Pernambuco survey - CITES - Proposal to move from Appendix II to Appendix I

[Shelbow]

Dear All,

I am sure you are all aware by now that there will soon be discussions at CITES https://cites.org/eng relating to Brazil's proposal to move Pernambuco from Appendix II to Appendix I (same level as Ivory etc etc).

Obviously this will have a massive impact on players, makers and dealers.

A few different groups have created a questionnaire to collect information to lobby against the move. I have outlined these below.

I am not involved with any of these groups, I am simply providing the information for those that have not yet received it via email.

Regards,

Shelbow

 

MUSICIANS UNION QUESTIONNAIRE (PLAYERS)

Musicians! 
The Musicians' Union have published a questionnaire specific to players rather than traders which is the focus of this questionnaire. You can complete the MU's questionnaire here:

 https://musiciansunion.org.uk/news/if-you-own-or-play-an-instrument-with-a-bow-we-need-you-for-an-important-cites-survey

 

AMATI QUESTIONNAIRE

Proposal to add pernambuco to CITES Appendix 1 - Act Now!  CITES are meeting in November to discuss Brazil's proposal to transfer paubrasilia echinata from Appendix II to Appendix I.  This will have significant consequences on those involved in the making, restoring and selling of bows. The answers you provide in this form will help inform the UK Government of the extensive damage this change will do to our industry. It will also provide them with the information they need to make a counter-argument, or at the very least equip them with information to propose some common sense exemptions. Your name and company name will be kept confidential in the final report being sent to Defra.    Fill out the questionnaire here: https://hazpw66qytg.typeform.com/to/zsic5hEU If you have any questions please contact Sarah Buchanan - +44 (0)20 7099 7114.   CSFI QUESTIONNAIRE  (although it is already past their suggested date, it may still be relevant to fill out the form) Dear professionals, As you know, Brazil is proposing the transfer of pernambuco from appendix II to appendix I. This proposal will be studied during the CITES COP19 from November 14 to 25, 2022.   Our professional organizations have been mobilized since the announcement of this proposal at the end of June and will be represented at COP19 to defend your interests and convince CITES not to accept Brazil's proposal. The EU CITES authority is due to define its position on September 29, 2022 and to date it is in favor of transferring pernambuco to Appendix I. The only possible way to convince the EU to change its position is to provide it before Monday 26 September, through the French delegation, with European data on the existing state of the pernambuco stock and other information that we are already in the process of being acquired, such as the plantation actions carried out by the IPCI. THIS FORM IS ANONYMOUS! You can therefore be assured of the total anonymity of your answers! Please take 2 minutes to answer this questionnaire before Sunday evening so that we have every chance on our side to avoid the worst!   Please find attached the information document which has been sent to the CITES secretariat for distribution to your members for information purposes. As an association, you can send it to your national Cites authority in order to draw attention to the subject. If you wish to receive the results of the survey, please send an email to contact@csfi-musique.fr Link for the survey https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScu6LHSiD1FGTzMZ5mGJGj-OOx14HlHsXiT-0IvbAaxoiCaog/viewform

 

 

[martin swan]

I’m afraid it’s too late for the EU questionnaire.

Tomorrow we will know how the EU will vote at the CITES conference in Panama. All EU countries have decided to act as one and agree to vote the same way, though that seems like a perversion of the CITES voting system.

If the EU decides to vote for Appendix 1, that will be the death knell for pernambuco bows old and new. And it will do nothing to slow down deforestation in Brazil.

 

[Shelbow]

Quite worrying times.

[martin swan]

I don’t think people understand how serious this is. Brazilian environmental agencies are trying to outsource their enforcement. They are making a mockery of CITES and are willing to undermine all the conservation initiatives in order to pretend to be taking action.

Kudos to Amati for trying to do something … I hope it’s not too late.

Tomorrow we may discover that bowmakers are now an endangered species, with absolutely no benefit to the future of pernambuco … I can’t believe that would be a good outcome for CITES.

[Shelbow]

I completely agree. I have filled out the Amati questionnaire and I would advise makers / dealers to do the same. 

This could destroy a whole part of the industry overnight.

[reg]

I had this email from our Brasilian supplier - could be of interest!

 

"It’s been a while since we have last been to the UK but we have been having severe stock constraints for a while. I am sure you are aware of the news regarding the Pernambuco situation in Brazil and the coming decision by CITES in November to further restrict international trade. Since the end of May not a single Pernambuco bow has been allowed to leave Brasil, this has already caused the closure of many workshops over there. On our side we have reorganized our entire production there, shifting our partner workshops from Pernambuco production to Ipe wood production.

