Chiff and Fipple Forums

Confirmed - sending flutes from the US to Canada only requires the US permits from the USFWS and APHIS.

Casey

New Zealand doesn't require an import permit.

Just found out from the EU that each member country has their own requirement, rather than a blanket policy covering the EU. This is for shipping new flutes from the US to anywhere in the EU.

Casey

Well, this has been a vèry informative thread indeed!

All grumbles about excessive regulation aside, how does CITES affect the trade in "old" musical instruments? Obviously, some makers have been "retired" for a century or two, and so any sale of such instruments can not be from the "maker". Also, these woods were harvested twenty, eighty, two hundred and twenty years before the treaty was ever ratified. Are such instruments, even when made from woods on the list, affected as well? Are there exemptions for antiques?

What if the instrument is made from wood, but the seller can't determine what kind of wood it is?

My understanding is that any sale of an instrument between one person to another (including eBay sales) is considered a commercial transaction and thus a permit is required for sending it via the mail or other courier if the instrument contains Rosewoods of any kind, including Blackwood. Note that a permit is required for pre-Convention wood (before 2017) so if it was purchased last year or 100 years ago there is no difference.

However, if the instrument is being sent for repairs that is not considered a commercial transaction (sale) and the instrument is exempt. If the instrument is being hand carried as a personal item it is also exempt.

Casey Burns wrote:My understanding is that any sale of an instrument between one person to another (including eBay sales) is considered a commercial transaction and thus a permit is required for sending it via the mail or other courier if the instrument contains Rosewoods of any kind, including Blackwood. Note that a permit is required for pre-Convention wood (before 2017) so if it was purchased last year or 100 years ago there is no difference.

However, if the instrument is being sent for repairs that is not considered a commercial transaction (sale) and the instrument is exempt. If the instrument is being hand carried as a personal item it is also exempt.

Hmm. What if some hypothetical person wants to lend such a whistle to some other hypothetical person for a very long time and that other person just so happens to want to lend the first person some small amount of money, also for a very long period of time without interest?

whistlecollector wrote:Hmm. What if some hypothetical person wants to lend such a whistle to some other hypothetical person for a very long time and that other person just so happens to want to lend the first person some small amount of money, also for a very long period of time without interest?

They know where you live. Remember, you can be monitored with cameras in your microwave......

Best wishes.

Steve

Casey Burns wrote: Am picking up some curly maple tomorrow to experiment with (and having it acrylic impregnated).

As you probably know Michael MacHarg was making bagpipes out of impregnated maple back in the 1970s and 1980s (I don't see them on his current site).

It's not very attractive, with an odd greenish tint, but it's heavy and hard.

Thanks for your very informative posts! It's refreshing to see hard facts on a topic that's usually full of guesswork and mystery.

Anyone know whether cocus falls under the CITES regulations?

Thanks and best wishes.

Steve

Steve Bliven wrote:Anyone know whether cocus falls under the CITES regulations?

Thanks and best wishes.

Steve

Not listed. Just not available in commercial quantities. There might be a problem with identification, though, when passing through customs. Color variation is such that it can be confused with rosewoods or ebony.

Cocus - brya ebenus - is not subject to any restrictions under CITES. However, as Kevin says, proving that your cocuswood instrument which looks like "rosewood" and persistently gets described as such by antiques dealers isn't in fact made from a restricted rosewood species could be tricky. The historic lack of clarity and confused usage of the terms "cocuswood" and "cocoa wood", where it is not really possible to determine with any certainty what species may have been considered to be covered by the terms, do not help. Short of DNA sampling, how can you prove from what timber your flute is composed? Moreover, since brya ebenus is not a listed species, no licensing authority is going to be in a position to be willing to issue a transit licence for it. Classic Catch 22! My flute looks like "rosewood" but isn't; I can't get a certificate to prove it isn't because it isn't..........

pancelticpiper wrote:... a topic that's usually full of guesswork and mystery.

I presume you're referring to the CITES regulations (rather than resin impregnation), since "guesswork and mystery" does seem to apply to the workings of government in general. I would agree that Casey's contribution has been refreshly informative.

Tunborough wrote: "guesswork and mystery" does seem to apply to the workings of government in general.

Pretty much every year at this time (income tax time in the USA) there's a story where a tax law expert asks 10 different IRS agents the same question and gets 10 conflicting answers.

I received confirmation that my first blackwood flute shipped under the CITES regulations was delivered to the customer in Japan. There did not seem to be any delays either leaving the US or entering Japan, and no import permit was needed for entry to Japan confirming what Casey Burns posted. I stuck the permits (CITES and PPQ) in a clear envelope on the outside of the box, along with a copy of the invoice, and wrote "Flute made from Dalbergia Melanoxylon" on the box in large letters.

I have some new information regarding inspections. The APHIS inspection stations in the US, at least the one in Seattle, is going to test a pilot program with those willing such as myself to offer remote "remote" inspections. So the process would work this way: I mail in the paperwork to be checked, stamped and signed, and email in a high resolution photo of the flute or flutes I am shipping mentioned on the forms. They sign and stamp the forms, usually on the day they receive these and pop them in the mail immediately. Might be a 3-4 day turnaround but saves for me a trip that takes more than half my work day.

Last week's inspection was actually really fun. My inspector wanted to see my latest flute when I mentioned the new engraving. Then he wanted to hear what it sounded like and when I played it, it drew all of the other biologists in the office. Biologists are cool people and I am something of a biologist myself so we had a nice visit and the paperwork was easily finished without any errors or flags or worry. They actually are happy I am compiling data as well as spreading the word (later in the day I helped a big Seattle maker sort out the process and eased their troubled minds for instance - the inspectors suggested that I become a CITES broker or handler!). We talked shop as far as other biological things and after I left, I realized I had about 2-3 biological jokes and a few mollusc and other invertebrate impersonations to share with them.

For the flute makers. Could you each respond with a list of the countries you have exported to? We'll build a list and I will locate where our clients need to get import permits and how to apply. So far here is my list of countries:
Canada, Australia, Japan - import permit unnecessary
Ireland, Switzerland, all of the EU countries - an import permit is required
Russia, China, Taiwan, Brazil, Indonesia, New Zealand, Tasmania and others - still under investigation

Casey