and illogical that it becomes counter-productive to the goals of the treaty. For example, it would seem easy enough to get a permit to send or carry a 1965 Martin D-28 to Canada or England or to any one of the 170-plus countries that have signed the treaty. That guitar has Brazilian rosewood back, sides and headstock veneer, so according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife website, the owner can get a "pre-CITES certificate" stating that it was made before its materials were listed on Appendix I, which in the case of Brazilian rosewood is 1992. Then you can get a permit for it to leave the United States. The problem starts right there, because there is no such certificate as described in the CITES regulations; there is only the permit. On the permit application Form 3-200-32) you must list all of your guitars that contain CITES-protected material, along with information about the source of that material (including Latin name of the species and country of origin), and you must list the address of the recipient, which is presumably yourself if you are a traveling musician. The fee for a single shipment is $100 and the processing time is up to 60 days.
That permit will get your guitar out of the U.S. but to get it into another country you will need a reciprocal permit from that country. If you travel on to yet another country, you will need permits from the country you are leaving and from the one you are entering. The only time you will not need a separate permit for a border crossing is when you re-enter the U.S.; your export permit is also valid as an import permit. Technically, according to regulations, you can only bring a CITES-protected plant or plant product into the U.S. through one of only 12 PPQ (Plant Protection and Quarantine) inspection stations; we believe that this requirement is not applied to finished goods such as a guitar, but the published regulations make no such exception. This would be a good point to insert a disclaimer: This information is based on our understanding and interpretation of CITES regulations, but we certainly can not guarantee that various governmental agencies in the 170-plus signatory countries will act consistently or in accordance with our interpretation. However, it is likely that international travel will involve a CITES-signatory country, as only 27 have not signed the treaty, the most prominent of which are Korea, Iraq and Lebanon. (Complete lists of signatory and non-signatory countries)
Even if you have all the proper permits for Brazilian rosewood, if the saddle and nut on your 1965 D-28 are original, you are still in violation of CITES. That's because the saddle and nut are of elephant ivory. Although CITES didn't come into existence until 1974, the treaty restricts ivory to pieces predating 1947, and reworked ivory from pre-1947 products still counts as new ivory. And don't even think about carrying a tortoiseshell (Hawksbill see turtle) pick. To get a permit for tortoiseshell, you must be able to prove that it has been a guitar pick for at least 100 years; if it was reworked from a hairbrush or some other antique within the last 100 years, then it is not exempt from CITES.
Enforcement of guitar-related CITES regulations has in the past been relatively lax and in some countries non-existent. Many guitar dealers as well as individuals have been "slipping by" these regulations and simply not declaring (or mis-declaring) CITES-covered materials. However, we have recently seen tighter enforcement, such as a shipment of new guitars from China being impounded by U.S. Customs for lack of documentation, and we can expect it to get even tighter. If you don't believe it, you only have to look at CITES section of the Fish & Wildlife website. On the page dealing with shipments of "antiques," the only antiques specifically identified are "guitars made of Brazilian rosewood." There is also an illustration of Brazilian rosewood guitar - one of only two illustrations on the page (the other is of ivory products). On the permit application, which covers plants of all kinds, there is a special section for Brazilian rosewood (Dalbergia nigra) with headings for guitar exporters and vintage guitar exporters. Again, no other species, products or businesses (except nurseries) are singled out.
Clearly, compliance with CITES would be much easier and much more effective with a simple certification system - for new instruments as well as for pre-CITES instruments, most of which have serial numbers or period-specific characteristics that can provide accurate dating criteria. These practical, day-to-day problems with CITES warrant more discussion and action. However, there is a much bigger problem looming in the very near future that CITES only begins to address, and that is the dwindling supply of guitar woods, whether covered by CITES or not.
Guitar companies have long been aware of relatively finite wood supplies. Chris Martin, CEO of the Martin company, was perceived in the early 1990s as the boy who cried "Wolf" when he began talking about a day when there would simply be no more wood available for guitars. Martin's D1 of 1992, the first modern Martin with laminated sides, was developed as the first step in redesigning a guitar specifically for laminated materials. Today, Martin's X-series models feature non-wood HPL (high pressure laminate) back and sides and a multi-laminate neck of apple wood. The models with an HPL top still leave something to be desired in terms of tone, but the spruce-top models, such as the DX1, prove that good-sounding guitars can be made from eco-friendly materials. (More on spruce to follow.)
