Official Luthiers Forum!
http://www.luthiersforum.com/forum/

Stringing up Gibson - a Wall Street Journal editorial
http://www.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10101&t=34357		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  Chris Pile [ Fri Nov 25, 2011 2:08 pm ]
Post subject:  Stringing up Gibson - a Wall Street Journal editorial
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 39472.html

Hope you can read it. Sometimes it requires WSJ sign-in.
Author:  klooker [ Fri Nov 25, 2011 3:19 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Stringing up Gibson - a Wall Street Journal editorial
Can't read it.

Can anybody without a subscription read it? idunno

Kevin Looker
Author:  Chris Pile [ Fri Nov 25, 2011 4:58 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Stringing up Gibson - a Wall Street Journal editorial
Criminy.
Find it on Google News if you're interested.
Author:  Jim_H [ Fri Nov 25, 2011 5:48 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Stringing up Gibson - a Wall Street Journal editorial
Jeebs...

Here is an 'online' version.. I believe it's complete.

http://online.wsj.com/article/potomac_watch.html
Author:  dberkowitz [ Sat Nov 26, 2011 8:37 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Stringing up Gibson - a Wall Street Journal editorial
Stringing Up Gibson Guitar
Environmentalists and trade protectionists set a trap for American businesses.

By KIMBERLEY A. STRASSEL

POTOMAC WATCHNOVEMBER 25, 2011
WSJ

On a sweltering day in August, federal agents raided the Tennessee
factories of the storied Gibson Guitar Corp. The suggestion was that
Gibson had violated the Lacey Act-a federal law designed to protect
wildlife-by importing certain India ebony. The company has vehemently
denied that suggestion and has yet to be charged. It is instead living
in a state of harassed legal limbo.

Which, let's be clear, is exactly what its persecutors had planned all
along. The untold story of Gibson is this: It was set up.

Most of the press coverage has implied that the company is the
unfortunate victim of a well-meaning, if complicated, law. Stories note,
in passing, that the Lacey Act was "expanded" in 2008, and that this has
had "unintended consequences." Given Washington's reputation for
ill-considered bills, this might make sense.

Only not in this case. The story here is about how a toxic alliance of
ideological activists and trade protectionists deliberately set about
creating a vague law, one designed to make an example out of companies
(like Gibson) and thus chill imports-even legal ones.

The Lacey Act was passed in 1900 to stop trade in illegal wild game.
Over the years it has expanded, and today it encompasses a range of
endangered species. It requires American businesses to follow both U.S.
and foreign law, though with most Lacey goods, this has been relatively
clear. Think elephant tusks, tiger pelts or tropical birds.

That changed in 2007, when an alliance of environmentalists, labor
unions and industry groups began pushing for Lacey to cover "plant and
plant products" and related items. Congress had previously resisted such
a broad definition for the simple reason that it would encompass timber
products. Trees are ubiquitous, are transformed into thousands of
byproducts, and pass through dozens of countries. Whereas even a small
U.S. importer would know not to import a tiger skin, tracking a sliver
of wood (now transformed into a toy, or an umbrella) through this maze
of countries and manufacturing laws back to the tree it came from, would
be impossible.

Furniture maker Ikea noted that even if it could comply with the change,
the "administrative costs and record-keeping requirements" would cause
furniture prices to "skyrocket." The wood chips that go into its
particleboard alone could require tracking back and reporting on more
than 100 different tree species.

.
Which is exactly what the Lacey expanders wanted. The drive was headed
up by a murky British green outfit called the Environmental
Investigation Agency. The EIA is anti-logging, and, like most
environmental groups, understands that the best way to force developing
countries to "preserve" their natural resources is to dry up the market
for their products. They would prefer that wood be sourced from the U.S.
and Europe, where green groups have more influence over rules.

The EIA was joined by labor unions such as the Teamsters and industry
groups such as the American Forest and Paper Association. As Mark
Barford of the Memphis-based National Hardwood Lumber Association told
one news outlet: "We need the protection of the Lacey Act. . . . Our
small, little companies cannot compete with artificially low prices from
wood that comes in illegally. . . . This is our Jobs Act."

While everyone can be against "illegal" wood, what this crew understood
was that the complexity of complying with an expanded Lacey Act would
discourage companies from importing even legal wood. They went to Sen.
Ron Wyden, of the well-timbered Oregon, who dutifully introduced
legislation.

