Sign in to follow this  
welshman

bow headplate questions

Recommended Posts

Well, the requests have begun along with the difficult decisions

 

players are cluing in to the ivory ban and I have the first of probably many questions on what to do about the ivory headplates

 

on modern less expensive bows - not much of an issue but I just had a foreign exchange (college) student ask to have the ivory head plate removed, the problem for me is that we are talking about an original plate on a 'sartory bow.

 

I could only offer two pieces of advise at present

 

1. replace the headplate with a gold plate to match the gold mounted frog

2. before that, investigate the "passport: documentation" idea

 

does anyone know anything certain on this yet?

 

Reese

 

I also had requests to make up substitute buttons for members of Apollo"s Fire baroque orchestra's baroque bows, basicly making a new button and screw for use while touring in Europe (shameless plug, see/hear them if you get a chance)

so far one boxwood and one of pernambuco to replace the ivory buttons on their non-antique bows

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still not clear on exactly what is banned.  I know elephant ivory is banned.  I have two modern bows, made within the last three years, with mammoth ivory tips.  What about mammoth ivory?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder what would happen bringing that bow through customs if you left the original ivory tip in place but painted it so that it no longer looks like ivory.  It's probably not worth risking losing a Sartory to find out, but maybe someone should try it with a cheaper bow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are a couple of issues here. 

First is that ANY wildlife product needs to be declared at the border. This is not a new rule, but they are enforcing it more than ever before. Wildlife includes any animal products that are not from a domestic animal. All ivory, regardless of age or provenance, is wildlife, as is all mother of pearl. So is a lizard-skin grip. But bone (from a cow) and goatskin are fine; they are from domesticated animals. 

 

Fossil ivory does not require a permit. Elephant ivory requires a permit, and whether you can even get a permit or not depends on your having a lot of paperwork that you may not be able to get. Without that paperwork, and a permit, the item that incorporates the ivory is contraband. And you MUST get the permit before attempting to go through customs.

They have not yet finalized the "instrument passport" paperwork process. In the meantime, I would not remove the ivory tip from a Sartory. I would instead try as much as possible to document the provenance of that bow so that you have as much information as possible when you DO apply for a permit. And I would not take it across a border without a permit. 

 

Bone is permitted. Fossil ivory is permitted. Ivory on antiques over 100 years old need a permit. Pre-ban elephant ivory needs a permit. Post-ban elephant ivory is simply illegal.

Neither bone nor fossil ivory require a permit, but you can't count on a border inspection agent to be able to tell the difference. They are free to assume to worst if you do not have paperwork. 

And that's the moral. Get paperwork. If you are buying a bow with a bone or fossil ivory tip, make sure the bill of sale specifies that, and gives the species name. Same for a goatskin grip. If you already own such a bow, that really doesn't need a permit, contact the seller (if possible) or get an appraiser to issue a letter identifying the materials. That will not guarantee it will go across the border without difficulty, but at least you are giving the customs official something in writing to substantiate your claim that no permit is needed. 
 

I wrote a couple of blog posts on this, and plan to update this as things develop: 

http://bowed-instruments.blogspot.com/2014/04/violin-materials-and-law.html  and
http://bowed-instruments.blogspot.com/2014/04/borders-and-permits-part-2.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are a couple of issues here. 

First is that ANY wildlife product needs to be declared at the border. This is not a new rule, but they are enforcing it more than ever before. Wildlife includes any animal products that are not from a domestic animal. All ivory, regardless of age or provenance, is wildlife, as is all mother of pearl. So is a lizard-skin grip. But bone (from a cow) and goatskin are fine; they are from domesticated animals. 

 

Fossil ivory does not require a permit. Elephant ivory requires a permit, and whether you can even get a permit or not depends on your having a lot of paperwork that you may not be able to get. Without that paperwork, and a permit, the item that incorporates the ivory is contraband. And you MUST get the permit before attempting to go through customs.

They have not yet finalized the "instrument passport" paperwork process. In the meantime, I would not remove the ivory tip from a Sartory. I would instead try as much as possible to document the provenance of that bow so that you have as much information as possible when you DO apply for a permit. And I would not take it across a border without a permit. 

 

Bone is permitted. Fossil ivory is permitted. Ivory on antiques over 100 years old need a permit. Pre-ban elephant ivory needs a permit. Post-ban elephant ivory is simply illegal.

Neither bone nor fossil ivory require a permit, but you can't count on a border inspection agent to be able to tell the difference. They are free to assume to worst if you do not have paperwork. 

And that's the moral. Get paperwork. If you are buying a bow with a bone or fossil ivory tip, make sure the bill of sale specifies that, and gives the species name. Same for a goatskin grip. If you already own such a bow, that really doesn't need a permit, contact the seller (if possible) or get an appraiser to issue a letter identifying the materials. That will not guarantee it will go across the border without difficulty, but at least you are giving the customs official something in writing to substantiate your claim that no permit is needed. 