Chris Martin has also tried to lead the way to more sustainable tone woods by using cherry wood instead of mahogany. Although cherry wood is widely used in furniture and was once known as American mahogany, guitar buyers have not yet been willing to make the switch. Martin's substitution - or mixing - of sapele wood (aka African mahogany) with other mahoganies in its Style 17 guitars has been successful.
Gibson took the initiative in the electric guitar market in 1996 by introducing the Les Paul Smartwood. It marked the beginning of a relationship with the Rainforest Alliance (Gibson CEO Henry Juszkiewicz sits on the board), a conservation organization that certifies wood for the Forestry Stewardship Council as having come from responsibly managed forests. In addition to making a publicity splash with various Smartwood models, Gibson quietly began working certified wood into regular production. The percentage of FSC-certified mahogany used in Gibsons went from 1 percent in 2003 to 22 percent in 2005 and to 40 percent in 2006. In addition, all of Gibson's domestic wood is certified except for figured maple.
Guitarmakers have substituted East Indian rosewood (Dalbergia latifolia) for Brazilian since 1969. Although it has been heavily logged in India, the Indian government is apparently managing its rosewood now such that it is not endangered. Other exotic substitutes for Brazilian rosewood, such as cocobolo (Dalbergia retusa), bubinga (Guibourtia demeusei) or Madagascar rosewood (Dalbergia baronii) are not in plentiful supply and should protected, but at present Brazilian rosewood is the only Dalbergia of any kind on CITES Appendix I, II or III.
When it comes to the top of an acoustic guitar, some cedar and redwood provide different tonal colorings than spruce, but for all practical purposes, there is no substitute for close-grain spruce. Guitarmakers put a premium on red spruce (Adirondack spruce), which was used by Martin and Gibson prior to World War II. Those companies switched to Sitka spruce because red spruce was in short supply. Now Sitka stands in Alaska are being depleted, and there is no quick and easy solution. Spruce trees that have 20 grain lines to the inch must be close to 200 years old to provide a top for a dreadnought acoustic guitar, and some trees are as old as 500 years. The demand for Adirondack tops has made wider-grained wood more acceptable, but our generation will obviously not be able to benefit from any replanting of spruce trees in our lifetimes. In the meantime, we can continue to try to develop substitutes, and we can make the most efficient and conscientious use of the spruce that we do have.
CITES treats the symptoms of the problem of endangered species, but it's like trying to cure alcoholism by outlawing alcohol. Some people would stop drinking, but others would continue to demand alcohol, which would create a market for illegal alcohol at higher prices. CITES certainly slows the flow of endangered species, but it also creates a black market. And it does not appear to allow for a "managed comeback" that might be attainable through proper management of resources. Nile crocodiles, for example, are reproducing quite well in captivity and could provide hides for commercial use without adversely affecting populations in the wild. Ivory from elephants that have died of natural causes is usually destroyed along with confiscated poached ivory. In both of these cases, the reintroduction of materials - with proper certification - could undermine the black market and, if some or all of the profits were reinvested in enforcement, could further curtail poaching.
Most animals reproduce and reach maturity faster than trees reach harvestable size, so the solutions for guitar woods are more difficult to implement and will take much longer. While we can easily imagine a time in the near future when "all-wood" instruments will bring premium prices for dealers of vintage fretted instruments, we would prefer that our wood resources be handled with the same care with which we handle our instruments, so that fine guitars can continue to be produced as we know them.
George Gruhn and Walter Carter
More links...
FAQ document, from Wales, very informative for traveling musicians.
CITES home page.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service permit page.
List of common and Latin names for wood species. Also see CITES database search.
Greg's Guitars 770-337-9679
Greg's Guitars website
Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2011, 06:29 PM
Structo Structo is offline
Senior Member
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Orygun
Posts: 9,272
To me this all seems ambiguous.
There is nothing that tells a Customs agent when a guitar was built therefore whether the wood used in the construction of the guitar was restricted at the time of manufacture.
Or if the guitar was made after the regulations went into affect and what paperwork the guitar needs to prove it is legitimate.

