[jazz_guitar] CITES
Bob Hansmann
pastes here so you'll know how serious this issue is, and possibly save
yourself some major expense.
my first post:
> Hypothetical:
> I buy an old Cuban Mahogany dresser from a thrift shop and recycle the
> wood. It's obviously endangered (extinct, in fact). So does my new piece
> from recycled wood get confiscated if some knucklehead put it on the
> CITES list?
>
> Perhaps the most valuable asset we have toward saving species of wood
> are those wood workers aware enough to recycle, along with the
> suppliers salvaging and selling recycled wood, lots of it very rare
> and endangered. How is this provided for in the CITES agreement?
and then:
> So if Joe Blow luthier takes his dead grandmother's old ivory broach
> and grinds it down into a string nut, he's outta luck. This is really
> senseless, and counter-ecologically sound.
This came back (special thanks to Sarn Dyer):
> Further to question of pre-Convention re-cycled/re-
>
> constituted materials. The CITES manager with whom I exchanged views
> expressed his concern to me for the individuals who get caught in the
> 'machinery' of CITES, by the Convention itself and by the almost
> infinite national legislation used by the 175 member states.
>
> He recognised that the Convention cannot be applied effectively (and
> conservation benefits cannot result) if users of the Convention are
> put to excessive trouble. He supported finding solutions to individual
> problems (such as Michael's) but thought it preferable that the
> Convention should find solutions that apply to everyone.
>
> With further regard to Michael's issue, it was accepted that this had
> never received sufficient attention. As the current guidance
> (Resolution Conf. 13.6) doesn't address this issue, it is left to each
> country to interpret whether such re-worked items remain
> pre-Convention or whether they should be considered as new items, so
> not benefiting from the simplified regulations regarding
> pre-Convention specimens.
>
> The question here arises as to why CITES has left matters in this
> unsatisfactory state. It does not appear to be able to act without
> outside pressure, in particular from governments of member countries.
> I don't believe that to be a satisfactory situation.
>
> The manager believes that a strong case can be made for pre-Convention
> items remaining pre-Convention and that this is both logical and
> supportive to conservation considerations. I have argued that that,
> because any such implementation would be highly impractical and,
> indeed, unconstructive to enforce, all pre-Convention items should, at
> least for the time being, be excluded from all regulations and that
> musicians, for example, should not be put to the expense of time and
> trouble of obtaining certification, particularly since, for the most
> part, the supply to instrument makers poses little or no threat to
> conservation.
>
> He regarded the re-debate of the re-cycled specimens question as
> worthwhile in order to arrive at a clarity which is clearly lacking at
> present.
>
> However, CITES would only do this if individual governments put
> forward a proposal to amend Resolution Conf. 13.6. As the deadline for
> the next conference in 2010 has already passed, it will not now be
> possible to do put forward such a proposal until the following
> conference in 2013. Consequently, this is not a question that will be
> resolved in the near future. The matter of a lack of parity in the
> strictness of implementation applied by individual countries also
> remained to be addressed.
>
> Of course, there were many quite confrontational issues that the
> manager in question was not in a position address but, within those
> limitations, he was extremely helpful and, without naming him, I'd
> like to thank him personally.
>
> What can we conclude from the above? I think simply that we should be
> more involved and use the processes that are available to us.
> Nevertheless, shining the strong light of publicity on the
> illogicality and likely outcomes of the present regulation might act
> to focus the minds of those who, without sufficient information or
> forethought, have proposed and formulated regulations that effect us
> all, in some cases, perhaps, in ways more profound than we might imagine.
>
> The need, I believe, remains for the availability of a model letter to
> send to the relevant government department in your country to
> stimulate CITES to reconsider both Michael's and the other issues of
> pre-Convention items. I'm not aware of any website specifically
> created to disseminate information about the operation of CITES and to
> act as a focus for action by interested individuals such as musicians
> and instrument makers.
>
> Let's hope that Nature abhors that particular vacuum and that
> Necessity will prove, once again, to be the Mother of Invention...
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jazz_guitar/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jazz_guitar/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
jazz_guit...@yahoogroups.com
jazz_guitar-...@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
jazz_guitar...@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/