It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Subscribe to our Patreon, and get image uploads with no ads on the site!
Has anyone imported a guitar with a rosewood fingerboard from Japan and applied or had any experience with CITES?
The shop in Japan said that it could take up to 2 months to do this. In this case, is it worth doing CITES? Or is this an essential pain in the arse that you just have to wait for?
Base theme by DesignModo & ported to Powered by Vanilla by Chris Ireland, modified by the "theFB" team.
Comments
Not now - we have now gone back to as was 5/6 years ago it was compulsory for a while but rules then changed again- except for Brazilian rosewood- might be different for import of raw materials - Not sure about Madagascar and believe pernambuco is now under cites regulations
Formerly TheGuitarWeasel ... Oil City Pickups ... Oil City Blog 7 String.org profile and message
I recall a few years ago now I had an issue with binding on a Hamer Guitar and later a Duesenberg Guitar when shipping to the USA - Both were pulled over for some reason and I received notification about 'Ivory' binding - I pointed out on each guitar it is not ivory but 'grained' synthetic binding - Pearled and Ivoroid - USA Customs at first said that 'all sellers will say that' - In the end I had to get Duesenberg Germany to send an e-mail to USA Customs to clarify - So all was good in the end - Ref the Hamer I had to send various links I found via google to enrich my comments - All was good in the end
Bit confusing when you look at google today as loads of out of date info, in particular around 2017/2019 when cites was required on just about all guitars, but this was changed in 2019, and reverted back to pre-2017, other than a few species like Brazilian rosewood
Not so much now, but a few years ago I would often get a phone call from East Midland Airports Customs about such issues - As you say a) they ask you to prove it is not Brazilian, they don't need to prove the other way round and have the power to seize it if required b) they will check with various sources as required
The shop owner said 1 month yesterday and today is now 2 months wait for CITES!
So, hopefully all goes smoothly
However there are/have been grey areas - Reclaimed wood for example - I recall a chat with PRS many years ago about the option they had to buy some Braz rosewood from an old church that had been knocked down - So easy to say, so why not use it - The problem for the authorities is that how can any one say that it is new wood, chopped down last week in Brazil, or 100 year old wood from an old church from the Alamo - Hence ban all from today regardless - I think it is the argument used for not allowing the use of Ivory - How can you ever prove that the 'lump' of ivory you have in your hands is/was acquired over a 100 years ago, be it from a dead, or poached elephant , or indeed has been poached last week, or indeed the elephant died of natural causes last week - As such all ivory used today in any form of production is illegal and I can see why and vouch for it
To clear up who/what is CITES - First of all it is a world wide non-elected 'organisation' - It is a panel of 'experts' who create the 'blue print' as to what is acceptable to protect endangered wild life, plants etc - Then they expect countries and governments around the world to sign up, agree and accept such a blue print - Such a blue print is the minimal that you agree to sign up to as a government - You can endorse further policies of your own if required - The negative is the work load that the appropriate 'authorities' have to undertake with barely any resources - The UK is handled by DEFRA - They have to look at all sorts inc import of illegal animals be it snakes, birds or monkeys, illegal wild life etc - So a few guitars with a bit of Brazilian rosewood from 1948 is not a big deal - And in truth very little is ever done about such guitars
Braz rosewood received a world wide ban in 1992 - But the issue has been made complicated by CITIES and intern relevant departments like DEFRA - If you see a 1992 Strat for sale in the USA - That is fine - You can legally buy it, play it and sell it at a later date in the USA - However if you wish to buy it, today, from a shop in Florida and either bring it back to the UK on a plane, or indeed have it sent to the UK, via UPS, then you have an issue - You need a CITES certificate as it was not already 'residing' in the UK pre 1962 - Same guitar I know and as we said earlier, any Ecco damage was carried out over 60 years ago so what is the issue and you have. good case - But CITES makes no differential for new or used - I think it was never thought about when they sat down at their initial meeting in 1992 - It is doubtful if you'll actually get the appropriate CITES paperwork - Let's assume you did get a certificate - That certificate applies to you and only to you - Put the guitar up for sale, and legally you are meant to acquire a 'fresh' certificate and use the ref number on the original/old certificate as reference - Same over and over again every time it is sold - So a pain - Hence my thought of allowing all 'old history' to continue for sales/ownership - But ban 100% all future builds - think that would create a more clear policy
There has been issues surrounding violin bows that often have ivory on the tip/eye of the bow and many bows are made of pernambuco was is on the CITES list - I've heard stories of leading orchestral musicians running into customs issues whilst touring
Finally (I'm not a fan of big long posts) - By dad had an old antique conductors baton made from ivory - Something like 200 years old and about 15" long - In an appropriate nice wood case with a brass plaque to indicate who it was presented to - Dad had it as an ornament and I recall he paid almost bugger all for it - Because it is an antique (I think the term is 100 years old to be an antique) it is exempt from needing any CITES paperwork and as such could be legally sold if required - However, if I decided I wanted to give this legal lump of ivory to a luthier, so they could cut it down to use on a top nut, side dot inlays and fingerboard inlays it instantly becomes illegal - As how can you now prove that each part is legal, compared to the large 'sum' - Many old pianos have ivory on the keyboard
Truth be known we could clear up the whole mess and make it easier - As I said above, allow all the history to be exempt, but ban all new usage