Is CITES necessary?

leedsyjames · February 24

Has anyone imported a guitar with a rosewood fingerboard from Japan and applied or had any experience with CITES?

The shop in Japan said that it could take up to 2 months to do this. In this case, is it worth doing CITES? Or is this an essential pain in the arse that you just have to wait for?

Funkfingers · February 24

leedsyjames said:
is it worth doing CITES? Or is this an essential pain in the arse that you just have to wait for?

The paperwork is infinitely preferable to a fine or a custodial sentence (plus confiscation or destruction of the offending item). Prison would be the real pain in the arse.

gumbothewiddler · February 24

If it’s for braz rosewood, would it even be granted?

I recall looking into this once and I don’t think it’s a dead cert you can get one particularly for a modern guitar but others may have direct experience of this.

stickyfiddle · February 24

As said in the other thread, you only need CITES for Brazilian rosewood.

But if it is Braz RW then you do 100% need to do it right, and you don’t do it there’s a high chance the guitar will get seized and destroyed at the minimum

chickenbonejohn · February 24

CITES certification is standard and compulsory these days, it's not an option if the import falls under the legislation. If it's not completed properly, your guitar could be held by customs and not released for shipment. We export quite a lot of stuff and often we have to make a declaration to the shippers to say exactly what timbers are used in the construction of an instrument to confirm that it does not fall under CITES requirements.

guitars4you · February 24

stickyfiddle said:

As said in the other thread, you only need CITES for Brazilian rosewood.

But if it is Braz RW then you do 100% need to do it right, and you don’t do it there’s a high chance the guitar will get seized and destroyed at the minimum

Correct- not required at all now for Indian Rosewood when on a completed/finished guitar- rules I believe are different for raw wood but that is not my gig

guitars4you · February 24

chickenbonejohn said:

CITES certification is standard and compulsory these days, it's not an option if the import falls under the legislation. If it's not completed properly, your guitar could be held by customs and not released for shipment. We export quite a lot of stuff and often we have to make a declaration to the shippers to say exactly what timbers are used in the construction of an instrument to confirm that it does not fall under CITES requirements.

Not now - we have now gone back to as was 5/6 years ago it was compulsory for a while but rules then changed again- except for Brazilian rosewood- might be different for import of raw materials - Not sure about Madagascar and believe pernambuco is now under cites regulations

trevA · February 24

What's puzzles me is how would the average customs office be able to spot the difference between Indian and Brazilian rosewoods? I'm pretty sure I couldn't do it correctly every time - so if its a form filling exercise there's a huge scope for deception.

Whitecat · February 24

trevA said:

What's puzzles me is how would the average customs office be able to spot the difference between Indian and Brazilian rosewoods? I'm pretty sure I couldn't do it correctly every time - so if it’s a form filling exercise there's a huge scope for deception.

They have access to the internet too. If they suspect it, they’ll look it up. And I bet they would always err on the side of overcautiousness, much to the importer’s disadvantage. It’s not a situation I’d want to find myself in.

OilCityPickups · February 24

trevA said:

What's puzzles me is how would the average customs office be able to spot the difference between Indian and Brazilian rosewoods? I'm pretty sure I couldn't do it correctly every time - so if its a form filling exercise there's a huge scope for deception.

The average customs officer probably couldn't, but they would probably flag anything suspicious, and things would be delayed while they get an expert (they have those in quite a few they can call upon) to give it the once over. Time is not really an issue for them - only for the person waiting for the guitar. .

guitars4you · February 24

There will always be exceptions - I quote from google

CITES regulations can apply to musical instruments built with protected materials such as Bubinga, Brazilian rosewood, ivory, abalone and tortoiseshell,

I recall a few years ago now I had an issue with binding on a Hamer Guitar and later a Duesenberg Guitar when shipping to the USA - Both were pulled over for some reason and I received notification about 'Ivory' binding - I pointed out on each guitar it is not ivory but 'grained' synthetic binding - Pearled and Ivoroid - USA Customs at first said that 'all sellers will say that' - In the end I had to get Duesenberg Germany to send an e-mail to USA Customs to clarify - So all was good in the end - Ref the Hamer I had to send various links I found via google to enrich my comments - All was good in the end

Bit confusing when you look at google today as loads of out of date info, in particular around 2017/2019 when cites was required on just about all guitars, but this was changed in 2019, and reverted back to pre-2017, other than a few species like Brazilian rosewood

guitars4you · February 24

Whitecat said:

trevA said:

What's puzzles me is how would the average customs office be able to spot the difference between Indian and Brazilian rosewoods? I'm pretty sure I couldn't do it correctly every time - so if it’s a form filling exercise there's a huge scope for deception.