Think about all the prewar and post war Martins made with Brazilian rosewood and other makers that used it as well.
I have a Tacoma acoustic that has solid rosewood back and sides, do I need a document to prove that this guitar is legal?
Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2011, 06:39 PM
arthur rotfeld arthur rotfeld is offline
Senior Member
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: white plains, ny
Posts: 7,068
Stucco, with these laws and the whims of the customs guys, almost anything could be confiscated. I will not travel internationally with any acoustics and I'd think twice about some electrics.

Pre-war Martin? IMO you'd be crazy to travel with it, even if you were able to get the paperwork.

Technically you wouldn't have a problem with the Tacoma, as it's not Brazilian rosewood, but all you need is a customs agent to suspect it is. What if he can't tell bone from ivory? Like telling a bag of baking soda from coke. Try to educate a customs guy while in line at JFK.....

Affiliations with Alfred Music, Cherry Lane Music, Shubb Capos, Clayton Picks, Italia Straps, Xotic Effects
Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2011, 06:52 AM
epluribus epluribus is offline
Senior Member
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 9,207
Just found this, 'preciate the post John! I cross borders all the time, so I'll watch what I carry. But it shouldn't be a biggie...I'm too cheap to be ponyin' up for cool stuff like Zambizian Heartwood.

Tone is in Aisle 4.
Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2011, 05:37 PM
J Sudjian J Sudjian is offline
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 120
Originally Posted by Flyin' Brian View Post
There's absolutely no common sense in any bureaucracy anymore. It's stunningly stupid, as are the people making the rules.
" Stunningly Stupid " lmao nice!
Have you built people up today, or did you bring them down?
Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2011, 08:45 PM
Rockledge Rockledge is offline
Senior Member
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: mars
Posts: 2,938
Look at the bright side.
If history serves as a yardstick, then this likely means that the united states will be flooded with instruments that contain banned components.
There is a war on drugs, we are among the top ranking countries suffering from drug addiction.
We have strong laws against entering this country without permission, but our cities are flooded with people who don't belong here.
My prediction is that this is a passing fad that as soon as enforcement gets old and lax the market will be flooded with what is now considered to be contraband right under the noses of those enforcing it.

If not, then the ramifications will be severe, imagine if any country looses the relics of past craftsmanship. The guitar is a national monument to many countries, including this one. It will not just be musicians who experience the consequences , it will be an entire culture.
It would also have the effect of creating a huge black market for musical instruments, driving the value of them sky high.
Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2011, 08:53 PM
jazzandmetal? jazzandmetal? is offline
Supporting Member
Feedback Score: 2 reviews
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 8,548
Originally Posted by Husky View Post
Well I agree about the species but the problem is there are certain licenses guys can get for research and then do what they want with the shell anyway. Kind of like Save the whales but they kill the whales for "research" There are too many loopholes. Anyone watch "The Cove" ?
I'm sure you guys have heard about Gibson getting popped. Also there will soon be issues with many woods. The CITES regulations are so thick you have to read between the lines for days but here is some google found stuff. I'm still researching but so far it looks like I need $190 worth of permits for anything with a substance where I have to prove it was either obtained legally or is exempt. This will drive up the price of options such as pearl/abalone dots. If you dont have this permit then they can seize the instrument even if you are transporting it personally.
I am so glad I don't like dots on guitar fretboards.....just trying to lighten the mood. This really does suck.
I work for GC
Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2012, 11:33 AM
Branzell Guitars Branzell Guitars is offline
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Nevada
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by Husky View Post
I wish this were a sticky.
What are you other builders doing about complying with cites regulations and the heavy potential fines associated with it? No Abalone, Shell, Ivory, Mahogany, Brazilian etc. From what I see is in order to use 1 abalone face dot it will cost me $190. There are permits associated with export now. My European and Japanese dealers are freaking.
This is even affecting the transportation of your instruments, take it to Canada and you might not be able to bring that old Martin back !
Even if you use an old piece of Tusk from a knife handle to make a nut , if you reshaped it last month they consider the born date last month no matter how old the knife was.