Mr. Wyden cleverly attached it to the wildly popular 2008 farm bill,
guaranteeing its passage. Even then, some lawmakers sought to ensure
that companies weren't unfairly ensnared. In October 2008, Louisiana
Sen. David Vitter sent a letter to the Justice Department's Environment
and Natural Resources Division (whose career staff is notorious for
pursuing a green agenda), asking it to clarify whether any companies
acting in good faith would be granted some protection from the law. The
division has never clarified.

And so Gibson has been trapped, as intended. The company, after all, is
not accused of importing banned wood (say, Brazilian mahogany). The
ebony it bought is legal and documented. The issue is whether Gibson ran
afoul of a technical Indian law governing the export of finished wood
products. The U.S. government's interpretation of Indian law suggests
the wood Gibson imported wasn't finished enough. Got that?

The EIA, which helped author the Wyden legislation, happens to have
spent years publicly targeting Gibson for buying foreign wood. Oh, to
see the Justice Department's communications with outside groups.

Gibson was picked because it is famous and, sure enough, its travails
have scared importers away from an array of foreign wood products.
Tennessee Reps. Marsha Blackburn and Jim Cooper are now working to give
companies some protection and reduce paperwork. On cue, the EIA is
howling that Congress is "gutting" Lacey.

Congress would be better off doing just that-repealing the expansion in
its entirety. The provision does nothing to stamp out illegal
logging-the products from which were already clearly no-nos. This isn't
environmental protection; it's hostage-taking.
Author:  bluescreek [ Sat Nov 26, 2011 8:49 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Stringing up Gibson - a Wall Street Journal editorial
Thanks for posting. Too many environmentalists are also uninformed. Remember the fire in Yellowstone and how the activists cried that this will ruin the wildlife. Again proved wrong in that after a few years things were better for the animals and the environment . Yes we want to preserve the environment and resources but this can be done best by proper management of people that know what they are doing , Not activists that have other agendas.
Hopefully we can get something done that will help both parties. The supplier and the consumer .
Author:  WudWerkr [ Sat Nov 26, 2011 9:35 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Stringing up Gibson - a Wall Street Journal editorial
It all comes down to the Almighty dollar !

I cant help but wonder , if the offices of these individuals were raided . How many of the Desk , book cases , etc: are in violation of the act .
Author:  dberkowitz [ Sat Nov 26, 2011 11:18 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Stringing up Gibson - a Wall Street Journal editorial
Just for balance sake, I'd like to add that Ms. Strassel has a number of facts wrong as well. First and foremost is that while there appears to be a convenient (for EIA) and inconvenient (for Gibson and the rest of the guitar industry) nexus of regulation and materials, it is not altogether clear that EIA, in getting the law passed was specifically gunning for Gibson; however, it was EIA that provided evidence, post enactment, to USFWS of Gibson's activities in Madagascar. It is clear that the guitar industry, being connected to the entertainment industry, provides a convenient foil against which the arguments in favor of the Lacey Act can be played. What is also clear is that Gibson and several other manufacturers went to Madagascar at the invitation of EIA to see what was happening and of all the players in attendance, only Gibson, it appears, continued to pursue "grey market" materials which would be in contravention of the Lacey Act. Whether the materials were in fact "grey market" as an email from Gibson suggests is an option, not the source, remains to be established.

Secondly, this article is equally as problematic as those published by more liberal papers in that it chooses to only talk about the 8/11/2011 incident involving Indian rosewood fingerboards as if there never was a 11/2009 incident with Madagascar (the liberal press chooses to only talk about Lacey in terms of Madagascar because it shores up their arguments but doesn't talk about India whose forestry management practices are second to none and thus undermine their position because other than there being a disagreement with harmonized codes there isn't an issue with regard to whether the wood was legally harvested, or even endangered). It is unclear as to Gibson's culpability in the matter. Gibson screams the Justice department won't let them go to court to fight the case, but court filings indicate that Gibson is unwilling to answer questions to interrogatories regarding the source of the materials seized. Consequently, it appears that Gibson is crying crocodile tears at least insofar as Government obfuscation -- they can't very well complain that the case isn't moving forward when it appears that they are dragging their heels.
Author:  George L [ Sat Nov 26, 2011 1:07 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Stringing up Gibson - a Wall Street Journal editorial
Workers are the enemy and environmentalists are ruining the world. Got it. Let's go shopping!
Author:  Stuart Gort [ Sat Nov 26, 2011 1:52 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Stringing up Gibson - a Wall Street Journal editorial
20 years of self-employment here....as a manufacturer.