They have access to the internet too. If they suspect it, they’ll look it up. And I bet they would always err on the side of overcautiousness, much to the importer’s disadvantage. It’s not a situation I’d want to find myself in.

Not so much now, but a few years ago I would often get a phone call from East Midland Airports Customs about such issues - As you say a) they ask you to prove it is not Brazilian, they don't need to prove the other way round and have the power to seize it if required b) they will check with various sources as required

webrthomson · February 24

There is a useful list on the wood DB:

https://www.wood-database.com/wood-articles/restricted-and-endangered-wood-species/

Musical instruments are exempt when made from Bubinga.

leedsyjames · February 24

Thanks for all of your replies.

I should add, that the guitar is from 2021 and the fingerboard is East Indian rosewood.
The shop owner said 1 month yesterday and today is now 2 months wait for CITES!

guitars4you · February 24

leedsyjames said:

Thanks for all of your replies.
I should add, that the guitar is from 2021 and the fingerboard is East Indian rosewood.
The shop owner said 1 month yesterday and today is now 2 months wait for CITES!

Baffled - I can understand the need too Tate on the invoice that it is CITES exempt as no 'forbidden' woods/inalys - Not sure if their is a value limit on exports without a licence but as far as I'm aware there should be no restrictions on East Indian Rosewood - Not sure if Japan authorities have a different criteria - But certainly if I was shipping that guitar to Germany or Spain or Canada there would be no issues

trevA · February 26

guitars4you said:

Whitecat said:

trevA said:

they don't need to prove the other way round and have the power to seize it if required b) they will check with various sources as required

Thats good to know. I didn't really consider who has the burden of proof here.

leedsyjames · February 27

Thanks for all the feedback. Some helpful comments and info.

So, I’ve just ordered a used James Tyler Studio Elite (with full spec electronics) 2021 from Japan. (With East Indian Rosewood fingerboard)

I haven’t done a CITES form as I don’t see that it’s really necessary after some research. (Especially with 2 months waiting time!)
So, hopefully all goes smoothly

guitars4you · February 27

leedsyjames said:

Thanks for all the feedback. Some helpful comments and info.
So, I’ve just ordered a used James Tyler Studio Elite (with full spec electronics) 2021 from Japan. (With East Indian Rosewood fingerboard)

I haven’t done a CITES form as I don’t see that it’s really necessary after some research. (Especially with 2 months waiting time!)
So, hopefully all goes smoothly

There is 2 aspects of CITES/Customs - Import and export - I'm 99% certain you don't need one to get the guitar into the UK - But if, and it is a big if, as far as I know, that Japan customs needs one for export purposes, then the onus is on the seller as you can't arrange such a process from the UK

guitarjack66 · February 27

Why does it even get used in the first place? Or was it only used in years gone by? I'd just use a guitar without one and made with many other alternatives. It's just a shame that it's most likely all a bit late in the day to save swathes of the Amazon Rainforests.

guitars4you · February 27

guitarjack66 said:

Why does it even get used in the first place? Or was it only used in years gone by? I'd just use a guitar without one and made with many other alternatives. It's just a shame that it's most likely all a bit late in the day to save swathes of the Amazon Rainforests.

In my view, the easy answer is to do away with any need of cites paperwork for what has gone on in the past - Be it ivory, tortoiseshell or Braz rosewood - I think we would all agree that the need to kill an elephant, or a tortoise or indeed to cut down any more trees in the Amazon is not required at all - So let's just accept that all pre 63 Strats can be sold with Braz boards and all pre 64/65 Gibson's can be sold with Braz boards and that applies to local, national or international sales - The same applies to a host of guitars made in recent years that include Braz rosewood - Gibson, Collins, Martin, Fender, PRS have all built such guitars, with or without appropriate documentation - Any Ecco damage can not be rectified - However, in agreement to allow us to sell 'history', CITES now instruct all companies/luthiers, regardless of the size of the company/builder that no more guitars can be built with such woods, with or without any documentation

