The Lacey Act of 1900

Summary

The Lacey Act was enacted in 1900 to prevent hunters from illegally killing game in one state and escaping prosecution by crossing state lines. It has evolved into a law that prohibits import, export, transport, purchase, or sale of species when that action would violate state, federal, tribal, or foreign law. Congress amended the Lacey Act most recently in 2008, expanding the reach of the act to include timber and timber products. Implementation of the 2008 Amendments has proved controversial, and the Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) initially delayed implementing the act’s new declaration requirements for importing wood products.

Some find the Lacey Act puzzling. While people charged with violating the act are charged with violating a U.S. law, that prosecution is premised on a violation of another law, sometimes the law of another country. That has led some to claim that the United States is enforcing the laws of another country. U.S. conservation laws (such as the Lacey Act), however, have long protected species and habitats even outside of the United States. Worldwide conservation was one reason for expanding Lacey Act coverage to more plants in 2008. Preserving U.S. timber jobs and prices was another reason. However, the 2008 Amendments to the Lacey Act allow enforcement of foreign laws that are not directly related to conservation or U.S. jobs, such as failure to pay foreign stumpage fees, or shipping wood in violation of a country’s export restrictions. After search warrants were executed by the Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) against Gibson Guitar Corp. of Nashville, TN, in August 2011, based on the possible illegal import of wood from India, the 112th Congress took another look at whether the 2008 Amendments achieve the goals of the Lacey Act. Bills in the 113th Congress would alter how the 2008 Amendments are applied (H.R. 3280 and H.R. 3324) by establishing a grandfathering provision and changing the declaration requirement, respectively.

In July 2012, Gibson Guitars settled charges that imports in 2008 and 2009 had violated the Lacey Act, agreeing to pay a $300,000 penalty, make a $50,000 donation to a wildlife nonprofit group, and withdraw its claims to recover wood forfeited during the Madagascar investigation. The United States returned the wood from India seized in 2011. As part of the settlement, the United States agreed that Indian trade law, on which the alleged 2011 violations were based, was unclear.

However, Gibson admitted that it had continued to import ebony from Madagascar after learning that it was illegal.

Pernambuco update – AFVBM on Zoom, August 11, 2022 Yung Chin

CITES: The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, is an international agreement between governments. Its aim is to ensure that international trade in specimens of wild animals and plants does not threaten the survival of the species. It has been in place since 1975.

In June 2007 Pernambuco was listed in Appendix 2 and the following commodities are regulated by the CITES listing of Pernambuco: logs, sawn wood, veneer sheets, and unfinished wood articles used for the fabrication of bows for stringed musical instruments. The listing does NOT include finished wood articles made of Pernambuco wood.

This past spring, Brazil has submitted to the CITES their proposal to move Pernambuco from Appendix 2 to Appendix 1.

The next Conference of the Parties, COP, will be held in Panama November 14-25 this fall.

Some of the consequences for bowmakers and musicians if this proposal is accepted at Cop19:

For bowmakers: Only pre-convention trade (i.e. bows made with pernambuco dating from before 09/13/2007) would be allowed and subject to CITES permits (export permit, re-export certificate, import permit)

For musicians: any international journey with a bow made from pernambuco would require a Musical Instrument Certificate (MIC). The border crossing must be done at specific customs ports and the MIC must be systematically stamped by the dedicated services: this is restrictive and complex for the users, for example there are only 17 possible entry points for the USA.

To obtain this certificate, the musician must then prove that the pernambuco wood used for their bow dates from before 09/13/2007, whether made before or after this date.

If she or he has a correctly written invoice from the seller of the bow, there should be no problem to obtain a MIC. However, some countries might put additional regulations on top of CITES regulation which would be more demanding in some cases and require other documents.

What actions have the bowmakers and violinmakers taken since learning of the Brazilian proposal?

There have been many international meetings bringing awareness to most of the bow and violin trade worldwide. Most of the countries who have violin and bow organizations are fully involved in bringing awareness to their membership.

Bowmakers have produced a great deal of data in a very short period of time which will be used by those who represent us at various meetings held with NGO’s and governmental regulatory agencies around the world. In particular, I would like to thank Lynn Hannings of USA, Arthur Dubroca of France and Thomas Gerbeth of Germany for assembling much of this data. These meetings have started and are CRITICAL if we are to have any chance for a good outcome in November at the COP.

Who is representing us at these meetings?

There is an international group of various stakeholders: bowmakers, violin makers, music

manufacturers, organizations representing orchestras, NGO’s, and of course John Bennett. John has been representing the trade since around 2011 and he has developed a very good team who have helped with the ivory, rosewood, and ebony issues for musical instruments. This international team is highly respected in the CITES universe. John’s first involvement with bowmakers was when I meet him at an informal meeting in NYC when he was the director of a NGO the musician Sting had in New York and after a few years he became involved in the IPCI. Since 1999, many bowmakers around the world mobilized within the IPCI (International Pernambuco Conservation Initiative) to finance the planting of pernambuco in Brazil. As of 2022, approximately 500,000 trees have been planted in the expectation that some of them will mature to be harvested in a sustainable and renewable way one day. Despite the efforts of most of the profession, some makers have deviated from this initiative to succumb to illegal trade and thus tarnish the image of bowmakers who are actively involved in preserving the forest, its trees and its biodiversity.

It will be very difficult for those who represent us at CITES related meetings if those involved in illegal activities do not stop. Only concrete actions led by our organizations to fight the illegal trade will be relevant and make our voice heard to find the most suitable solutions to sustain pernambuco and preserve our craft which we are all involved in. Of course, here in the USA, the Lacey Act enacted in 1900 is looming.

To remind everyone: there has been a five-year long investigation into the illegal trade of Pernambuco in Brazil and the investigation is spreading worldwide. Much data has been collected by the Brazilian authorities via social media.

Solutions:

Support IPCI: We are hearing from many governmental authorities around the world how impressed they are with what we have achieved with so little. Many of the technical details mentioned in the proposed Brazilian document are in fact from the work of IPCI.

Alliance-USA: This is an off shoot of EILA and was recently created to centralize our worldwide efforts with regard to conservation and associated activities. The three goals are representation, education and direct action. As AFVBM members, you are already members of Alliance-USA, please visit the website: alliance-usa.org. There you will find regularly updated information.

Hold off on buying Pernambuco sticks or boards till after we see what happens at the COP. Of course, if you have declared your Pernambuco in 2007, you can sell your wood easily inside the borders. We expect to see more direction from the Brazilian authorities after the COP as to what will be legal or not legal pertaining to sticks coming out of Brazil. We are trying to find solutions for ALL bowmakers worldwide. For sure, even in the best of circumstances after the COP meeting in Panama, the trade will be very different.

THANK YOU for taking the time to attend this meeting today.