No more building with Brazilian Rosewood ?
- Thread starter hawaii 50
- Start date
Moore Bettah Ukuleles
Well-known member
Posted by Chuck Erickson, the Duke of Pearl on June 4th:
Up until now Brazilian rosewood already in the U.S. was legal to buy, sell, use, and ship interstate even without documentation (much old lumber and many vintage guitars lack paperwork, since it wasn’t previously required). But as of June 26th, as a CITES Appendix I species (like elephant ivory) and in conjunction with the new total ban on all elephant ivory, it will become a felony to buy or sell anything containing Brazilian rosewood unless it has proper documentation (http://www.fws.gov/international/pdf/regulation-part23-use-after-import.pdf). To qualify for the exception: “If the [rosewood] was lawfully imported…before the species was listed…you may continue to use the [rosewood]…provided you can clearly demonstrate (using written records or other documentary evidence) that your [rosewood] was imported prior to the CITES listing, with no restrictions on its use after import. If you are unable to clearly demonstrate that this exception applies, the [rosewood] may be used only for noncommercial purposes.”
Good luck to you all trying to get acceptable paperwork for all those guitars..."
Up until now Brazilian rosewood already in the U.S. was legal to buy, sell, use, and ship interstate even without documentation (much old lumber and many vintage guitars lack paperwork, since it wasn’t previously required). But as of June 26th, as a CITES Appendix I species (like elephant ivory) and in conjunction with the new total ban on all elephant ivory, it will become a felony to buy or sell anything containing Brazilian rosewood unless it has proper documentation (http://www.fws.gov/international/pdf/regulation-part23-use-after-import.pdf). To qualify for the exception: “If the [rosewood] was lawfully imported…before the species was listed…you may continue to use the [rosewood]…provided you can clearly demonstrate (using written records or other documentary evidence) that your [rosewood] was imported prior to the CITES listing, with no restrictions on its use after import. If you are unable to clearly demonstrate that this exception applies, the [rosewood] may be used only for noncommercial purposes.”
Good luck to you all trying to get acceptable paperwork for all those guitars..."
Michael Smith
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2010
- Messages
- 1,061
- Reaction score
- 72
Wow, Felony.......Thats Brutal. anything containing......cripe........does this mean If I sell a ukulele with antique elephant ivory from a piano key I could spend time with the Arian Brotherhood.
Last edited:
Moore Bettah Ukuleles
Well-known member
Indeed it does. Unless you have documentation. There was talk of including the fossil ivories (mammoth & mastodon) because they are hard (by untrained personnel ) to differentiate from elephant ivory but they are still legal to trade in any manner.
Michael Smith
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2010
- Messages
- 1,061
- Reaction score
- 72
Chuck, are you keeping all the records for mammoth ivory in case some overzealous agent decides to throw you in the hoosegow first and ask questions later?
Moore Bettah Ukuleles
Well-known member
Fossil ivories are not included in any ban. They never were and hopefully never will be. I've been working with the same supplier of fossil ivories for over 30 years so documentation is no problem. I'm more worried that koa will be included on one of these lists one day!
coolkayaker1
Well-known member
Chuck, is it illegal to own, or just to sell elephant ivory. For instance, my folks have a hand carved chess set from the 1950s made of elephant ivory. No paperwork, they bought it overseas (in India or something 50 years ago). So now it cannot ever be sold? Can it be shown and displayed? Can one play chess with it in a public park?
There has been a lot of this going around- my friend John Thomas, Professor of Law at Quinnipiac university had written a brief commentary on it for fretboard journal: http://www.fretboardjournal.com/fea...-updated-not-really-policy-brazilian-rosewood.
The new ruling effectively helps instrument owners:
"Since publication of our regulations in 2007, we have given further consideration to the allowed use of a specimen within the United States when the listing status of the species changes after a specimen has been imported. We are amending this section to clarify that the allowed use after import into the United States is determined by the status of the specimen under CITES and the ESA at the time it is imported, except for a CITES specimen that was imported before the species was listed in Appendix I, or listed in Appendix II with an annotation disallowing commercial use, or listed in Appendix II or III and threatened under the ESA. Where an individual can clearly demonstrate that his or her specimen was imported with no restrictions on its use after import, prior to the species being listed under CITES with restrictions on its use after import, we will continue to allow use of the specimens as allowed at the time of import."