However there are/have been grey areas - Reclaimed wood for example - I recall a chat with PRS many years ago about the option they had to buy some Braz rosewood from an old church that had been knocked down - So easy to say, so why not use it - The problem for the authorities is that how can any one say that it is new wood, chopped down last week in Brazil, or 100 year old wood from an old church from the Alamo - Hence ban all from today regardless - I think it is the argument used for not allowing the use of Ivory - How can you ever prove that the 'lump' of ivory you have in your hands is/was acquired over a 100 years ago, be it from a dead, or poached elephant , or indeed has been poached last week, or indeed the elephant died of natural causes last week - As such all ivory used today in any form of production is illegal and I can see why and vouch for it

To clear up who/what is CITES - First of all it is a world wide non-elected 'organisation' - It is a panel of 'experts' who create the 'blue print' as to what is acceptable to protect endangered wild life, plants etc - Then they expect countries and governments around the world to sign up, agree and accept such a blue print - Such a blue print is the minimal that you agree to sign up to as a government - You can endorse further policies of your own if required - The negative is the work load that the appropriate 'authorities' have to undertake with barely any resources - The UK is handled by DEFRA - They have to look at all sorts inc import of illegal animals be it snakes, birds or monkeys, illegal wild life etc - So a few guitars with a bit of Brazilian rosewood from 1948 is not a big deal - And in truth very little is ever done about such guitars

Braz rosewood received a world wide ban in 1992 - But the issue has been made complicated by CITIES and intern relevant departments like DEFRA - If you see a 1992 Strat for sale in the USA - That is fine - You can legally buy it, play it and sell it at a later date in the USA - However if you wish to buy it, today, from a shop in Florida and either bring it back to the UK on a plane, or indeed have it sent to the UK, via UPS, then you have an issue - You need a CITES certificate as it was not already 'residing' in the UK pre 1962 - Same guitar I know and as we said earlier, any Ecco damage was carried out over 60 years ago so what is the issue and you have. good case - But CITES makes no differential for new or used - I think it was never thought about when they sat down at their initial meeting in 1992 - It is doubtful if you'll actually get the appropriate CITES paperwork - Let's assume you did get a certificate - That certificate applies to you and only to you - Put the guitar up for sale, and legally you are meant to acquire a 'fresh' certificate and use the ref number on the original/old certificate as reference - Same over and over again every time it is sold - So a pain - Hence my thought of allowing all 'old history' to continue for sales/ownership - But ban 100% all future builds - think that would create a more clear policy

There has been issues surrounding violin bows that often have ivory on the tip/eye of the bow and many bows are made of pernambuco was is on the CITES list - I've heard stories of leading orchestral musicians running into customs issues whilst touring

Finally (I'm not a fan of big long posts) - By dad had an old antique conductors baton made from ivory - Something like 200 years old and about 15" long - In an appropriate nice wood case with a brass plaque to indicate who it was presented to - Dad had it as an ornament and I recall he paid almost bugger all for it - Because it is an antique (I think the term is 100 years old to be an antique) it is exempt from needing any CITES paperwork and as such could be legally sold if required - However, if I decided I wanted to give this legal lump of ivory to a luthier, so they could cut it down to use on a top nut, side dot inlays and fingerboard inlays it instantly becomes illegal - As how can you now prove that each part is legal, compared to the large 'sum' - Many old pianos have ivory on the keyboard

Truth be known we could clear up the whole mess and make it easier - As I said above, allow all the history to be exempt, but ban all new usage

guitarjack66 · February 27

guitars4you said:

guitarjack66 said:

Why does it even get used in the first place? Or was it only used in years gone by? I'd just use a guitar without one and made with many other alternatives. It's just a shame that it's most likely all a bit late in the day to save swathes of the Amazon Rainforests.

