CITES - What every bass player should know

[Jeff Scott]

The problem with the regulation isn't the regulation itself, it's compliance and enforcement. I don't have a problem with regulations, I have a problem with onerous burdens imposed by regulations. For musicians, this could easily be handled by having a standardized form, accepted by all relevant government agencies, that declare what woods (+ sourcing) are used in an instrument. Such a form would accompany every new instrument sold (even if the wood is ubiquitous as maple or alder) and would serve as the instrument's passport. Once manufacturers get in the habit of providing that information with instruments on a form that is universally accepted by government agencies, compliance with regulations will be a non-issue for musicians crossing borders.

What about older instruments where it may not be possible to acquire the information needed (source, in particular)?

I do agree that on all newly made instruments there could be such documentation supplied and kept with each instrument. But, if the instrument was purchased at, say, Guitar Center, there is a good likelihood that documentation will be missing come purchase time.

 

[Rick Turner]

it seems from some reading that only newer instruments are effected by this. my 69 is pre-CITES rosewood regulations so I think I might be ok. Although, I might need to get that certification if I do travel abroad.

You wish. ALL international movement of rosewood will be affected; it doesn't matter how old or new your instrument is. YES, you will need a "passport" for your insrument. Don't try to interpret these new regulations to fit your convenience unless you can afford to lose an instrument if you travel overseas with it. The horror stories will start in a few days.

 

[Rick Turner]

What about older instruments where it may not be possible to acquire the information needed (source, in particular)?

I do agree that on all newly made instruments there could be such documentation supplied and kept with each instrument. But, if the instrument was purchased at, say, Guitar Center, there is a good likelihood that documentation will be missing come purchase time.

If you try to travel with an older instrument and you don't have the necessary "passport", be ready to lose the instrument. Once again, you cannot interpret these treaties your way; this isn't up to you. You cannot apply your own logic to it. These regulations were made up by people who simply do not give a poopie about musicians. To those who wrote this stuff, it's legalese to protect rosewood, and to them, a rosewood guitar is no different from a gigantic ornately carved rosewood bed. Trees were cut to make it. You have to get out of bass player/guitar player mentality to come anywhere near understanding this stuff.

 

[Jeff Scott]

I hear you, Rick! I don't plan on any international travel with instruments, not selling internationally. It is a sad day for anyone using or has used wood for products. I fully understand why this is in place, it is just a shame it affects anything made before these laws were enacted.

I take it you are using only "safe" materials, these days.

 

[s_wood]

If you try to travel with an older instrument and you don't have the necessary "passport", be ready to lose the instrument. Once again, you cannot interpret these treaties your way; this isn't up to you. You cannot apply your own logic to it.

Exactly right! The CITES musician passport is a half-day PIA to get and costs $75, is valid for 3 years and it is proof that your instrument can travel internationally without violating CITES. Any musician who travels internationally is courting disaster unless he or she has one of these passports.

CITES is enforced at first point of contact by customs inspectors, both here and abroad, who have virtually no training in how to identify the various wood species (and shell inlay materials) covered by the treaty. All you need is one hyper-vigilant customs inspector who thinks that he or she sees a prohibited item on your bass and you are in trouble. Your bass can and probably will be confiscated right then and there, and the burden and expense of proving that the bass does not contain any prohibited materials falls on you. I personally know of an instrument that was held by customs for 3 months in a CITES fight before it was eventually returned to its owner.

More about CITES, courtesy of the American League of Orchestras... good news and bad news. It looks like there may soon be a CITES exemption for musical instruments that are traveling with a musician for personal use. The bad news is that sales of instruments containing any type of rosewood will now require a permit (and theinternational sale of instruments containing Brazilian rosewood will remain prohibited. Have a look:

Relief as Rosewood Protections Increase
An original proposal related to the rosewood frequently used in crafting musical instruments would have subjected significantly more musicians to the burdensome travel permit requirements. Entering into the negotiations, Brazil, Argentina, Guatemala, and Kenya requested listing all species of rosewood (the scientific name of the genus is dalbergia) under Appendix II of the treaty, requiring permits for transportation of any rosewood items across borders without exceptions. While musical instruments that contain Brazilian rosewood already require CITES permits under the treaty’s highest Appendix I level of protection and will continue to do so, very many stringed instruments that contain Indian rosewood tuning pegs and tail pieces have not been subject to CITES permit rules. As the underlying threat to rosewood species is driven by a demand for large luxury furniture items, the music community successfully [Invalid or Expired Link Removed] to add an exemption for the small quantity of rosewood found in musical instruments so that permits would not be required when instruments are merely transported across borders for performances and personal use. Sales of these items across borders, on the other hand, will now require permits.

The process of crafting the non-commercial exemption for musical instruments was a very complicated one, and up to the very last moment of deliberations it was unclear whether a real solution had been found. On the closing day of the CITES decision-making process, the U.S. delegation, led by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, took the highly visible and essential step of intervening during the proceedings to successfully obtain a clarification so that musicians traveling back and forth from their home countries with their instruments will find relief under the new rules. We are most grateful for this key leadership by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service which is consistent with the recent steps taken by the Obama Administration to find solutions for musicians under new domestic ivory rules.

The whole article is here.
CITES Treaty Negotiations Include Musical Instrument Policies - League of American Orchestras

 

[BlueTalon]

What about older instruments where it may not be possible to acquire the information needed (source, in particular)?

I do agree that on all newly made instruments there could be such documentation supplied and kept with each instrument. But, if the instrument was purchased at, say, Guitar Center, there is a good likelihood that documentation will be missing come purchase time.

You're right, I overstated my case. Assuming user-friendly documentation that would be accepted by government agencies, and assuming the documentation doesn't get lost, CITES compliance would be a non-issue for people purchasing new instruments.

 

[smperry]

Because this thread has information on legislation, not surprisingly, the discussion has veered towards political arguments several times.

For now, I'm leaving this stickied but closed for discussion. If anyone wants to send me updates in CITES, feel free and maybe I'll add it here or reopen.

 

[smperry]

As of January 2nd, 2016, changes to CITES anyone selling an instrument internationally
that includes any amount (i.e. fingerboard, back, sides, binding) of Dalbergia (rosewood of any kind, including cocobolo) or the other newly regulated woods (some, but not all kinds of bubinga) out of your country as part of a commercial transaction, must first accompanied by a CITES re-export certificate.

Even if the instrument was made with Dalbergia or the other regulated woods that were acquired before January 2, 2017 - such as a used or vintage instrument - it still must be accompanied by a CITES certificate and marked pre-convention when shipping internationally. if you ship and instrument without the required certificate and a customs inspector believes that it contains any of the newly – protected wood species, the instrument may well be impounded and the burden is on the seller to prove that the instrument may lawfully be sold internationally.

For sellers in the United States, CITES re-export certificates must be applied for through the US Fish and Wildlife Service. You can download the application here. Be aware that it can take a month or two for the agency to process your application.

 

[smperry]

I'm reopening this as a member sent me some information about his experience. Please don't post opinions about the policy or conjecture right now...but if you've had to deal with CITES directly, feel free to post in here.

At some point, we'll figure out what to do with this thread longterm, but I think the information is useful, so reopening..

 

[Passinwind]

I am currently working through the export process for my 1977 Travis Bean fretless bass, which has an Indian rosewood fingerboard. After waiting nearly three months for the $75 USF&W CITES pre-convention exemption certificate I was blindsided with a few nasty surprises:

1) The bass must be inspected by a USDA/APHIS agent prior to export if wood is involved. USF&W joins the party for animal products, if any are at issue. In my case that means an 8 hour roundtrip drive to Seattle, but in many cases the distance might be much greater since there are a very limited amount of export/inspection portals.