The new ruling effectively helps instrument owners:
"Since publication of our regulations in 2007, we have given further consideration to the allowed use of a specimen within the United States when the listing status of the species changes after a specimen has been imported. We are amending this section to clarify that the allowed use after import into the United States is determined by the status of the specimen under CITES and the ESA at the time it is imported, except for a CITES specimen that was imported before the species was listed in Appendix I, or listed in Appendix II with an annotation disallowing commercial use, or listed in Appendix II or III and threatened under the ESA. Where an individual can clearly demonstrate that his or her specimen was imported with no restrictions on its use after import, prior to the species being listed under CITES with restrictions on its use after import, we will continue to allow use of the specimens as allowed at the time of import."
Moore Bettah Ukuleles
Well-known member
I'm not 100% up to date on elephant ivory but I believe it's legal to own. I have followed this very closely only as it relates to fossil ivories. Here's an excerpt from the NY Times that I think answers your question:
The service will prohibit “all commercial imports of African elephant ivory, including antiques,” and it will prohibit exports except for certified antiques. Sales of elephant ivory across state lines will be prohibited, unless the ivory is demonstrably more than 100 years old. And ivory sales will be prohibited within a state unless the seller can demonstrate that the ivory was lawfully imported before 1990, the year after the signing of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, a United Nations agreement known as Cites. The burden of proof of purchase will fall on the seller, and sales will require rigorous documentation. People can still own ivory and pass heirlooms to descendants.
(BTW, mammoth/mastodon ivories are 10,000 to 40,000 years old and are legal to own, trade, buy, sell, etc.)
The service will prohibit “all commercial imports of African elephant ivory, including antiques,” and it will prohibit exports except for certified antiques. Sales of elephant ivory across state lines will be prohibited, unless the ivory is demonstrably more than 100 years old. And ivory sales will be prohibited within a state unless the seller can demonstrate that the ivory was lawfully imported before 1990, the year after the signing of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, a United Nations agreement known as Cites. The burden of proof of purchase will fall on the seller, and sales will require rigorous documentation. People can still own ivory and pass heirlooms to descendants.
(BTW, mammoth/mastodon ivories are 10,000 to 40,000 years old and are legal to own, trade, buy, sell, etc.)
coolkayaker1
Well-known member
That helps. Thanks, Chuck, for that. Very much.
Moore Bettah Ukuleles
Well-known member
Questions:
What year was BR added to Appendix 1?
How does this affect your stock of BR?
Moore Bettah Ukuleles
Well-known member
Even authorized Martin repair people can't get BR parts.
Timbuck
Well-known member
Can't see a problem..Use Indian rosewood instead..One of these is Indian..the other Brazilian..Guess which is Which 
BlackBearUkes
Well-known member
Can't see a problem..Use Indian rosewood instead..One of these is Indian..the other Brazilian..Guess which is Which
After working with the stuff for years I would say the left is Indian and the right is Braz. If the colors here are ture, Indian is never that orange unless it is colored. The real difference is in now they feel and bend, Braz is like glass and much harder.
Last edited:
So, I guess that the one set of BZ that I have on hand will someday end up in an instrument that will get donated to a good cause or an "underfunded" musician.
There's always the "Bill in Portland needs an Ono tenor" charity...
Michael Smith
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2010
- Messages
- 1,061
- Reaction score
- 72
My buddy who is a high end piano restorer says they get all the legal elephant ivory they want. Maybe that changes after june I don't know. There is a plethora of rosewoods some look so much like Brazilian I don't think you could tell the diff without testing a sample. I just built a uke with a big chunk of mammoth ivory and rosewood from Peru. Do I have to worry about shipping it? How is that going to work? This whole thing seems insane to me and very un-American. The people who regulate things here in the US have gotten way out of control.
Last edited:
Similar threads
