http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4362760.stm

crap

I had been talking with some guys involved in conservation biology at the University of Alberta a couple of weeks ago. I have decided that all future instruments are going to be built using only certain domestic woods where there is a considerable (albeit not enough) regulation to limit environmental impact. One of the guys I was talking to (who is a good friend from high school) has been surveying the logging of old growth forests in Western Canada for the past few years. It's actually kind of horrible even here. He was talking about some interesting new techniques that some conservation groups are trying to get government backing on, such as some sort of logging action that would mimic the shapes of natural forms of forest destruction (fires).

Actually, I was going to start a thread about suitable domestic woods for use in building. Mainly I was thinking about fretboards as maple is the only NA domestic that comes immediately to mind. There's always Larry's impregnated woods too... so that opens it up to pretty much anything.

What a mess about the forest. There is a place near my work that makes moulding for houses and churches. They sometimes use Mahogany. I have been able to get a lot of it from the huge "scraps" they have left. So in a way I am recycling it. :D

Absolute crap from a "news source" with more agendas than the Tri-lateral Commission. :rolleyes:

There is probably no more an environmentally sound method of harvesting naturally grown trees than selective harvesting. Even the figures sound waaayyy out of whack.

Well, I wouldn't necessarily call it crap. Anyway you look at it, it's disturbing. BBC cited a report from the journal Nature.

http://www.nature.com/news/2005/051017/full/051017-13.html

AP will have a story in next week's newspapers on the "biopiracy" thats said to be going on down there.

Remember that this is the BBC....They seldom give you the entire story.....Deforestation has been going on in that region for over 60+ years (that I am aware of), mostly related to farmers clear-cutting to create pasture land for beef cattle....and then burning the felled timber. The lumber companies are also to blame, as are the South American governments for their poor land management policies, but the clear-cutting for cheap hamburgers hardly gets a mention.

I'm with Hambone here.....Selective harvesting is the way to go...the preferred method of harvesting......Timber piracy is a different matter.

I just realized something: if the world warms up enough, maybe the trees which grow tropically will begin growing further away from the equator. Imagine, ebony growing right in your backyard! Of course, that won't be any comfort if your state is under water...

With the amount of damage the rainforest is taking I'd rather see no additional harvesting. It's unrealistic for it to be 0, but I won't be purchasing any more tropical woods (this was decided before this article, so don't worry about that).

I agree with Geoff. The market drives most of the damage, and I don't want to be part of that force anymore. It would be great if we could all pacify ourselves with rationalizations about responsibly harvested tropicals, but we have to live in the world the way it is today, not the way we'd like it to be, or the way it should be. I can't imagine any of those governments are motivated to or capable of limiting logging to sound, selective foresting methods that make the most sense now. As long as people, including ourselves, support the price of that wood, greedy people are going to cut it down. If we stop paying, they will stop cutting and find something else to do.

Geoff has identified the least attractive course of action, which also looks like the right course. Good enough for me. Congratulations for not taking a self-serving approach to the problem! Good character is great!

This is an old debate ... to a point I am sure you know what I mean by that. Yes something needs to be done, yes stop buying if you feel that is right, I dont think I will be buying either. One of the best methods I know is the sustainable foresting, ever tree cut down, 2 more up, that could be enforced more, as it isn't often enough from what I have heard, which is the problem, we only "hear" of this sort of thing. Yes cutting the trees down reduces the amount of carbon absorbed by the trees, but where does that come from? The governments use these articles to bring it to our attention, which is all good, I have no dispute with that as it may sound I do from what I say a bit later on this.

Though they bring it to our attention, but it just pushes other factors of it out the way, it reduces the amount of carbon absorbed, but that carbon comes from industry and vehicles, along with other sources of course. But those two sources could have so much more done to reduce the carbon produced. The best things we can do is try and be energy effecient, yeah I am sure you've heard a lot about this recently as it is a big on-going issue, and an important one.

There are so many factors to this you can't just consider one and try to clear that up a bit, though saying that I am not saying its pointless consentraiting on one factor, but just keep your mind open. Mine may sound pretty closed from the way I've came across in this post, though I do assure you it isn't, just try and do what you can if your concerned, not let that concern fade, it's a major issue lots overlook, I do myself, as it is easy to do.

Please bring up queries with my post here, I enjoy topics of convo like this, its a subject I enjoy to share what knowledge I have on it.

Zet.

I'd be interested in knowing how much deforrestation is due to consumer demand of exotic woods and how much is due to things such as clear-cutting and burning to make way for use of the land. Anyone have a general idea about this, or for a governmental (or non-) resource for this type of information?