2) The Seattle agent was very cool and helpful, and mentioned that there has been a big learning curve on the US regulatory agencies' side as well as for aspiring exporters. He was then nice enough to ask if I also had the USDA PPQ Form 621 in hand, which is the Protected Plant Permit. I may or may not have done due diligence, but this was the first I had heard of this particular hoop. "Luckily" this one can be obtained online for a mere $70 and the current processing time is listed at only "up to 30 days." So I've just spent about another 4 hours getting that application done. Most of that was dealing with authentication issues on the USDA website, which in my case required a drive to the nearest USDA Farm Service office, about a half hour from here. Here's the link to get started on that process: Invalid Link Removed

3) And then once I eventually have both permits in hand and validated by the inspection agent the export shipment must go through one of the approved export portal cities (aka PPQ CITES Designated Port). I haven't figured out the mechanics of making that happen yet, but it doesn't appear that the FedEx hub city of Memphis is on that list, for example.

I will update my experience as I continue to work through this process. So far my main takeaway would be seller beware...

 

[Passinwind]

I'm reopening this as a member sent me some information about his experience. Please don't post opinions about the policy or conjecture right now...but if you've had to deal with CITES directly, feel free to post in here.

At some point, we'll figure out what to do with this thread longterm, but I think the information is useful, so reopening..

Maybe this would be a good TB WIKI topic? I talked to a few luthier friends and most were blissfully unaware of their legal obligations these days.

 

[s_wood]

Glad this the mods re-opened this thread as there is a need for information on CITES so that we can understand and comply with it. The bottom line is this: anybody who is trying to buy, sell or travel with a basinternationallu he needs to understand how CITES works.

If your bass contains any quantity of any kind of rosewood, cocobolo or bubinga it is covered by CITES regardless of when it was made. If you try to ship or travel with such an instrument internationally with the proper permit (for sales) or musical instrument passport (if it's our bass and you are traveling with it) there is a real chance that the bass will be seized and impounded.

Maybe, in the interests of civility and keeping this thread open, the mods can temporarily ban all opinions about whether or not CITES is a good or necessary idea limit this thread to facts about CITES and tips for compliance. I am about the last person to ever suggest that limiting speech is a good thing, but the history of this thread is that it quickly descends into a political debate. I am not denying the importance of the debate, but in this instance it gets in the way of exchanging the information we need to comply with this new reality.

 

[markjazzbassist]

Glad this the mods re-opened this thread as there is a need for information on CITES so that we can understand and comply with it. The bottom line is this: anybody who is trying to buy, sell or travel with a basinternationallu he needs to understand how CITES works.

If your bass contains any quantity of any kind of rosewood, cocobolo or bubinga it is covered by CITES regardless of when it was made. If you try to ship or travel with such an instrument internationally with the proper permit (for sales) or musical instrument passport (if it's our bass and you are traveling with it) there is a real chance that the bass will be seized and impounded.

Maybe, in the interests of civility and keeping this thread open, the mods can temporarily ban all opinions about whether or not CITES is a good or necessary idea limit this thread to facts about CITES and tips for compliance. I am about the last person to ever suggest that limiting speech is a good thing, but the history of this thread is that it quickly descends into a political debate. I am not denying the importance of the debate, but in his instance it gets in the way of exchanging the information we need to comply with this new reality.

but i thought if you were performing with your instrument (say a european tour) there was no issue. anyone know if that's true?

 

[s_wood]

but i thought if you were performing with your instrument (say a european tour) there was no issue. anyone know if that's true?

Sorry, but NOT true. If you are traveling with an instrument that you own and aren't trying to sell and you don't have a CITES Musical Instrument Passport with you the instrument can be seized.
You MUST have the appropriate paperwork. There are NO exceptions.
Look here for more info:
https://americanorchestras.org/advo...s-material/protected-species-travel-tips.html

Plus, the CITES Musical Instrument Passport is proof that your bass doesn't contain prohibited material. For instance, rosewood is covered by CITES. Pau Ferro is not. But, if some customs inspector decides that your pau ferro fingerboard is actually rosewood your instrument will be impounded

Anybody who travels internationally with a bass who doesn't have a CITES Instrument Passport is courting disaster.