In my view, the easy answer is to do away with any need of cites paperwork for what has gone on in the past - Be it ivory, tortoiseshell or Braz rosewood - I think we would all agree that the need to kill an elephant, or a tortoise or indeed to cut down any more trees in the Amazon is not required at all - So let's just accept that all pre 63 Strats can be sold with Braz boards and all pre 64/65 Gibson's can be sold with Braz boards and that applies to local, national or international sales - The same applies to a host of guitars made in recent years that include Braz rosewood - Gibson, Collins, Martin, Fender, PRS have all built such guitars, with or without appropriate documentation - Any Ecco damage can not be rectified - However, in agreement to allow us to sell 'history', CITES now instruct all companies/luthiers, regardless of the size of the company/builder that no more guitars can be built with such woods, with or without any documentation

However there are/have been grey areas - Reclaimed wood for example - I recall a chat with PRS many years ago about the option they had to buy some Braz rosewood from an old church that had been knocked down - So easy to say, so why not use it - The problem for the authorities is that how can any one say that it is new wood, chopped down last week in Brazil, or 100 year old wood from an old church from the Alamo - Hence ban all from today regardless - I think it is the argument used for not allowing the use of Ivory - How can you ever prove that the 'lump' of ivory you have in your hands is/was acquired over a 100 years ago, be it from a dead, or poached elephant , or indeed has been poached last week, or indeed the elephant died of natural causes last week - As such all ivory used today in any form of production is illegal and I can see why and vouch for it

To clear up who/what is CITES - First of all it is a world wide non-elected 'organisation' - It is a panel of 'experts' who create the 'blue print' as to what is acceptable to protect endangered wild life, plants etc - Then they expect countries and governments around the world to sign up, agree and accept such a blue print - Such a blue print is the minimal that you agree to sign up to as a government - You can endorse further policies of your own if required - The negative is the work load that the appropriate 'authorities' have to undertake with barely any resources - The UK is handled by DEFRA - They have to look at all sorts inc import of illegal animals be it snakes, birds or monkeys, illegal wild life etc - So a few guitars with a bit of Brazilian rosewood from 1948 is not a big deal - And in truth very little is ever done about such guitars

Braz rosewood received a world wide ban in 1992 - But the issue has been made complicated by CITIES and intern relevant departments like DEFRA - If you see a 1992 Strat for sale in the USA - That is fine - You can legally buy it, play it and sell it at a later date in the USA - However if you wish to buy it, today, from a shop in Florida and either bring it back to the UK on a plane, or indeed have it sent to the UK, via UPS, then you have an issue - You need a CITES certificate as it was not already 'residing' in the UK pre 1962 - Same guitar I know and as we said earlier, any Ecco damage was carried out over 60 years ago so what is the issue and you have. good case - But CITES makes no differential for new or used - I think it was never thought about when they sat down at their initial meeting in 1992 - It is doubtful if you'll actually get the appropriate CITES paperwork - Let's assume you did get a certificate - That certificate applies to you and only to you - Put the guitar up for sale, and legally you are meant to acquire a 'fresh' certificate and use the ref number on the original/old certificate as reference - Same over and over again every time it is sold - So a pain - Hence my thought of allowing all 'old history' to continue for sales/ownership - But ban 100% all future builds - think that would create a more clear policy

There has been issues surrounding violin bows that often have ivory on the tip/eye of the bow and many bows are made of pernambuco was is on the CITES list - I've heard stories of leading orchestral musicians running into customs issues whilst touring

Finally (I'm not a fan of big long posts) - By dad had an old antique conductors baton made from ivory - Something like 200 years old and about 15" long - In an appropriate nice wood case with a brass plaque to indicate who it was presented to - Dad had it as an ornament and I recall he paid almost bugger all for it - Because it is an antique (I think the term is 100 years old to be an antique) it is exempt from needing any CITES paperwork and as such could be legally sold if required - However, if I decided I wanted to give this legal lump of ivory to a luthier, so they could cut it down to use on a top nut, side dot inlays and fingerboard inlays it instantly becomes illegal - As how can you now prove that each part is legal, compared to the large 'sum' - Many old pianos have ivory on the keyboard

Truth be known we could clear up the whole mess and make it easier - As I said above, allow all the history to be exempt, but ban all new usage

I'd love to answer that but I simply cant be arsed reading it. For the record I am pro the environment but believe its truly fucked because of the horrible people who control the world economies nowadays. If CITES is necessary then fair enough. I simply have no idea why anybody wants one particular type of wood over another. And especially in an electric guitar as I think the wood difference to sound is negligible given all other components. It would most likely matter a bit more in an acoustic but even then there are plenty of other woods available to pursue your hobby/career/profession with.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

In this Discussion

Become a Subscriber!

Is CITES necessary?

Comments