My brother is a Federal Agent with the US Fish and Wildlife Service and I'll send him your note.

Gary Branzell
Branzell Guitars
Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2012, 03:06 PM
Mighty Melvin Mighty Melvin is offline
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 150
Originally Posted by Flyin' Brian View Post
There's absolutely no common sense in any bureaucracy anymore. It's stunningly stupid, as are the people making the rules.
They're not stupid. They're evil.

Reply With Quote
Old 10-06-2012, 12:30 PM
drbob1 drbob1 is offline
Supporting Member
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 12,033
This actually could come back and bite someone with an old guitar, hard. Imagine you've a 50s Gibson and it's refretted and the fretboard planed-does that constitute remanufacture and the instrument must be siezed? How about a patch on an old Martin (or an old credenza for that matter)?

What's frustrating too, is that guitars are what, less than 1% of the Rosewood used? Never were more than 1% of the ivory or abalone? I just don't see rogue guitar makers driving the deforestation of Brazil...

Like the Reader's Digest Condensed version of Ron Kirn...
Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2012, 10:56 AM
whoismarykelly whoismarykelly is offline
Silver Supporting Member
Feedback Score: 12 reviews
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 6,723
I'm reading through the cites manual posted above and when I got to the identification section of the manual I wasn't surprised to see that inspectors were directed to take a sample of the wood with a razor blade to inspect with a magnifying glass or microscope. Then each species has specific identifiers that agents are supposed to look for. Here on TGP, the "brazilian rosewood authorities" routinely say that to identify BRW they look for a sweet spicy smell. Guess what the CITES manual says. Exactly the same thing.

If they are in fact targeting guitars, its a safe bet that they will be harvesting a sample of wood from your fingerboard, headstock veneer, bridge, back/sides, etc... to look at it and smell it. So if there is suspicion at all, they WILL be causing irreparable damage to the guitar to conduct their tests. They aren't just going to be looking at a finished guitar and scratching their heads looking at pictures. It looks like they will be cutting pieces off to send to labs and inspect on site.
Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2012, 11:12 AM
arthur rotfeld arthur rotfeld is offline
Senior Member
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: white plains, ny
Posts: 7,068
As the owner of several top-notch production guitars and custom instruments (which include BRW parts) I ain't taking them across borders!

You know what else? The $200 Yamahas students keep bringing in sound pretty darn good!
I'll pick up one of those for any overseas tours.

Affiliations with Alfred Music, Cherry Lane Music, Shubb Capos, Clayton Picks, Italia Straps, Xotic Effects
Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2013, 10:54 AM
larry1096 larry1096 is offline
Senior Member
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 460
For all of you hoping this will get sorted out and clarified; did it?

I know that the 922(r) laws certainly didn't (they apply to firearms) and arrests and seizures in error continue unabated.


Last edited by larry1096; 03-24-2013 at 11:06 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2013, 09:04 AM
bluesmanbill bluesmanbill is offline
New Member
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Montreal
Posts: 1
I will use fake dot inlays to avoid any hassles--they look fine. Complex inlays may be a different story, but I never get any requests for that sort of thing, and what little I had supplied in the past was sub-contracted to people better at it than I was. Here again, todays Pearloid and laser cutting can solve a lot of issues.
Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2013, 09:17 AM
MBT74 MBT74 is offline
Supporting Member
Feedback Score: 2 reviews
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Australia.
Posts: 1,188
I'm curious too about how all of this is playing out as time goes on. I've heard horror stories about guitars being taken from musicians at gigs in Germany.

How do the big name touring professionals get their vintage guitars on tour with these laws? I'm thinking about people like The Edge who travels with dozens of vintage guitars.

The logical progression of the CITES laws would mean that nobody can sell vintage guitars that used Brazilian rosewood (so no pre '66 Fenders etc). Is that likely to happen or is common sense prevailing with the execution of these laws?
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:26 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright ©2002-2015, The Gear Page, LLC, Brian Scherzer
All rights reserved.
Header Graphic by NetThink 21