"Illegal Wood" and the Lacy Act

[Rob Wallace]

If you have not yet seen this news, the Gibson Guitar company was recently "raided" by government officials enforcing the Lacy Act which sets out to limit and restrict trade in any products obtained from endangered or threatened species.

Federal agents raided two Gibson Guitar plants and identified what is suspected to be illegally harvested and traded ebony (and perhaps other) wood. Gibson denies the wood was illegally obtained. If you're interested, you can read more about the situation in several other articles by following the links seen HERE.

Members of the international wood trade industry apparently are supporting the action as reported in THIS ARTICLE from the online magazine Woodworking Network.

It is important to regulate which plant species producing woods are in danger of being lost to extinction due to uncontrolled harvest/over-use or habitat destruction (the latter is far more prevalent than the former, but the results are the same in the end - total loss of the species). To those of us in the USA & Canada, these are generally considered to be "exotic" wood species which are harvested from natural areas (e.g. NOT from tree plantations or forest-managed areas) in tropical or other specialized habitats, and exported to various countries for distribution and sale.

What this means for woodturners is that the availability of certain wood species may change (read: become harder to find) in future years if sustainable harvesting practices are not followed by wood suppliers. Importers and retailers of "exotic" species will need to continue to be certain (?) that the trade in woods being exported and sold complies with international agreements, as well as complying with those regulations in individual countries for which such laws are created to protect these wood-producing species of plants. Without adequate regulation and enforcement, many of these uncommon or rare species could easily be wiped-out permanently, particularly in countries in which enforcement of existing conservation laws are lax or are not enforced.

To those of us who love the diversity of woods, these laws are important in assuring even a small chance of continued availability of many beautiful species of wood into the future. Buy and use them responsibly.

Rob Wallace

 

[Dave Ogren]

Illegal Wood or Manufacturing Out of the Country

I got a whole different take on this subject. The government seized over $1 Million of Rosewood ?? in raw boards. Gibson has a staff of 40 people who machine this wood into Necks ?? for guitars. The guitars are the only ones made in the USA. It would be perfectly legal to have the same wood machined in India where it is grown and shipped here as a finished product, as all of the other 6 or 7 ?? guitar manufacturers do. Something wrong with this picture. The media claims that it is politically driven.
I don't want to start a controversy here or a political mess, just reporting the facts as I read them.

Good Luck and Happy Turning.
Thanks,
Dave

 

[Bill Boehme]

You can be almost certain that most exotic species are not from any sort of sustainable production regardless of what is claimed.

 

[George Clark]

You can be almost certain that most exotic species are not from any sort of sustainable production regardless of what is claimed.

Why is that so, Bill? Do you have any factual data to support your statement or are you just bloviating?

George

 

[Harry Robinette]

George
If you think that the wood your getting is from this legal source.Show us your paper work thats signed by the US Dept of Agricultural.Thats what Gibson Does Not have.If you can not show that paper you can be charged for illegal importing even if you say you bought it from so an so company USA.Thats the fact of whats going on.Show me your papers from were you get ANYTHING other then domestic wood.

 

[Bill Boehme]

Why is that so, Bill? Do you have any factual data to support your statement or are you just bloviating?

George

I will need to look up bloviating to see if that is something that I am doing.

Most of my information comes from either the website of Bradford F. Whitman or US Government sites that he links. Mr. Whitman wrote a two part article for American Woodturner that appeared in the 2007 -2008 time frame. If you go to his web site http://www.bradturnsgreen.com, there are a number of links on the left side of the page. One of the more informative is the second one which is dated November 10, 2009 which leads to a US Government regulations site. There will be a pop-up stating that the link is old and will not be maintained much longer. Click the X on the pop-up window and then select the PDF attachment which is near the bottom right hand side of the page (It is the tiny red box with the letters "PDF". I also recommend reading the two part series that he wrote for American Woodturner. He has links to the articles. There are numerous other links if you have the inclination to read more.

BTW, the Lacey Act isn't something new -- it has been around for 100 years. While many countries have laws to help protect endangered plants and animals, the world is full of unscrupulous people (both in the foreign countries and in the US). While the US government is trying to make it more difficult for things to be brought in illegally, there is not enough manpower to have perfect enforcement.

 

[Bill Boehme]

OK, I found "bloviating", a slang term meaning to talk at length, esp. in an inflated or empty way.

I'll let you decide if if my one sentence post of twenty-two words constitutes talking at length. BTW, your one sentence reply contains twenty words.

 

[George Clark]

George
If you think that the wood your getting is from this legal source.Show us your paper work thats signed by the US Dept of Agricultural.Thats what Gibson Does Not have.If you can not show that paper you can be charged for illegal importing even if you say you bought it from so an so company USA.Thats the fact of whats going on.Show me your papers from were you get ANYTHING other then domestic wood.

Harry, I hope English is your second language. How is it you know these "facts?"

How is it you know what Gibson does or does not have?

What are your sources for this information? Do you have an inside line on the Gibson case or is this just more bloviating?

George

 

[davidwalser]

A slightly different take

I don't think it's fair to cast the Gibson case as an issue about sustainability. Gibson has worked with environmental groups to bring about sensible forestry practices and regulation that will ensure rosewood and other exotic lumbers will be available in perpetuity. According to Green Peace, Gibson has been a leading advocate of such practices for decades. So, it's unfair to paint Gibson as the corrupt capitalist that cares nothing about the environment. The company's record says (loudly) that's not the case.

Instead, the problem seems to be with the Lacey Act. The Act makes it a crime to knowingly or unknowingly import wood in contravention of another country's laws. The importer (Gibson) has absolute liability. A good faith belief that the wood was imported legally is NOT a defense. (Such a belief might be a mitigating factor when it comes to affixing a punishment for the offense, but it's not a defense against conviction.)

In the Gibson case, two separate shipments are at issue. One was a shipment of rosewood from Madagascar. The second is the much more recent shipment of rosewood from India. Gibson claims that the first shipment was the result of a purchase the company made from a corrupt distributor who bribed officials in Madagascar to approve the shipment. Gibson quit using Madagascar as a source of wood when it could not find a trustworthy (a/k/a non-corrupt) supplier.

The second shipment is different. Here the press have reported that the issue was that the shipment was of raw lumber and that Indian law prohibits the export of raw wood products. Gibson claims that the shipment was of partially finished wooden guitar parts. Indian workers roughed-out the parts, allowing Gibson's US workers to do the final shaping. Gibson claims, and the Indian government does not dispute, that the parties had negotiated the amount of work that needed to be done in India before the parts could be legally shipped to the US. The parts were inspected by Indian officials and the shipment was approved for export.

Assuming Gibson's representation is accurate, what's the problem? The second shipment was mislabeled with a different rare wood. Had the box been properly labeled as rosewood, no one is arguing that the shipment would have been illegal. Had the box contained the type of wood mentioned on the label, the shipment would have been legal. The only issue is the wrong label was placed on the wrong box.

Perhaps, the feds are just being sticklers for "truth in labeling" or, perhaps, the feds are worried that the mislabeling was part of a plot to allow Gibson's distributor to ship more rosewood (and less of the other wood) out of the country. Whatever the theory of the "crime", it appears Gibson played no role in it other than as a good faith buyer. It's not been alleged that Gibson knew anything about the mislabeling. As was discussed above, such a lack of knowledge is not a defense under the Lacey Act.

So, what does this mean to woodturners? We need to be careful where we source our woods. If you buy some exotic wood from the local WoodCraft or Rockler, and if that wood was shipped into the country illegally, you could be liable under the Lacey Act. Sure, the government would go after the direct importers before coming after a turner who bought a bowl blank at his local retail store, but everyone in the chain is guilty of the same crime.

Personally, I think the Lacey Act went too far. Wood is not like ivory. Some exotic species of wood can be grown and harvested responsibly. Countries should be allowed to sell this valuable resource and woodworkers like Gibson (on a large scale) and you and I (on a small scale) should be able to buy responsibly harvested wood. The problem is it's impossible for a buyer to tell the difference between a piece of rosewood that was legally harvested from a piece that was not. The seller should have the burden of demonstrating that the lumber meets all the legal requirements for sale. Good faith buyers should not have that burden placed on them. Buyers are ill equipped to determine the origin of the wood they are buying.

 

[George Clark]

You can be almost certain that most exotic species are not from any sort of sustainable production regardless of what is claimed.

Bill,

I like that word, bloviate, and thank you for giving me the opportunity to use it. I thought it fit quite well.

I read most of your references and will reread them when I have more time, but I still take issue with your statement. While you or Mr. Whitman may believe it to be true, that in itself does not make it true. It is still simply your opinion, and should be stated as such.

George

 

[waltben]

I don't think it's fair to cast the Gibson case as an issue about sustainability. Gibson has worked with environmental groups to bring about sensible forestry practices and regulation that will ensure rosewood and other exotic lumbers will be available in perpetuity. According to Green Peace, Gibson has been a leading advocate of such practices for decades. So, it's unfair to paint Gibson as the corrupt capitalist that cares nothing about the environment. The company's record says (loudly) that's not the case.

Instead, the problem seems to be with the Lacey Act. The Act makes it a crime to knowingly or unknowingly import wood in contravention of another country's laws. The importer (Gibson) has absolute liability. A good faith belief that the wood was imported legally is NOT a defense. (Such a belief might be a mitigating factor when it comes to affixing a punishment for the offense, but it's not a defense against conviction.)

In the Gibson case, two separate shipments are at issue. One was a shipment of rosewood from Madagascar. The second is the much more recent shipment of rosewood from India. Gibson claims that the first shipment was the result of a purchase the company made from a corrupt distributor who bribed officials in Madagascar to approve the shipment. Gibson quit using Madagascar as a source of wood when it could not find a trustworthy (a/k/a non-corrupt) supplier.

The second shipment is different. Here the press have reported that the issue was that the shipment was of raw lumber and that Indian law prohibits the export of raw wood products. Gibson claims that the shipment was of partially finished wooden guitar parts. Indian workers roughed-out the parts, allowing Gibson's US workers to do the final shaping. Gibson claims, and the Indian government does not dispute, that the parties had negotiated the amount of work that needed to be done in India before the parts could be legally shipped to the US. The parts were inspected by Indian officials and the shipment was approved for export.

Assuming Gibson's representation is accurate, what's the problem? The second shipment was mislabeled with a different rare wood. Had the box been properly labeled as rosewood, no one is arguing that the shipment would have been illegal. Had the box contained the type of wood mentioned on the label, the shipment would have been legal. The only issue is the wrong label was placed on the wrong box.

Perhaps, the feds are just being sticklers for "truth in labeling" or, perhaps, the feds are worried that the mislabeling was part of a plot to allow Gibson's distributor to ship more rosewood (and less of the other wood) out of the country. Whatever the theory of the "crime", it appears Gibson played no role in other than as a good faith buyer. It's not been alleged that Gibson knew anything about the mislabeling. As was discussed above, such a lack of knowledge is not a defense under the Lacey Act.

So, what does this mean to woodturners? We need to be careful where we source our woods. If you buy some exotic wood from the local WoodCraft or Rockler, and if that wood was shipped into the country illegally, you could be liable under the Lacey Act. Sure, the government would go after the direct importers before coming after a turner who bought a bowl blank at his local retail store, but everyone in the chain is guilty of the same crime.

Personally, I think the Lacey Act went too far. Wood is not like ivory. Some exotic species of wood can be grown and harvested responsibly. Countries should be allowed to sell this valuable resource and woodworkers like Gibson (on a large scale) and you and I (on a small scale) should be able to buy responsibly harvested wood. The problem is it's impossible for a buyer to tell the difference between a piece of rosewood that was legally harvested from a piece that was not. The seller should have the burden of demonstrating that the lumber meets all the legal requirements for sale. Good faith buyers should not have that burden placed on them. Buyers are ill equipped to determine the origin the wood they are buying.

Thank you David! Now I'm left wondering what my two direct importer sources of wood are doing today.

 

[hockenbery]

Rain Forest trees are harvested from three general sources
Primary forest ( sometimes called virgin forest)
Second growth forest
Plantations

None of these are ecologically sound.

Primary and and secondary forests have at least a hundred species of trees per acre. Tractor road ways are cut to the timber trees and it takes 50 years to grow new trees. I visited a site in Peru where a forty foot wide roadway a half mile long destroyed several hundred trees to get two or three mahoganies to the river. The primary forest becomes secondary forest.

Plantation grown seems like a great idea but plantation land comes from clear cutting primary forest and replacing it with a monoculture.
The monoculture has little wildlife. Presumably at some point in time land use will achieve a state of equilibrium in which new plantation planting only occurs on harvested plantation land.

Sustainable? Check back in 50 years.

I've had the good fortune to see rainforest in central and south America.

Al

 

[KellyDunn]

I was under the impression from what I heard on NPR that the India deal was for ebony fretboards. the madagascar deal I forget. Gibson has not been charged with a crime so have no way in court to do anything about it until they are charged. Gibsons owner says he had all his ducks in a row.
A tree plantation is a long term project. As is replanting. When I lived in the southern US thousands of acres were planted in trees. Until harvest the understory became whatever nature provided. The owner of the land may not be around for harvest. Large timber companies do the same thing. Here in Hawaii former sugar cane land has been planted in trees to be used for chip board, biomass and whatever else. Every plan for a mill to do the work gets kicked by nimbys. So the trees seem to be close to a 100ft. tall and the understory is everything.
It is true in tropical settings clearing had to be done. Many of the large plantations have been growing stuff for one heck of a long time. Several hundred years.Some switch products as times change. The complaint is with slash and burn. A tree plantation has to take a very long view.
So we shall see how this turns out. But untill they get formally charged?

 

[Bill Boehme]

The amendment to the Lacey Act passed in 2008 was intended to address some of the problem areas where imported wood was being misidentified on purpose to circumvent restrictions. One problem was that the seller could claim that the wood species was unknown. Some of the wood from Peru was being identified with "creative" new names that were supposedly local names for the various species. By International convention, wood is now supposed to be identified by its scientific name to eliminate this practice. Also, international convention identifies which species are endangered and should not be harvested. Fifty years ago, the large island of Madagascar was covered by dense forests. Today it is essentially a desert island that is nearly devoid of trees.

Importers in this country are smart enough to know what species of wood they are buying so neither playing dumb nor real ignorance has ever been an excuse for disobeying any law.

 

[Bob Hadley]

Whether or not Gibson did anything illegal (knowingly or not doesn't matter, per the Lacy act) remains to be determined.

On the other hand, one has to wonder what justifies an armed raid in these circumstances. It's not like they were importing blow from some South American cartel.

Surely the Government could have got all they needed with a few subpoenas of Gibson's import documents, a review of customs records from the POE and some investigation into what was actually exported from India.

But no, it was a full-on armed raid. (Actually, two armed raids.)

Really?

 

[Bruce Florek]

Police officers carry guns.

After reading several articles, there appears to be some "sensationalism" concerning law enforcement's serving of the warrant. The government denies the use of SWAT Teams, insisting that regular law enforcement officers effected the service of the warrant. Virtually all Peace Officers carry guns both on duty and off. If these duty weapons are what constituted an "armed raid", then we have a case of the press sensationalizing to get ratings.

So in my opinion, as a former Deputy Sheriff:
SWAT TEAM = Armed Raid
NO SWAT TEAM = Police doing their job

None of this has anything to do with the way I feel about the whole mess. As I read, the changes made to the Lacey Act were supposed to be about jobs and the lumber industry, as well as protecting the world's forests. Do we grow a lot of Rosewood or Ebony here? It has been stated that Gibson could have ordered the guitar necks finished from India and no law would have been broken. If that is true then that portion of the Lacey Act protects neither jobs or forests.

 

[Keith T.]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_logging_in_Madagascar

According to this report, most illegal rosewood is going to CHINA, not the U.S.. According to Gibson's president, the action taken by the Fish and Wildlife Service is politically motivated, based on the fact that Gibson insists on remaining a non-union employer despite intense pressure to unionize. Personally, I find it interesting to see Gibson singled out, when they are such a small player, while "green" companies, such as Solyndra receive hundreds of millions of dollars of our tax money while the government turns a blind eye despite warnings of dire financial consequences. Reward your friends, punish your enemies. I cannot help but think our government agencies must have better things to do with our tax money: they cannot seem to stem the flow of illegal drugs and narcotics (all meeting the definition of "flora", as applied by the Fish and Wildlife Service by the way) that cross our borders daily, yet they can focus on destroying companies such as Gibson.

U.S. wood processors complain of unfair competition from imported lumber, but most of the tonewoods must be imported....they don't grow here, therefore, they have no effect on domestic sales.

http://www.bing.com/images/search?q...t=slash+and+burn+deforestation&FORM=IGRE#x0y0 By far, more forest is lost to slash and burn farming practices than lumber production. These are a few images of such practices....The truth is, if people were made aware of the value of the timber they're burning, the practice would be greatly reduced. Yet, wood product manufacturers are viewed as among those destroying the earth.

A recent article in the New York Times criticized musicians as contributing to the destruction of the rain forests because they refuse to buy instruments made of "renewable" materials. I feel musicians are among the most ecologically minded people; but nothing compares with traditional tone woods for proper sound. Violin bows are only crafted from pernambuco wood, for example. Besides, if wood isn't a renewable resource, what is?

Were you aware that in medieval times (1100's) so much wood had been harvested in Europe to fuel the iron smelting furnaces that trees suitable for 35 foot ship's masts couldn't be located in the whole of France? I have seen pictures of Kent, Connecticut from the turn of the century...even the trees on main street were harvested for iron production. There wasn't a tree left standing from parts of Connecticut to well into New York state. Fortunately, wood grows back; just drive from Virginia, through Pennsylvania, New York, and Vermont. We have no shortage of trees here...products that were once made of wood are now made of plastic or other synthetic materials, and most paper products are processed using sound harvesting practices.

 

[Bill Boehme]

A lot of furniture and other products from India, China, and southeast Asia, mainly Thailand, is made from pterocarpus macrocarpus and is marketed as being genuine rosewood although the correct name for that species is Burma Paduak which is not related to true rosewood. It is very likely that finished products from that region of the world are not really rosewood (at least not the wood that comes through legitimate channels).

The most well known true rosewood, dalbergia nigra, is commonly known as Brazilian Rosewood. It is now listed as endangered by CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora). Another true rosewood is Dalbergia latifolia, commonly known as East Indian rosewood. It is also an endangered species. It is found in India, Madagascar, and Central America. Other rosewood species include African Blackwood, Cocobolo, Kingwood, and Tulipwood.

Criminal syndicates in Madagascar illegally logged East Indian Rosewood and then laundered the logs through various channels and it eventually wound up in China where it was processed into boards, furniture, and other products before being exported to Europe and the US. It was in this illegal sourcing that Gibson was suspected of being involved. All of this is old news since it happened in 2009, but I do not know what the final outcome was or if it is still ongoing.

Meanwhile, the Malagasy government said that they planned to ban logging of rosewood for a couple years or so in their rapidly dwindling National Forests. They have basically no natural resources to provide any sort of wealth and the illegal logging was not helping the situation. Since the government is on the warning list of Failed States, there are no easy answers to their predicament nor are they likely able to have much control over their situation.

 

[MichaelMouse]

How about the argument that allowing controlled harvest makes preservation of the resource valuable to those who inhabit the land? Or at least as valuable as the few crops they might grow after slash and burn.

Problem with conservation is those pesky people who are trying to feed themselves and their families. Why can't they understand that we know better. Wheat, rice and corn are "monoculture" too. If we could return to hunter/gatherers, we might be able to eat seeds, weeds and tubers that would take over the same space. After the famine, disease and war, of course.

 

[John Jordan]

Here is a pretty good take on the subject with some references. I've deleted a couple of words that might be politically charged, as my intent is not to turn it into a heated debate, or to express my political views. I believe this is informative and fairly brief.

John

I've noticed a couple diaries about the raids on the Gibson guitar company lately, and I just couldn't let this pass without adding some real facts to the story.

I am a semi-professional luthier, i.e. a maker of stringed instruments, and this story affects me personally. I use some of the materials in question, I have professional relationships with some of the people involved (in a six-degreesl kind of way). I have also been following what other people in the industry are saying about it. So here are some more details on what's going on.

First, I am not going to defend Gibson's CEO. Making this into a case of political martyrdom is not doing anyone any good.

According to to people in the know, the object of the first raid on Gibson (in 2009) was in response to suspicion a shipment of malagasy ebony, which comes from Madagascar. There are about 150 species of ebony in the world (persimmon is actually a kind of ebony) but only about 20 of those species are useful for building musical instruments. The particular kind from Madagascar is particularly dense, and very uniformly black. This makes it very much prized for the fingerboards of stringed instruments.

I have been to Madagascar. Once, it was mostly covered with incredible rain forests. Since human habitation began, about 500 AD or so, these have been shrinking steadily, until now there is almost nothing left. It's shocking and heartbreaking to see mile after mile of red-dirt scrubland, with nothing growing on it except eucalyptus and sisal. Once-forested slopes are now cut with red gashes where landslides have devastated them. All of the once-clear rivers now look like potters' slip, they are so choked with the poor red clay. People eke out subsistence on skinny cows and dry rice cultivation.

Madagascar was a corrupt dictatorship for decades. Their longtime strong-man was overthrown in 2002, and since then the country has not had a stable government. There is a massive international conservationist presence in the country, but there is little their either they or the government can do to stop illegal logging.

But not all logging is prohibited in Madagascar. It is perfectly legal, under U.S. law to import wood from Madagascar, as long as it wasn't illegally cut under Madagascar law. This rule falls under the Lacey Act, which is at the heart of the matter. More on that in a moment.

Is it ethical to use wood from Madagascar? I don't think so, but that's my personal choice. Certainly, if we guitar makers were all to stop using any Madagascar woods for building, this would not have any impact on the deforestation. Illegal logging in Madagascar is carried out by local people whose children are starving. If they can get 1,000 for a log, which will end up in high-end guitars, they'll take it. However, if no one will buy that log for $1000 for guitars, they will happily sell the same log to someone else for $100. Failing that, they'll just make charcoal out of it.

Yep, imagine that. $100 a board foot ebony being turned into charcoal. It happens.

THe only real solution is to get local people to stop cutting down their own forests and give them some other ways to make money. Tourism helps (I know, I've been there) but it's not a cure-all.

You may ask, why not just substitute? Some makers do. A few kinds of wood are suitable for guitar making, but not very many. Fingerboards in particular need to be made from very dense, heavy wood or they just sound like crap.

But Gibson's crusade is about the Lacey Act (http://www.eia-global.org/lacey/P6.EIA.LaceyReport.pdf ). In a nutshell, it holds manufacturers liable if any of the materials in their products were illegally obtained. Sounds great on the surface, and I certainly agree with the spirit of it, but it's damned near impossible to enforce, and impossible to comply with. For example, if I buy a piece of wood from LMI and make a guitar with it, and want to export it, I need to somehow prove that the piece of wood was legally obtained. I can point back to LMI, but LMI may not be able to prove it either. The legality of my product is only as good as the legality of every other person in the chain-- and sometimes that's a very long chain. It's impossible for me to verify every link in that chain-- no one can-- and yet I am legally on the hook for it.

In this sense, Gibson has a point. But, we should point out, other guitar makers (Martin, for example) manage to navigate the Lacey Act well enough, and have people on the ground in their procurement process to ensure they are in the clear.

In this first case in 2009, it seems like Gibson just got caught in blatant violation of the act, with the wood equivalent of banned ivory. In this new case, it's a different story.

In this luthier's forum thread http://www.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10101&t=33311&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&hilit=Lacey+act, it's explained (several pages in) that the new raid is over East Indian Rosewood fingerboards. Unlike malagasy ebony, East Indian Rosewood is not in short supply. It's grown on tea plantations to provide shade for the tea plants.

The Indian government has a law prohibiting the export of raw rosewood. Not because it's rare, but because the Indian government wants to create sawmill jobs. So the stipulation is that only "finished" wood products may be exported, not just lumber. However, the Indian government considers a rosewood fingerboard blank, which is really just a piece of wood about 24" x 3" x 5/16", to be a "finished" product for legal purposes.

The trouble with Gibson started when someone at Luthiers Mercantile International filled out the paperwork wrong-- a simple clerical error. The inspectors, not being luthiers, saw a stack of "raw" wood boards, rather than "fingerboard blanks." So now here we go again.

In this case the Lacey Act is being used to enforce India's industrial protectionism, rather than environmental laws. The wood in question this time isn't even illegal under the Lacey Act, it's just suspected of being illegal because someone made a paperwork mistake.

There are some allegations that the government trumped up this latest raid to just poke around for more evidence to use in their first action two years ago. Which is the sort of thing I'd do if I were them. I don't have a lot of sympathy for Gibson, but the problem they face is a very real one.

Bottom line here: Gibson's CEO is ***********, but the real situation with the Lacey Act is pretty complicated, and the law itself needs some serious reform to achieve its laudable aims while allowing environmentally conscious businesspeople to keep operating.

The wild claims to martyrdom coming from Gibson Guitar CEO Henry Juszkiewicz are being challenged by an unusual coalition of environmental groups, U.S. hardwood industry groups and unions. On a Tuesday conference call and elsewhere, they have made a number of key rebuttals to Juszkiewicz's claims.

First off, Juszkiewicz is pushing the notion that Gibson has now been raided twice because the company was somehow being specifically targeted. In fact, the Environmental Investigation Agency notes,

The affidavit indicates that the government did not realize that Gibson was the recipient of the ebony shipment in question when it was first held in Dallas due to irregular paperwork and suspicion of a Lacey Act violation; only upon investigation they found the parties in this shipment to be the same as those involved in the Madagascar ebony case already in process.

When they say "parties in this shipment," they mean parties plural: According to the EIA's Andrea Johnson, although the 2009 case involved Malagasy ebony and the 2011 case involves Indian ebony, the importer Gibson was using in 2011 was the same importer they had used in 2009. If you had been raided and were under continuing investigation for illegal activity and you really wanted to obey the law, wouldn't you start doing business with someone other than the company that had been supplying you with illegal goods?

At least in 2009, Gibson knew that what it was doing was at least potentially illegal: "Information released in affidavits and motions over the past year include excerpts from internal emails indicating that Gibson decided to buy illegal wood knowing the risks involved."

Moreover, Juszkiewicz has claimed that this was an attempt to drive jobs out of the U.S., or at least that that would be the effect of the action against him. However,

Jameson French, CEO of Northland Forest Products and the former chairman of the Hardwood Federation, a trade association, said illegal loggers evade environmental and trade laws and sell their products more cheaply than law-abiding companies can.

French said he is “flabbergasted by the misinformation that’s been put out there†by Gibson. In particular, he said that rather than costing jobs, the Lacey Act has “saved a lot of American jobs†by protecting American wood companies from illegal competition.

On Tuesday's call, Mark Barford, the executive director of the National Hardwood Lumber Association said bluntly that the Lacey Act "is our jobs act ... we need the protections of the Lacey Act, we need a fair playing field." There is a significant economic effect: Illegal logging can cost the U.S. $1 billion per year.

Additionally, there are major environmental issues. Last year, a Chatham House report estimated a 22 percent decline in illegal logging since 2002, and "The decline in illegal logging may have kept some 1.2-14.6 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide locked up in trees over the last decade."

Gibson currently faces a civil case from 2009 and is expected to face criminal charges in that case; the 2011 case is still being investigated.

 

[Bill Boehme]

Thanks for that information, John. From the stuff that I had read I was under the impression that the 2009 case against Gibson involved East Indian rosewood from Madagascar rather than ebony that was obtained from clear cutting in their National Forests. While the part about illegal clear cutting and laundering rosewood logs through various channels before it wound up in China is probably true, it is not the wood that Gibson was procuring.

I sympathize with the poor starving people in Madagascar because the smuggling cartels are the ones getting rich and giving the people just a pittance. I have the impression that the land in many tropical rainforests is pitifully poor and that most of the nutrients come from the topsoil that consisted of decayed vegetation. When the topsoil is gone, the land becomes almost useless.

 

[Harry Robinette]

John
Thank you for a very informative article.

 

[bfwhitma]

Lacey discussion

Hello.

I have tried to update my site www.bradturnsgreen.com periodically to provide the best information available regarding conservation of tropical species and the laws. This material is not, as one commenter said "just opinion". It is a collection of the facts and laws. I am a lawyer and I understand the difference quite well.

This info can and should be relied upon by people who want to conserve rare and threatened species and tropical forests and comply with laws that exist here (Lacey) and also in a number of countries around the world that have recognized the urgency of this issue and have now used Lacey as a model for their own laws. It is a rather exciting moment when the world seems to be coming together on any issue--and this one in particular. If anyone does spot an error in my information clearinghouse, I would appreciate notice of it.

As far as Gibson is concerned, there has been a great deal of misrepresentation of facts by parties pursuing various agendas or plying their trade as pot-stirrers willing to upset very important work that is being done for the benefit of all of us--U.S. industry, U.S. citizens and citizens of all the countries that have had the courage to move ahead with legal protections for reserves and species.

I know the Department of Justice In DC rather well having worked there for eight years and kept in touch with a variety of folks in Washington and filed comments on the regulations with the Department of Agriculture that is the issuing agency under Lacey. I am attaching a link to DOJ's well-written letter to Congress setting forth facts and law--not opinions or hype. These are good, dedicated people who do a remarkable job serving this country with integrity, intelligence, and a strong concern for the well-being of the natural species and forests being decimated in these tropical countries. It is our jobs as American citizens to support this work in our own ways and to make sure we do not knowingly become the financial drivers for illegal activity around the world.

Here is the link to the DOJ letter on Gibson that I will add to my website. I have a feeling these links will not go through well in this message. Hopefully, you can follow up on my site and if you have specific questions, you may address them directly to me through the site.

http://blackburn.house.gov/UploadedFiles/DOJ_-_DOI_response_re_Gibson_Guitar.pdf

Thank you for considering this reply.

Brad Whitman

 

[KellyDunn]

Brad, thanks for that. So i did hear the facts on NPR. The owner of Gibson says he had his ducks in a row yet can do nothing but be in limbo untill actually charged with a crime. So I say get on with it so Gibson can have a day in court.