This site would indicate that commercial logging is the single largest cause of rainforest destruction. This is taking into account that roads created strictly for logging are used by landless farmers to gain access to the rainforest where they begin slashing and burning to allow for subsistence agriculture. These people then have to move every 1 to 2 years because the soil in the rainforest is not suitable for agriculture.

http://www.rain-tree.com/facts.htm

I honestly don't know how accurate it is, especially since it seems that no one keeps very good track of what is being cut. Also, there are differences in the causes from country to country. That said, every site I visited ranked commercial logging in the top 5 causes of rainforest destruction. Even selective logging isn't very good. The rainforest foundation estimates that one hectare of rainforest is destroyed in order to selectively log a single mahogany tree. Selective logging doesn't mean that a couple of guys walk in and chop a tree down with some handsaws and axes (obviously). The WWF states that 45-74% of trees remaining after selective logging in selective logging zones are damaged or destroyed. The International Tropical Timber Organization (ITTO) has stated that the amount of sustainable logging occuring in the world's rainforests was negligible.

For the sake of clarity, I would ask just how much of which species each of us has acquired over that last year that specifically came from a "rainforest".

I can safely say none.

I'd have to say:

Ebony
Mahogany
Bubinga
Padauk
Wenge
Limba

The amounts I personally used were quite small, but most likely more than most other people.

To make a bass, it takes only 6.5 to 7 sq.ft of wood.
So i think it will take a long time to kill a forest.
You make a lot of basses with a single tree

If we stop paying, they will stop cutting and find something else to do.




..Or maybe they will find someone else that actually buy it.....

My family work in the wood buisinnes since 1951, and this problem is not new, at the beginning of the '60 companies started to deal with african woods, because of the scarce availeability of "good" european woods,
Few years agò they moved back to the "former" eastern europe to cut down woods where nobody took care of cutting anything for almost 50 years, being "european"woods cheaper than importing woods from Africa...

buisinnes as usual.


people will need woods anyway, and will buy the best woods money can buy, no matter where it comes from, don't forget that musical instruments making is just a very little part of the full picture, if you want to change something you must work on human rights first, making those people in need in the same position as YOU are, if they're starving, don't expect they stop cutting trees if that mean feed theyr families,


actually China is starting exporting woods as well, how are you going to stop this competition?

Do you think that people is not going to buy chinese woods if it's good and cheaper?


Where is it going to lead this fact?

wood is going to be cheaper, and countries are going to cut more and more to offer woods cheaper and cheaper,as far as this is going to feed theyr people.....

and south american people "wish" to have everything that the "north americans and europeans" have (they actually have television and internet already, so they can see, and they "wish" and "need" as you do in the nothern part of the world) .

Maybe if all of us, start thinking in a certain way, something can change in the long run, but we should look in "our house" first, and work to make other people free from basic needs first, than maybe they will be more willing to respect the planet they WILL feel part of, actually I think they don't feel to "belong" to this planet (it actually belong to those with power and money, a lot of ), they only belong to themself, with theyr problems to survive day by day,


do you really think they would care about a forest?

and do you really think that big woods companies are going to close down to "save the planet" (not making HUGE profits anymore) ?

If you don't buy , someone else will do, as far as the price is better ( and how you can obtain better price?finding someone to be underpayed, ask to a mexican guy if they actually get payed as you are, but they "need "more than you do, so....).


ciao


M.

To make a bass, it takes only 6.5 to 7 sq.ft of wood.
So i think it will take a long time to kill a forest.
You make a lot of basses with a single tree

It's still wood I'd rather see alive than cut down for woods that I don't have to use in a bass. Especially rainforest woods. Additionally, as far as the rainforest goes, a lot of trees that are desireable for cutting do not grow together in dense stands, so they must be selectively found. The result is that the cutting must occur over a larger area of forest than say cutting lodgepole pine in Alberta. This requires more roads and more disturbance of the rainforest to get the few desirable trees. Also, there's more damage done to a forest by commercial logging than is the direct result of the logging.

If you don't buy , someone else will do, as far as the price is better ( and how you can obtain better price?finding someone to be underpayed, ask to a mexican guy if they actually get payed as you are, but they "need "more than you do, so....).


Well, no, if I don't buy there is no direct replacement. This is how complacency is bred in the consumption of goods. It's like someone driving the most humungous truck, burning the most gas and justifying it by saying that if he didn't do it someone else would have bought it in his place. No, they would simply build another truck for the guy if he wanted it. And if I don't buy that truck, there will be one less out there.

I agree with the basic premise that the destruction of the rainforest is 100% greed driven. Not directly by the countries doing it either.

it's tragic,, greed is destroying the earth, and there is wery little we can do about it.

Well, no, if I don't buy there is no direct replacement. This is how complacency is bred in the consumption of goods. It's like someone driving the most humungous truck, burning the most gas and justifying it by saying that if he didn't do it someone else would have bought it in his place. No, they would simply build another truck for the guy if he wanted it. And if I don't buy that truck, there will be one less out there.