The Washington State code is 5600 pages of gobbelty gook to the common man. California code is much larger. I've operated under the authority of both. When I retired those boxes of code where the first things that went into the dumpster. No single person can know everything in a state code...much less the Federal code. Counties and cities also have their own codes. If I go into business in Washington State there are about 15 regulatory agencies that use the Washington State code and other similarly profluent documents as their authority. Hopefully, they don't all find out you're in business. For those that find you, while interacting with their agents, one musn't speak to any basic tenet of freedom or any other principle for that matter, or he risks irritating that agent which risks an arbitrary enforcement of the code. Ususally, when you're super nice to them they go away with only a minor fee imposed.

Make no mistake. All businesses everywhere are breaking some law. May I please restate that?

All businesses everywhere are breaking some law.

Now, if true, that's either a poor reflection on all businesses...or a poor reflection on the political ruling class.

If this seems like a good premise for liberty...ya'll will let me know via PM....right?

I hope this makes my point about discussing the Lacey Act on a forum that eschews politics.
Author:  JSDenvir [ Sat Nov 26, 2011 3:01 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Stringing up Gibson - a Wall Street Journal editorial
"the Justice Department's Environment and Natural Resources Division (whose career staff is notorious for
pursuing a green agenda)"

That's pretty funny. "Oh no, they're doing their jobs."
Author:  JSDenvir [ Sat Nov 26, 2011 8:23 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Stringing up Gibson - a Wall Street Journal editorial
Sorry Todd, I think that's the perfect definition of a green agenda.
Author:  Chris Pile [ Sat Nov 26, 2011 8:48 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Stringing up Gibson - a Wall Street Journal editorial
Quote:
Sorry Todd, I think that's the perfect definition of a green agenda.


It might be the perfect definition, but it's not their agenda.
They don't give a hoot about green, it's all about control and consolidation of power.
Author:  nickton [ Sun Nov 27, 2011 1:38 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Stringing up Gibson - a Wall Street Journal editorial
I always thought the main problem was not so much guitar makers using lumber, as poor people needing to cut trees down for income, or more often for use as charcoal, and in hopes that cleared rainforest land for example would provide farming or cattle grazing income. Using certain hardwoods for fine woodworking may be handling lumber in the most conscientious way available in many cases.
Author:  CharlieT [ Sun Nov 27, 2011 2:04 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Stringing up Gibson - a Wall Street Journal editorial
JSDenvir wrote:
Sorry Todd, I think that's the perfect definition of a green agenda.


In a perfect world, it is indeed the the perfect definition......
Author:  Billy T [ Sun Nov 27, 2011 4:02 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Stringing up Gibson - a Wall Street Journal editorial
dberkowitz wrote:
Gibson screams the Justice department won't let them go to court to fight the case, but court filings indicate that Gibson is unwilling to answer questions to interrogatories regarding the source of the materials seized.


Gibson has no responsiblilty, at all, to answer any interogatories! It does have a right to a speedy trial! The "Justice" department using the court schedule to place punitive conditions on Gibson vis-a-vis, confiscation of materials, when no resolution of judgement is in place is clearly tyrannical. This is a clear offence of the Justice department itself.
Author:  George L [ Sun Nov 27, 2011 12:16 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Stringing up Gibson - a Wall Street Journal editorial
All rise!
Author:  Alan Carruth [ Sun Nov 27, 2011 2:47 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Stringing up Gibson - a Wall Street Journal editorial
Nick Fullerton wrote:
"I always thought the main problem was not so much guitar makers using lumber, as poor people needing to cut trees down for income, or more often for use as charcoal, ..."

Right, which is why I think the whole CITES model is not going to work for wood.
Author:  Alan Carruth [ Sun Nov 27, 2011 2:49 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Stringing up Gibson - a Wall Street Journal editorial
Oh yeah: another thanks to David Berkowitz for being so reasonable and well informed. It's a dirty job, but somebody needs to do it.
Author:  Dom Regan [ Sun Nov 27, 2011 6:04 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Stringing up Gibson - a Wall Street Journal editorial
I think it curious that people start looking for 'hidden agendas' of green groups. There motive to protect the environment is as clear as businesses agenda is to make money. Both are certain.

But the greens groups do have a point and I would have thought it was in the luthier communities interests to work with them not against them. The proportion of wood going to the lutherie community would be very small and we are generally very appreciative of the woods we use, create little waist and make wonderful objects that enrich peoples lives. Compare that to some banker living off government handouts who has had his office re-lined in maccasar ebony because last years cocobolo decor was no longer stylish.

The fact is, big rich markets like the US have been responsible for the destruction, legal or not of vast tracts of old growth forest from developing countries in the past. Brazillian RW is banned now because its earlier destruction was unchecked. Governments in many of these countries are riddled with corruption and big logging companies have enormous influence in government. So just because wood has been legally logged, does not mean it was sustainably logged or that it did anything other than enrich a few at the expense of the many.

I see a lot of people complaining about the new rules and I agree they seem to have been very badly implemented. But I think a lot more could gained by working with green groups at the local and national level to show them that as an industry, lutherie can be responsible and make a positive contribution to creating a sustainable world and assisting those from communities in developing countries in maximising the returns they receive from the dwindling forest resources.

So contact your local groups, invite them to see what you do. They could be your best friends in this campaign to correct the issues with Lacey.

Cheers
Dom
Author:  nyazzip [ Mon Nov 28, 2011 1:54 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Stringing up Gibson - a Wall Street Journal editorial
as much as i love wood, and exotic wood, i am glad to see that its use is coming under increased scrutiny, fairly or unfairly, legally or not so legally: we don't NEED guitars, and we certainly don't need to be making them out of exotic woods. simple fact is, global forests are under massive pressure, more than ever before, and the global population is (still) increasing exponentially.
and to top it off, gibson is a greedy company that charges ridiculous prices($3-4000 for a simple electric guitar? http://www.sweetwater.com/store/search. ... QAodu1Jmrw), just for the brand name.
note also that the story is from the Wall Street Journal.
Author:  Chris Pile [ Mon Nov 28, 2011 9:29 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Stringing up Gibson - a Wall Street Journal editorial
Quote:
note also that the story is from the Wall Street Journal.


WTH does that mean?
Their opinion doesn't count?
Aren't you involved in luthiery to make money doing what you like?
Author:  dberkowitz [ Mon Nov 28, 2011 11:55 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Stringing up Gibson - a Wall Street Journal editorial
Dom, some of the arguments made by the environmental groups are only partly true -- yes, the forests are under pressure. Was it the guitar market that did it, probably not. Madagascar is being leveled to China to make bedroom sets. In the case of Brazilian rosewood, blame McDonalds that gave Brazilians economic incentive to level, no, burn down huge swaths of rain forest and Brazilian rosewood stands to make way for cattle for burgers. There is a convenient nexus of going after the musical instrument industry, but forests aren't being torn down because of our industry -- we are part of it, but not to the extent some suggest. My principle problem with the environmental NGOs is that they say they want to work with the guitar industry but publicly only want to talk about Lacey in terms of Madagascar because that suits their purposes. They don't talk about good actors like India that have been managing their forests since the 1960's and should be a poster child for everything that the NGO's should want globally, but they won't talk about it. They are every bit as disingenuous in their advocacy as the conservatives are on theirs.
Author:  bluescreek [ Mon Nov 28, 2011 12:57 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Stringing up Gibson - a Wall Street Journal editorial
I agree with Mr Berkowitz . While it is true we luthiers use this wood , it is the people in the country of origin that are destroying the resource. Most gets slashed and burned and it is isn't just wasted it gets used to cook and heat the natives huts. When you look at how few trees grow luthier grade lumber it is few. Management needs to start in the forest .
How can you tell a native that may see less than $1000 a year not to cut down a tree that may give him food in his belly ? This is not an easy question to answer and the politicos are not making it any easier .
Author:  Stuart Gort [ Mon Nov 28, 2011 1:23 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Stringing up Gibson - a Wall Street Journal editorial
Dom Regan wrote:
I think it curious that people start looking for 'hidden agendas' of green groups.


...and I think it's curious when they don't.

Google "Samuel Day Fassbinder".....a marxist whom I have confronted ever since the internet was invented. When I first began with him, he was an elementry substitute teacher and was writing a textbook at that time that boiled down the tenets of "class struggle" for the kiddies to understand. He's a full-on professor today, trying as hard as he can to be Noam Chomsky.

Note his "green" website if you take the time to look him up....and try not dismiss the fact that there are 1000's of Sams in our culture.

The Lacey Act wasn't voted on independently. It was slipped into the farm bill of 2008 that was a slam dunk to pass. One of the tyrannies we face today are laws that are put into effect even though they can't pass an independent vote of Congress. This is what minorities with agendas DO. This occurs with all ideologies, left and right, and it must stop.
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC - 5 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/