CITES - What every bass player should know

[SteveC]

These were the Yamaha basses.

http://usa.yamaha.com/products/musi...bx/rbx4a2/?mode=model#list=within&mode=paging

I've always thought Yamaha made decent stuff.

Ed playing one:

 

[Jim Carr]

Wood, plastic, aluminum, lucite, stone, rubber, steel, glass, titanium, it's all good, but CITES does not make tone woods illegal or forbidden, it places restrictions on the source and movement of woods like Dalbergia Nigra (brazilian rosewood) or Swietenia Macrophylla, (broad-leaved mahogany or honduran mahogany).

Not many bassists have instruments with those exact species from the controlled sources/countries and imported from after the restrictions were instituted (the date when the species is listed in Appendix III). N.B., Swietenia Macrophylla is widely grown for consumer uses outside of the americans, especially in asia.

Gabon Ebony is now part of the story. Diospyros Crassifora (and dozens of other Diospyrosia) were listed in Appendix III of CITES in 2011. These species are now endangered. See above for more detail on CITES Appendix I, II, and III.

 

[reverendrally]

...or we could be happy with instruments made of local timbers. Works for me.

P.s. tonewoods are a myth, especially when it come to electric instruments.

 

[Jim Carr]

Yes. The problem is that some of us have instruments built with woods that are restricted. If that seems like a myth, I assure you it is not. This thread is to help musicians act in an informed way concerning CITES listed materials. It is not just wood.

 

[reverendrally]

I entirely agree. The issue is that CITES came into being precisely because of the myth of "tonewoods". If pundits and marketers hadn't been telling everyone that the best tone came from endangered ebony and rosewood, CITES wouldn't need to exist.

 

[scotch]

I entirely agree. The issue is that CITES came into being precisely because of the myth of "tonewoods". If pundits and marketers hadn't been telling everyone that the best tone came from endangered ebony and rosewood, CITES wouldn't need to exist.

Uhhh,... you're opinion about tonewoods aside (which is clearly your soapbox issue du jour), CITES is in place far more due to the exploitation of endangered animal species and timber for the furniture and building trade. Musical instruments have had a far lesser impact than you suggest.

Maybe save the tonewood debate for a more appropriate thread?

 

[reverendrally]

Uhhh,... you're opinion about tonewoods aside (which is clearly your soapbox issue du jour), CITES is in place far more due to the exploitation of endangered animal species and timber for the furniture and building trade. Musical instruments have had a far lesser impact than you suggest.

You know, I honestly thought that until I heard a BBC special feature on endangered timbers about 3 years ago. Unfortunately, musical instruments demand has placed huge pressure on rare timbers, specifically things like rosewood. The Chinese in particular have grown mass production of guitars to the point where they're consuming huge quantities of rainforest timbers. What we call 'tonewoods' plays right into that problem. And of course, the rarer it is, the more expensive and sort after by purists and tone-philes.

Whether I believe in tonewoods is besides the point. The problem is, many consumers do. Those that do, demand those timbers in new instruments and hence the issue and the need for protections such as CITES.

 

[Jim Carr]

I entirely agree. The issue is that CITES came into being precisely because of the myth of "tonewoods". If pundits and marketers hadn't been telling everyone that the best tone came from endangered ebony and rosewood, CITES wouldn't need to exist.

Oh, would that it were so. The vast majority of poached timber ends up in the homes of newly wealthy individuals as flooring, paneling, ornament, and furniture—or worse yet, stockpiled in secret.

 

[Jim Carr]

...musical instruments demand has placed huge pressure on rare timbers, specifically things like rosewood. The Chinese in particular have grown mass production of guitars to the point where they're consuming huge quantities of rainforest timbers...

This is flat out false. Your sources are misinformed.

 

[Jim Carr]

To Wit:

 

[Jim Carr]

How many Jazz Bass Dalbergia Negra fingerboards do you reckon that furniture might have made? Imagine tens of thousands such instances of architectural use in the last decade alone. Then consider that Dalbergia Negra has been exploited heavily since about 1800. Rainforest destruction has really ramped up since 1975. We are now looking at the extinction of many species of plants and animals, driven by habitat destruction and poaching. This has not been helped by musical instrument builders, per se, but they are not the cause.

I will grant that in the case of ebony, instrument-making has been a major factor in recent years, but habitat loss over-shadows ALL, which Mr. Taylor acknowledges in the video below.
N.B., This is the same Taylor PR video posted earlier in this thread.

 

[reverendrally]

This is flat out false. Your sources are misinformed.

So what you're saying is, a respected BBC journalist deliberately went on international radio and told everyone the wrong facts, with the very real possibility of being sued by Chinese based multinationals?

Umm, yeah. I don't think so.

I'm NOT saying that furniture hasn't been the major player. What I am saying is the worldwide demand for quality guitars has hit forests hard. The estimate in the report was that 1,000,000 guitars were produced worldwide in 2011. Where do you think most of them were made and what went into them? And until very recently, the Chinese companies didn't care who they bought timbers from or where it came from. They certainly had no CITES.