 

Ipe is the wood closest related to Pernambuco for bowmaking, in regards to sound, playability and looks. We have tried it out in different markets already as well as in the Cremona Mondomusica and the reception has honestly exceeded our expectations, in blind tests the Ipe bow has been regularly selected over the Pernambuco one. At the same time we have organized a workshop in Portugal in which, in addition to Ipe bows, we will continue to produce Pernambuco bows using high quality and CITES registered wood we managed to purchase in Europe. These bows will be, of course, in much more limited quantity and more expensive than what we offer at the moment due to the difficult in finding properly registered wood at an attainable price in Europe."

 

 

[Blank face]

For those who are interested is here the German statement of the involved organisations: https://www.ipci-deutschland.org/antrag/Gemeinsame-Stellungnahme-Fernambuk.pdf

Unfortunately I have the impression that the election of the actual Brazil president marked the end of the pernambuco bow as we knew it.

[Christian Pedersen]

Any updates? 

[Wood Butcher]

I don’t think there is going to any official word before November, but it seems very likely that pernambuco will get moved to appendix 1.

Should this become the reality, as a musician travelling across borders, you are going to need a carbon bow, some cheap thing made from mystery wood, or an expensive 19th century French bow made from something else.

It probably means a ban on being able to export bows from one country to another, and will no doubt lead to the closure of a number of businesses. While other woods can be used, how long can it be until Ipe, and Ebony are moved onto appendix 1 too?
The bow trade would seem in great peril, and could possibly end on these decisions.

[Jwillis]

So (for people who would know). Are you anticipating that dealers would no longer be able to sell their old bows out of their shops?  Wouldn’t bows be treated like ivory or other banned things like baleen?  I understand how it will completely destroy modern bow makers and international trade of instruments. Not to mention traveling musicians…

[martin swan]

Interestingly not even CITES really seems to know the law as regards pre-Convention Appendix 1 material. It also depends how the country you live in chooses to apply and enforce the law.

If we take something like tortoiseshell, which has been on appendix 1 since 1976 or thereabouts, all sales of post 1976 tortoiseshell are totally forbidden. For pre-1976 tortoiseshell, you must have an "Article 10 certificate" if you hold it in stock with an intention to sell. If you want to export it, then you also need a CITES permit to export it from your country, and a CITES import permit for the country you are exporting to ... the application process is very complicated and enough to deter most people.

So of course this prevents sending anything on trial, since if the buyer doesn't want it, they would then have to do the whole process in reverse.

But within your national borders it's legal to sell appendix 1 items provided the specific material was harvested before the item was listed on appendix 1 - of course you must be able to prove that.

Some dealers argue that items that date from before the existence of CITES (1947) require no paperwork whatsoever, but I very much doubt that's true as it would leave a massive loophole for abuse of the system.

[Shelbow]

It's crossing borders that is a real issue, you are at the mercy of the customs officials in the countries you are travelling to or through. Even with the correct paperwork they could still make things complicated. Even bows that aren't Pernambuco could be problematic, as it is unlikely that customs officials would be trained to recognise one from material for the other. You would probably need to get some kind of paperwork even for a non Pernambuco bow just to be safe.

It makes sense people would gravitate to Carbon Fibre in the case that Pernambuco is moved to A 1.

 

[Blank face]

To say it with a big portion of sarcasm, from my personal experience no custom officer is able to distinguish one violin from another by photos, much less bows, so one certificate for import and another for export should be enough for a whole dealer’s stock.

[martin swan]

18 minutes ago, Blank face said:

To say it with a big portion of sarcasm, from my personal experience no custom officer is able to distinguish one violin from another by photos, much less bows, so one certificate for import and another for export should be enough for a whole dealer’s stock.

unfortunately CITES export and import certificates are only valid for 6 months ...

and in order to get them you have to have an expert certificate identifying the bow. I agree that customs officers don't have a hope in hell of differentiating between pernambuco and amourette, but a pearl eye versus a plain frog, easy peasy.

[wm_crash]

So let's say I bought a bunch of pernambuco from Cook Woods, like 30 planks or so. And let's say I have the receipts in my mailbox. So I technically have proof of that wood's existence from before the appendix 1 listing. And let's say then in the process of making <insert here whatever you think I made from that wood>, I generate offcuts in various sizes which I keep for future use, and maybe some planks were bought as backup and are now just sitting there leaning against a wall.

To what degree do I have to have to trace the exact pieces for the entirety of the process in order to establish legal ownership with intent to sell within national borders?

cheers,
Cosmin

 

 

3 hours ago, martin swan said:

But within your national borders it's legal to sell appendix 1 items provided the specific material was harvested before the item was listed on appendix 1 - of course you must be able to prove that.