Well, in this case what's the need for imports woods?

the need for SAVING and competition.

Do you REALLY think the the prices at the original place where the woods are cutted down is JUST a bit lower than in your country?


I can tell you for sure, it's not , so the wages for the people working at it, otherwise no one would invest in THIS buisinnes, it would be pointless.


And the local governaments are WILLING to attract investiments to develop THAT buisinnes as it happened in Africa in the past (now it's not THAT different,belive me, now if you don't buy from the governaments, you can buy from rebels looking for weapons, it's even cheaper) and in exactly the same way is happening in the "former" comunist countries here in Europe,

they can be competitive on the market,
and nobody spit on money, nor me and you.

and this have nothing to do with that beautiful piece of coccobolo or bubinga that you and I are buying in OUR country, the most of our money don't fall in the hands of the people living in the woods original countries, otherwise it would be really different,they would take great care of this kind of resouces.

My family (since my grandpa) did hardwoods flooring (and my uncle still do) in HUGE quantities,so I know this market very well, actually there is an invasion of chinese wooden floors here in Europe, and reps of chinese' woods lumber companies are running like hell to sale woods to a price wich is hard to belive, all the Italian companies that invested in Poland and Romania are seriously worried, someone is starting to lower the prices , all the southamericans hardwood flooring are actually discontinued, too expensive (despite it's quite cheap) .....

Do you think that those companies in Brazil are NOT going to react?

They will cut more to sale it cheaper, not to loose theyr market.

You probably are not going to buy that beautiful plank of coccobolo , even if it cost a lot lesser than a plank of maple, but someone will, and will force you out of buisinnes or to compete with him.


Here in Italy there are companies that can build some of the most beautiful yact money can buy, probably you cannot even imagine how much can cost a yact like those, well, they can obtain quantity of TEACK that is NOT ALLOWED by the law (it's endangered and you MUST fill an application to obtain a small quantity, from an official dealer autorized from the BURMA governament), but they can resale it without problems in ANY quantity, maybe you got the picture....

Teack is endangered, but corruption it's not.....


the market is not fair, and globalization does't help in THIS way....

now do not call me "BLACK BLOCK" please, I'm not.


ciao


M.

I'd have to say:

Ebony
Mahogany
Bubinga
Padauk
Wenge
Limba

The amounts I personally used were quite small, but most likely more than most other people.

Geoff, my real point was that although these species are most often known as tropical, what we get is not all harvested from "rain forests" - a term that carries it's own weight amongst environmentalists (whacko and otherwise). By lumping all ebony varieties under the generalized name of "ebony" one confuses their actual origin when it isn't clear at all if that piece comes from an endangered area, country, or even the same continent. We also can't tell from the name if the wood came from a managed resource. Likely not but there ARE some and keeping the differences distinct is important to the argument.

Geoff, my real point was that although these species are most often known as tropical, what we get is not all harvested from "rain forests" - a term that carries it's own weight amongst environmentalists (whacko and otherwise). By lumping all ebony varieties under the generalized name of "ebony" one confuses their actual origin when it isn't clear at all if that piece comes from an endangered area, country, or even the same continent. We also can't tell from the name if the wood came from a managed resource. Likely not but there ARE some and keeping the differences distinct is important to the argument.

Generally wood that has come from a managed source comes with a certification that businesses like to display as it makes them seem more earth friendly. For example, the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) certifies wood that is cut in an "environmentally responsible, socially beneficial, economically viable way".

I agree that, when I walk into Windsor plywood (a chain up here), I don't know where their bubinga (for instance) came from. It's not a plantation variety, as there are woods there like that that are labelled (mostly plantation teak), and it isn't FSC or some of the other certified cut woods. When in doubt it's my decision not to purchase. I'm not going to assume it came from a well managed area. Even further, it's unclear if the management is effective... there's a case in point about 3 hours from my house of some "managed" forests that are certainly not managed and will not be forests ever again without some heavy intervention.

Well, in this case what's the need for imports woods?

the need for SAVING and competition.

Do you REALLY think the the prices at the original place where the woods are cutted down is JUST a bit lower than in your country?


I can tell you for sure, it's not , so the wages for the people working at it, otherwise no one would invest in THIS buisinnes, it would be pointless.


And the local governaments are WILLING to attract investiments to develop THAT buisinnes as it happened in Africa in the past (now it's not THAT different,belive me, now if you don't buy from the governaments, you can buy from rebels looking for weapons, it's even cheaper) and in exactly the same way is happening in the "former" comunist countries here in Europe,

they can be competitive on the market,
and nobody spit on money, nor me and you.

and this have nothing to do with that beautiful piece of coccobolo or bubinga that you and I are buying in OUR country, the most of our money don't fall in the hands of the people living in the woods original countries, otherwise it would be really different,they would take great care of this kind of resouces.

