Your Action Needed Now For Lacey Act Amendment Vote In Congress

[Chuck Erikson]

Instrument makers, dealers, collectors, music store owners, wood and shell vendors, musicians, and anyone else in the music industry, you need to contact your Congressional reps immediately urging them to vote "YES" on HR 3210, which is designed to fix weaknesses in the Lacey Act (without weakening the Act's proven effectiveness in protecting endangered plants and animals). HR 3210 recently passed out of the Natural Resources Committee and now heads to the House floor for debate and a vote. And we now have to really turn up the volume and advocate for support of this bill. What's immediately needed is direct contact from all of us to any and all members of the US House of Representatives (Congress) and urge that they “vote YES for HR 3210”. Just do it, or quit complaining about government over-regulation...

All instructions for doing this are at: http://www.namm.org/publicaffairs. Here's an example of what the message needs to be:

"I am contacting you to urge your support of H.R. 3210 (RELIEF Act), when it comes to the House floor in mid-July. This bipartisan bill is very important to my business and the jobs we provide because it addresses some unintended consequences of the 2008 amendments to the Lacey Act. H.R. 3210 makes several common sense improvements in the Lacey Act:
1) Grandfathers wood products assembled and processed prior to the 2008 amendment --- makes them legal to possess and sell.
2) Provides businesses whose products are seized for alleged violation of law the opportunity to a day in court to prove they are innocent.
3) Provides more clarity about which foreign laws could trigger a Lacey Act violation.
4) Creates incentives for better compliance and reduces unnecessary burdens on U.S. companies without compromising environmental protection.
5) H.R. 3210 does not undermine enforcement of the Lacey Act, encourage illegal logging, or protect those unscrupulous businesses who violate the law."

Copy this and pass along to anyone you know in the music industry. Thanks!

[Mario Proulx]

And what will this do with regards to sending new instruments(and shell) back and forth across the US border?

[Chuck Erikson]

Hi, Mario! It will make it possible to get import/export exemption certificates for pre-2008 woods and the instruments made from them which don't meet Lacey's post-2008 paperwork requirements. This only pertains to woods, not shell, although it sets a legal precedent that could be applied to shell.

[Mario Proulx]

Well, that does nothing to help me.... Thanks for the efforts, thus far, nonetheless!

[Alan Peterson]

Point of information please, regarding the amended first condition shown.

As the Lacey Act exists now, does it in theory forbid the sale of Craigslist pianos that would claim to have "real ivory" keys? And if so, would the amended Act correct that?

Not trying to be a wisenheimer here -- Craigslist is packed with free pianos every Spring, and in a world gone mad it could be a legitimate concern to anyone who might want to obtain an unplayable dog to harvest veneers and ivory keycaps.

Thank you.

[Chuck Erikson]

Since it's listed as protected by CITES but not by any U.S. regulation (such as the ESA) African elephant Ivory isn't a problem as long as it remains within the U.S. (Asian elephant ivory is totally illegal to buy or sell, as is all tortoiseshell, since both are listed by CITES and the ESA), but ivory is illegal to move across the U.S. borders. The exceptions domestically are:

1) California has banned the sale or purchase of all elephant ivories -- two such laws had been introduced in CA since the 1980’s, but these were struck down by the 9th Circuit Court because their all-encompassing “no sales” restrictions conflicted with federal laws which do allow interstate sales of species not listed domestically as protected. It appears as though CA residents can neither sell (or even offer to sell) ivory to each other inside their state nor make any interstate purchases or sales. Only CA has a law like this, but its enforceability is questionable.

2) New York requires a permit for residents who sell "in" the state to other New Yorkers; but no other states have similar laws.

The HR 3210 bill doesn't address ivory (or shell), but only woods.

[Chuck Erikson]

Congressman Jim Cooper's office just called George Gruhn to tell him Republican leadership in the House decided that because they can't get enough support to pass the RELIEF Act it's been pulled. So, sincere thanks again to those of you who did make the effort to contact your reps...but to the vast majority of music industry people who have constantly refused to make their voices heard (and those forums which blocked discussion about this), when your wood or instruments wind up in trouble at the border you'll be getting exactly what you deserve. It's possible that after the elections a new effort for relief can be started again from scratch, but if the overall apathy level doesn't change there's not much point in wasting more time and funding...

[Bob Gramann]

I sent a note to my congressman but he hasn't been very receptive to my requests in the past. Rather than veer toward a political discussion, I'll stop there.