 

I wrote a couple of blog posts on this, and plan to update this as things develop: 

http://bowed-instruments.blogspot.com/2014/04/violin-materials-and-law.html  and

http://bowed-instruments.blogspot.com/2014/04/borders-and-permits-part-2.html

  This is the clearest description of the situation I have seen.  It's a big help.  Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree completely, Thorbjorn.
The FWS officials who were at Mondomusica said that they have no desire to confiscate bows or instruments from musicians, but they have been given a set of rules and have to enforce them. It sounded as if they were willing to be reasonable - for instance, they suggested that country of origin and approximate date of entry into the US may be acceptable instead of requiring a copy of export and import permits (a requirement which would be nearly impossible to satisfy). 

I have great hopes for the instrument passport, and hope they get the paperwork straightened out soon.

A Sartory bow is the poster child for this. He lived and, so far as I know, worked until 1946, so some of his bows will not qualify under the 'antique' exception until 2046. Yet any original ivory headplate is definitely pre-ban ivory, and it would be a desecration to replace the head (and risk damaging the head) for something that isn't even going to help save any elephants. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree completely, Thorbjorn.

The FWS officials who were at Mondomusica said that they have no desire to confiscate bows or instruments from musicians, but they have been given a set of rules and have to enforce them. It sounded as if they were willing to be reasonable - for instance, they suggested that country of origin and approximate date of entry into the US may be acceptable instead of requiring a copy of export and import permits (a requirement which would be nearly impossible to satisfy).

I have great hopes for the instrument passport, and hope they get the paperwork straightened out soon.

A Sartory bow is the poster child for this. He lived and, so far as I know, worked until 1946, so some of his bows will not qualify under the 'antique' exception until 2046. Yet any original ivory headplate is definitely pre-ban ivory, and it would be a desecration to replace the head (and risk damaging the head) for something that isn't even going to help save any elephants.

I also believe the FWS officials are just trying to follow orders. The problem is the utter ignorance, incompetence and apathy of some politicians in Washington who make rules based on the optics of being perceived as helping elephants without thinking of the consequences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tsetse Fly in the news --  The news says that we now can begin the search for an anti-tsetse fly poison.  

The tsetse fly has protected a huge part of Africa from human exploitation (development).

If we destroy the tsetse fly millions of people will have a new place to live.

The large animal population of Africa is doomed.

But someone will get rich.

 

So the ivory ban is a short term 'gain'.

Global warming makes elephant survival shaky anyway.

 

Try bamboo,  you cannot kill it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tsetse Fly in the news -- The news says that we now can begin the search for an anti-tsetse fly poison.

The tsetse fly has protected a huge part of Africa from human exploitation (development).

If we destroy the tsetse fly millions of people will have a new place to live.

The large animal population of Africa is doomed.

But someone will get rich.

So the ivory ban is a short term 'gain'.

Global warming makes elephant survival shaky anyway.

Try bamboo, you cannot kill it!

So save the tsetse fly, who can argue with that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No   If you save the Tsetse fly there is a continuing poaching problem.

But if you do not there are no more Elephants.

So...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No   If you save the Tsetse fly there is a continuing poaching problem.

But if you do not there are no more Elephants.

So...

I think this is why so many people choose to bury their heads in the sand.  Looking at the issues straight on can get quite depressing.

 

-Jim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...and going all 'artificial'...ie. plastics...isn't good for the environment either...

 

Let's just call it a day and go extinct... :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are a couple of issues here. 

First is that ANY wildlife product needs to be declared at the border. This is not a new rule, but they are enforcing it more than ever before. Wildlife includes any animal products that are not from a domestic animal. All ivory, regardless of age or provenance, is wildlife, as is all mother of pearl. So is a lizard-skin grip. But bone (from a cow) and goatskin are fine; they are from domesticated animals. 

 

Fossil ivory does not require a permit. Elephant ivory requires a permit, and whether you can even get a permit or not depends on your having a lot of paperwork that you may not be able to get. Without that paperwork, and a permit, the item that incorporates the ivory is contraband. And you MUST get the permit before attempting to go through customs.

They have not yet finalized the "instrument passport" paperwork process. In the meantime, I would not remove the ivory tip from a Sartory. I would instead try as much as possible to document the provenance of that bow so that you have as much information as possible when you DO apply for a permit. And I would not take it across a border without a permit. 

 

Bone is permitted. Fossil ivory is permitted. Ivory on antiques over 100 years old need a permit. Pre-ban elephant ivory needs a permit. Post-ban elephant ivory is simply illegal.

Neither bone nor fossil ivory require a permit, but you can't count on a border inspection agent to be able to tell the difference. They are free to assume to worst if you do not have paperwork. 

And that's the moral. Get paperwork. If you are buying a bow with a bone or fossil ivory tip, make sure the bill of sale specifies that, and gives the species name. Same for a goatskin grip. If you already own such a bow, that really doesn't need a permit, contact the seller (if possible) or get an appraiser to issue a letter identifying the materials. That will not guarantee it will go across the border without difficulty, but at least you are giving the customs official something in writing to substantiate your claim that no permit is needed. 

 

I wrote a couple of blog posts on this, and plan to update this as things develop: 

http://bowed-instruments.blogspot.com/2014/04/violin-materials-and-law.html  and

http://bowed-instruments.blogspot.com/2014/04/borders-and-permits-part-2.html

So, animals include fish ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal

Therefore, when I use Salmonskin leather for the thumb grip.... it needs to be declared at the border??

What a pile of bureaucratic BS!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.