My family (since my grandpa) did hardwoods flooring (and my uncle still do) in HUGE quantities,so I know this market very well, actually there is an invasion of chinese wooden floors here in Europe, and reps of chinese' woods lumber companies are running like hell to sale woods to a price wich is hard to belive, all the Italian companies that invested in Poland and Romania are seriously worried, someone is starting to lower the prices , all the southamericans hardwood flooring are actually discontinued, too expensive (despite it's quite cheap) .....

Do you think that those companies in Brazil are NOT going to react?

They will cut more to sale it cheaper, not to loose theyr market.

You probably are not going to buy that beautiful plank of coccobolo , even if it cost a lot lesser than a plank of maple, but someone will, and will force you out of buisinnes or to compete with him.


Here in Italy there are companies that can build some of the most beautiful yact money can buy, probably you cannot even imagine how much can cost a yact like those, well, they can obtain quantity of TEACK that is NOT ALLOWED by the law (it's endangered and you MUST fill an application to obtain a small quantity, from an official dealer autorized from the BURMA governament), but they can resale it without problems in ANY quantity, maybe you got the picture....

Teack is endangered, but corruption it's not.....


the market is not fair, and globalization does't help in THIS way....

now do not call me "BLACK BLOCK" please, I'm not.


ciao


M.


Right now I'm not arguing whether there is a deeper underlying cause to the problem. I know there is. I've studied this in depth in multiple economics and politics classes.

I'm simply saying it is my choice whether I use woods that are taken at the expense of the destruction of the most biodiverse ecosystems on the planet. I'm not willing to support this with my money.

Also, I'm aware that wages and compensation to local people (if there is any, which there often is not) is absolutely tiny compared to what they are sold for at market.

Also, I think that you're missing a step in the chain you describe. Most of our money doesn't fall in the hands of local people. It falls in the hands of companies importing it. If I buy up a bunch of wood then more is imported to replace it in the marketplace. Importers and timber companies are getting rich off of it. My money goes to making the timber companies rich and what they here is "get more wood" so they get more wood. If no one buys it, then it won't be imported. This is unrealistic, but I'm not just going to be complacent and say "well, one person doesn't make any difference". There's too many terrible things that happen because people think that way and sit by and do nothing while ecosystems are irreparably destroyed.

I'm not saying anyone else has to do this. I was simply stating my decision and my reasons.

I'm also quite aware of illegal wood cutting and sale. Weyerhauser was charged for cutting, I believe, 200% of it's lumber quota in my province and had used up 200% of it's 20 year allotment of new road construction in forest areas in 5 years. They wound up being charged somewhere around $1.5 million in fines, but I have to wonder how much money they made on all that illegal timber they cut. At least in that case someone noticed. How many people notice in Brazil? Brazil has recently had to use its military to combat illegal logging.

Right now I'm not arguing whether there is a deeper underlying cause to the problem.

Well, i didn't want to argue with you , i just wanted to share that little bit of knowledge in this matter ,

I'm sensitive to this problem too, but unfortunatly I'm aware ( being a pro builder) that if i choose not to use some woods,someone else will, I'd loose all my customers (or many) and nothing will be changed apart from my job.

At the same time I'm triing to buy woods only from certified sources, from legittimate distributors from African governaments, but I know a LOT of distributors that don't give a damn, and offer the same woods for half of the price i pay for it.

I run a very small buisinnes, so I don't really care, i don't need so much wood, but a bigger company certantly will go for the cheaper way.


M.

Eventually it will all become managed and grown on reservations , or it will be lost forever .

I fear a combination of those two are what will happen. Plantation trees and no rainforests.

Guys,,,,
whatif the problem is mainly that we all are using stuff from another side of the world, instead of the local, justasgood stuff?

Whatif the main problem, and the basic incentment to e.g. deforstation, is actually the continously transportation to poverty? Because what we are doing, is transporting everythign back and forth, which yields specialized regions, and when somebody else in another region specializes in the same area, the poverty of the latter is moved (transported) to the once rich region...
And all we got is a lot of destoryed environments, and lots of air pollution from the transports.

Buy as local as possible, and help preserve Earth. It is as simple as that. Actually.

Guys,,,,
whatif the problem is mainly that we all are using stuff from another side of the world, instead of the local, justasgood stuff?
Buy as local as possible, and help preserve Earth. It is as simple as that. Actually.

I agree (though I'm not being driven by a desire to save the Earth) and that's why I build mostly with domestic hardwoods. I simply can't abide some of the prices I see on the simple exotics. I'm not dissing the prices - someone will pay what's being asked but they aren't for me. I only delve into the exotics as accents or as fretboards because these components have traditionally been made from exotics species