 

[martin swan]

1 hour ago, wm_crash said:

So let's say I bought a bunch of pernambuco from Cook Woods, like 30 planks or so. And let's say I have the receipts in my mailbox. So I technically have proof of that wood's existence from before the appendix 1 listing. And let's say then in the process of making <insert here whatever you think I made from that wood>, I generate offcuts in various sizes which I keep for future use, and maybe some planks were bought as backup and are now just sitting there leaning against a wall.

To what degree do I have to have to trace the exact pieces for the entirety of the process in order to establish legal ownership with intent to sell within national borders?

cheers,
Cosmin

 

 

Actually it will be from before the appendix II listing, so it has to have been legal before 2007. 

As your (slightly rhetorical) question implies, proving legitimate provenance will be nigh on impossible. In that situation, everything which can't be clearly shown to be legal is de facto illegal.

[Jwillis]

Not to pile on…. But hypothetically wouldn’t this drive up the price of the existing pernambuco bows simply by the law of supply and demand. No new bows makes the supply dwindle.  Unless of course some wonder material were to surface or pernambuco supply were to rebound to the point where the Brazilians demanded it be taken off the CITES list

[David Burgess]

Does this mean that all the planting of pernambuco trees in Brazil by the International Alliance of
Violin and Bow Makers for Endangered Species has been for naught? The wood can never be exported?

[martin swan]

2 minutes ago, David Burgess said:

Does this mean that all the planting of pernambuco trees in Brazil by the International Alliance of
Violin and Bow Makers for Endangered Species has been for naught? The wood can never be exported?

If Brazil gets pernambuco on Appendix 1 then yes.

By the way, the Brazilian proposal either doesn't acknowledge the existence of the many plantation schemes, or claims they are improperly registered and therefore invalid.

With all due respect to IPCI there are other similar or larger initiatives, notably FunBrazil and VerdeBrasil, and many private plantations. None of these are recognized by the Braziilian authorities.

[David Burgess]

34 minutes ago, martin swan said:

If Brazil gets pernambuco on Appendix 1 then yes.

By the way, the Brazilian proposal either doesn't acknowledge the existence of the many plantation schemes, or claims they are improperly registered and therefore invalid.

With all due respect to IPCI there are other similar or larger initiatives, notably FunBrazil and VerdeBrasil, and many private plantations. None of these are recognized by the Braziilian authorities.

Wonderful.

I wonder who got bribed, and by whom?

[Wood Butcher]

9 hours ago, Jwillis said:

Not to pile on…. But hypothetically wouldn’t this drive up the price of the existing pernambuco bows simply by the law of supply and demand. No new bows makes the supply dwindle. 

Every violin shop you go to has a lot of bows for sale, most players own several bows. There is no real shortage of bows.
If the price of newly made pernambuco bows from certified wood is exorbitant, people would, in most cases, just buy something else.

Many of my colleagues play on decent to very fine bows, until we had to get CITES paperwork in place, a lot of them had no idea what their bows were made from, one even thought the metal parts on their bow were copper, but it’s actually rose gold…
Basically, a bow just has to play well, it seems what it’s made from isn’t a primary concern for many.

[martin swan]

50 minutes ago, David Burgess said:

Wonderful.

I wonder who got bribed, and by whom?

I don't think that's what's going on.

The Brazilian proposal is part of a populist agenda - they are looking for reparations for colonial exploitation, and they are aiming to inflict the maximum damage possible on non-Brazilian cultural institutions, musicians, bowmakers, everyone who benefits from the use of their national tree.

They are trying to use CITES as the wrecking ball.

 

[martin swan]

47 minutes ago, Wood Butcher said:

If the price of newly made pernambuco bows from certified wood is exorbitant, people would, in most cases, just buy something else.

 

There is no working mechanism for certifying pernambuco, and Brazil will resist all attempts to make this possible.

[David Burgess]

27 minutes ago, martin swan said:

I don't think that's what's going on.

The Brazilian proposal is part of a populist agenda - they are looking for reparations for colonial exploitation, and they are aiming to inflict the maximum damage possible on non-Brazilian cultural institutions, musicians, bowmakers, everyone who benefits from the use of their national tree.

They are trying to use CITES as the wrecking ball.

 

Sheesh, most of the deforestation in Brazil is due to clear-cutting by Brazillians for cattle ranching (beef is one of their largest exports), and also for agricultural crops. Much of their motor fuel comes from sugar cane.

[martin swan]

3 minutes ago, David Burgess said:

Sheesh, most of the deforestation in Brazil is due to clear-cutting by Brazillians for cattle ranching (beef is one of their largest exports), and also for agricultural crops. Much of their motor fuel comes from sugar cane.

Of course ... but pau-brasil is their national tree, the country is named after it, and it's a symbol for colonial exploitation.

The whole thing is completely Orwellian ...