 

[Jeff Scott]

So what you're saying is, a respected BBC journalist deliberately went on international radio and told everyone the wrong facts, with the very real possibility of being sued by Chinese based multinationals?

Umm, yeah. I don't think so.

I'm NOT saying that furniture hasn't been the major player. What I am saying is the worldwide demand for quality guitars has hit forests hard. The estimate in the report was that 1,000,000 guitars were produced worldwide in 2011. Where do you think most of them were made and what went into them? And until very recently, the Chinese companies didn't care who they bought timbers from or where it came from. They certainly had no CITES.

The music industry is an easy target for the media to go after, not to mention certain federal governments.

 

[Jim Carr]

...What I am saying is the worldwide demand for quality guitars has hit forests hard. The estimate in the report was that 1,000,000 guitars were produced worldwide in 2011. Where do you think most of them were made and what went into them? And until very recently, the Chinese companies didn't care who they bought timbers from or where it came from. They certainly had no CITES.

There have not been one million guitars produced using Brazilian Rosewood in the last year, no matter who makes that claim. You are making vague undocumented generalized accusations that are, IMHO, demonstrably false. You have not provided a single specific source.

Broad unsourced undocumented rants with an agenda don't really help us much. Which woods are you referring to exactly? Which builders? Which instruments? What time period? And most importantly WHERE? Provide your sources and how they relate to CITES. Those facts are of interest.

 

[reverendrally]

Sorry Jim. I bow to your superior knowledge and intellect. Of course you are right...

 

[Jim Carr]

...a respected BBC journalist deliberately went on international radio and told everyone the wrong facts, with the very real possibility of being sued by Chinese based multinationals?

Umm, yeah. I don't think so...

We have not heard what said "respected BBC journalist" reported, nor what were the sources. See the problem yet? This thread is filled with this kind of stuff. Find some actual documented reproducible information that helps bassists who own instruments built with CITES listed materials and post a link. That would be welcome. Rants about radio or TV programs we once saw or heard on the BBC, CNN, NPR, or CCTV, etc., are probably best posted elsewhere, IMHO.

Find a link to the BBC Radio report, perhaps that will suffice to present your case, whatever it may be.

 

[hdracer]

Wood, plastic, aluminum, lucite, stone, rubber, steel, glass, titanium, it's all good, but CITES does not make tone woods illegal or forbidden, it places restrictions on the source and movement of woods like Dalbergia Nigra (brazilian rosewood) or Swietenia Macrophylla, (broad-leaved mahogany or honduran mahogany).

Not many bassists have instruments with those exact species from the controlled sources/countries and imported from after the restrictions were instituted (the date when the species is listed in Appendix III). N.B., Swietenia Macrophylla is widely grown for consumer uses outside of the americans, especially in asia.

Gabon Ebony is now part of the story. Diospyros Crassifora (and dozens of other Diospyrosia) were listed in Appendix III of CITES in 2011. These species are now endangered. See above for more detail on CITES Appendix I, II, and III.

I was just looking at some honduran mahogany body size blanks and gabon ebony. I did not know they are on the list.
Are these woods okay to sell or possess?
I saw this cl ad and was going to buy it.
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

 

[Jim Carr]

There have not been one million guitars produced using Brazilian Rosewood in the last year, no matter who makes that claim...

Some arithmetic. Assume a typical price for a Dalbergia Negra fingerboard = $600 (a great price). Also assume a typical guitar ordinarily costs $200 retail. Yes, that's quite low.

So, 1,000,000 X 200 = $200,000,000 worth of guitars on the market in one year.

Now if they all have Brazilian Rosewood fingerboards, multiply the above by the cost of a rosewood fingerboard and you get 200,000,000 X $600 or $1,200,000,000

Yes, one million instruments with Brazilian Rosewood fingerboards = 1.2 billion dollars worth of guitars, each selling for at least $800. Each year. To me, this not a picture of reality.

To put it in perspective, if a billion of that were profits, that means guitar making is nearly as profitable as MacDonalds (1.5 billion dollars last year, according to Huffington Post). http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/21/mcdonalds-profit-taxpayers_n_4136336.html

 

[Jim Carr]

I was just looking at some honduran mahogany body size blanks and gabon ebony. I did not know they are on the list.
Are these woods okay to sell or possess?

It really depends on the documentation of the wood. If it is a species listed in Appendix III of CITES, but can be documented as having been exported before the date it was listed, if you can obtain that documentation, and if you fill out the right forms and pay the fee, you can get a permit to travel with the instrument built with a banned material. You can still legally own banned wood that cannot be moved across international boarders, but you cannot re-export it, or take it out of the country.

I am not sure about re-export with such documented materials, but a quick check of the rules will probably explain it.

 

[Jim Carr]

...And until very recently, the Chinese companies didn't care who they bought timbers from or where it came from. They certainly had no CITES.

While China is a Party to CITES (since 08/01/1981), I can not comment on enforcement there. However, importation of CITES restricted materials via re-export from China has ended. Anything getting re-exported to North America or Europe is smuggled.

Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed