kitarist -> RE: Eye candy desde Brasil (Sep. 28 2023 19:45:31)
|
quote:
this thread would be a good reference OK, then I will add a bit more to explain why it is legal to sell some BRW even now, as well as what/where the rules are in general and why, with references. This assumes essentially zero knowledge of the subject matter. Sorry for the length. CITES = Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species [of Wild Fauna and Flora] (full text here: https://cites.org/eng/disc/text.php ) Created in 1973, the principal aim is to address the fact that unrestricted international trade (export-import) is the main driver for over-harvesting/killing of various (wild) plants and animals to such an extent that it threatens them with extinction. CITES was put together as an international agreement to address that by preventing/restricting import and export of these species, which presumably would remove the impetus for their over-harvesting/killing. (This is implemented, in practice, at the national level for each signatory country; one can find the CITES authority for one's country by looking it up on the CITES website: https://cites.org/eng/parties/country-profiles/national-authorities ). Domestic trade in these species is not restricted by CITES, presumably because it was not a big factor in what was driving the over-harvesting/killing problem. In fact, "Trade" is a defined word in CITES 'Article I: Definitions" to mean specifically "export, re-export, import and introduction from the sea". BRW (Dalbergia Nigra) is listed in Appendix I - which is the list with the most restrictions for [international] trade. CITES Article III provides the general rules for App. I species ( https://cites.org/eng/disc/text.php#III ), which are that any international trade would have to be done with export and import permits; however, they can only be obtained (or are not needed) in some very limited circumstances as outlined in Article VII ( https://cites.org/eng/disc/text.php#VII ): No import/export permits are needed, for example, in the case: VII.1: when species are in transit while remaining in customs control; VII.2: when species were acquired (harvested) before being included on the CITES list (as long as a certificate to that effect is issued by the relevant national authority); VII.3: when species are personal or household effects; and so on, a few other exemptions, like for specimens bred in captivity; for a non-commercial loan/exchange between scientists. As a consequence, the only way BRW and guitars made out of it can still be moved between countries for the commercial purpose of trade is if it can be proved that the BRW was felled before it landed in App. I of CITES. When did this happen, exactly? CITES's 8th meeting (called "CoP8" = CITES "Conference of the Parties, 8th meeting") was held Mar 2-13, 1992, in Kyoto, Japan. One of the proposals ( https://cites.org/eng/cop/08/prop/index.php ) adopted at that meeting was from Brazil, for including BRW in Appendix I (CoP8 Proposal 91 PDF). That 4-page proposal also provides biological and trade data, national protection status, and info on similar species, with references. That Brazilian proposal (among others) was adopted by CoP8, valid from Jun 11, 1992 (Amendments to Appendices I and II adopted at CoP8 (pdf)). Therefore, any BRW proved to have been harvested before Jun 11, 1992, would be 'pre-convention BRW' for which Article VII.2 exemption would apply - as long as a certificate to that effect is issued by the relevant national authority. In practice, Andy above has the original export document which apparently is dated before Jun 11, 1992, thus proving that the BRW must have been harvested before that date. This would be the main evidence likely sufficient to apply under Article VII.2 to the (in this case) US CITES authority for an official certificate to that effect. That certificate would then be the evidence needed for any buyer of guitars made from that BRW to apply and easily get a 'Musical Instrument Certificate' for each guitar. Alternatively, things can be left at the 'export permit' level, which will be needed (by guitar seller) later for any guitar to demonstrate pre-convention status for its sale abroad, and for getting a musical instrument certificate for later movement (by guitar buyer). Finally, one thing to add regarding the Musical Instrument Certificate is that CITES clarified recently that using such an instrument for paid performances (travelling musician) does not affect the granting of that certificate - it is not a violation of CITES to move such an instrument between countries for the purposes of paid work. This makes sense because CITES's 'commercial purposes' restriction is specifically about the [international] trade of the endangered species [and products made from it] itself. Making money from playing a BRW guitar abroad is not an act of trading BRW.
|
|
|
|