I'm sorry, but I have to post on this topic. Why in the world can't we have sustainable lumber trade, where one, two, four, or ten trees are planted and sustained until independent for every one that is harvested? Why can't the governments put that as a restriction?
I'm not a left-wing anything, but I like the earth and there seem to be some very practical things we can do to protect species yet still enjoy life. There really isn't that much wood in a solid wood ukulele!
And I understand it takes years for trees to grow, and in addition to human use, there are also acts of God and nature that can harm trees and agriculture. But if such efforts start today, things will be in great shape in 20 years.
And if I am hearing correctly, the issues with Koa in particular weren't caused by the ukulele trade, but mainly the cattle trade as pasture was needed.
Furthermore, as the price goes up, who is getting the money? It certainly isn't the luthier, who is paying for more the wood and then on further taxes (tariffs). Maybe the lumber companies? For sure, the governments. And many corrupt governments are likely also collecting bribes at various points?
I wish the fees that were collected would go back to reforestation. I doubt they will.
Go check out the Ukulele Site Podcast with Joe Souza as he talks about their reforestation project (
http://kanileaukulele.com/reforestation-project/). It just seems that it would be wise for every "major" company to invest back into similar projects.
And as I said in a previous thread, I'd buy a Koa tree to grow in my house, I can't imagine that many Hawaiians wouldn't also want to plant Koa trees on their properties. And that is only one species.