 

[bass12]

Sorry, but NOT true. If you are traveling with an instrument that you own and aren't trying to sell and you don't have a CITES Musical Instrument Passport with you the instrument can be seized.
You MUST have the appropriate paperwork. There are NO exceptions.
Look here for more info:
https://americanorchestras.org/advo...s-material/protected-species-travel-tips.html

Plus, the CITES Musical Instrument Passport is proof that your bass doesn't contain prohibited material. For instance, rosewood is covered by CITES. Pau Ferro is not. But, if some customs inspector decides that your pau ferro fingerboard is actually rosewood your instrument will be impounded

Anybody who travels internationally with a bass who doesn't have a CITES Instrument Passport is courting disaster.

So what this basically means is that, regardless of what kind of wood your bass is made from, the only safe way to go is to obtain the necessary permit (unless you have a bass with all blond wood - and even then who knows). I'm wondering how customs will handle basses with bodies covered in coloured lacquer. Does the fact that the woods on the CITES treaty are very rarely used for bass bodies make a difference?

 

[s_wood]

For those who don't want to scroll through the entire thread, here are a couple of key links that will tell you what you need to know about CITES and how to comply with it:

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
https://americanorchestras.org/advo...s-material/protected-species-travel-tips.html
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

 

[svtb15]

Easy fix.. this is what i do when i fly overseas now.. I fly with my Fender mexican Road Worn P bass with a maple neck and see thru SB finish. If they steal that one from me it's no big loss
Sadly , I DON'T bring my alleva coppolo that have the Dalbergia Nigra stuff. much less any type of rosewood looking wood.. .... If they wish , Customs acts to seize things on a whim as explained in my previous post on the Fake leopard boots.. .. They can steal a Pau Ferro bass if they wish to. Work as you wish to get it back... Try locating it// Ha fun doing so

 

[Passinwind]

I will update my experience as I continue to work through this process. So far my main takeaway would be seller beware...

Update: much to my surprise, the Protected Plant Permit has already been issued. So clearly the online application process is worthwhile in this case. On to Seattle in a few days for the physical inspection, so hopefully I'm sensing light at the end of the tunnel.

 

[clbass]

The US Fish and Wildlife Service's Q&A has some insightful information
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

Here's an excerpt from the Guidance for Traveling Musicians section, page 18:

Permit Requirements for Individuals

44. Does my instrument need a permit when I travel with it? It does not have CITES listed wildlife components (i.e., elephant ivory, snake skin), but it does have Appendix-II rosewood.

This question relates to paragraph b) of the new annotation for Dalbergia spp. and bubinga. Generally what this paragraph means is that if a specimen of the newly listed Appendix-II Dalbergia spp., excluding Siamese rosewood (Dalbergia cochinchinensis), or bubinga is less than 10 kg and is being moved for non-commercial purposes, it will not require a permit. The 10-kg threshold refers to the weight of the protected species within that instrument, not the instrument itself.

Many instruments, such as guitars and violins, when imported or exported for noncommercial purposes such as personal travel or performance, are excluded from the listing and thus exempt from the Appendix-II permit requirements, as the weight threshold will not be exceeded. However, some instruments may contain more than 10 kg of the protected species, such as a double bass, a marimba, or certain drums.

Even if the Appendix-II Dalbergia spp. or bubinga in an instrument is less than 10 kg, if it is being imported or exported for commercial purposes, such as sale, it must be accompanied by CITES documents.

 

[s_wood]

Be careful with the "less than 10kg" exemption, though. Indian Rosewood is eligible for the exemption, but Brazilian Rosewood is not. Upon inspection of the instrument at a border crossing, the determination of whether the instrument may lawfully travel internationally without a permit will depend upon the customs inspector's ability to accurately determine by visual inspection whether the fingerboard is made of Indian or Brazilian rosewood. if you don't have a musical instrument passport, you won't be able to prove what the fingerboard is made out of, and so if the inspector erroneously concludes that it's Brazilian rosewood your bass could be seized and impounded.

Don't take that chance: get the musical instrument passport!