Wood Smugglers Slaughtered By Indian Police

At the beginning of April, Indian police shot and killed twenty suspected red sandalwood smugglers in southern India.  Though the police claim that they acted in self-defense, a two-week investigation revealed that the smuggling task force (probably) fabricated the self-defense justification, and several of the officers involved have been charged with murder.  As The Guardian notes, red sandalwood is prized in several east Asian countries, where it’s known as “red gold,” for its alleged medicinal properties.  But like any illicit trade, the workers at the bottom of the pyramid make virtually nothing.  The twenty laborers who were killed made between $2 and $5 a day while the ringleaders weren’t present (or harmed).  The parallels to U.S illicit trades—like a crack operation—aren’t hard to imagine.  The street-level guys get squeezed while the higher ups stay protected.

India’s recent violence highlights a larger issue the country faces with the illicit wood trade.  Red sandalwood can fetch over $70 a pound in China and Hong Kong, making it an incredibly lucrative illegal business that attracts criminals who couldn’t care less about conservation or the long-term sustainability of their logging practices.  In fact, less than two years ago, smugglers killed two forest rangers near the same location where this month’s massacre occurred.

Recently, the Indian government issued a warrant for and seized the bank accounts of an Indian film actress who has allegedly laundered money for her sandalwood-smuggling boyfriend and his associates.  The Indian government’s pursuit of the actress is a larger reflection of its DEA-level response to the sandalwood trade.  Unfortunately, the trade is destroying the environment and people’s lives, and the government’s attempt to address the problem has, at best, produced mixed results.

What in the world does this have to do with music and United States law?  Actually, a lot.

For those of you that are even a little nerdy about acoustic guitars (or listen to a lot of conservative talk radio—more on that in a bit), the connection between the slaughter in India and the music industry is apparent.  Wood is a critical component of any guitar, and it is especially important in acoustic guitars.  Some nice acoustic woods are sourced within the United States (or close by); for example, a lot of spruce (a prized soundboard or top wood) comes out of the Pacific Northwest and Canada, and a lot of mahogany (a prized body wood) comes out of Mexico and Central America.  Hundreds of beautiful-sounding Gibson J-45s have been made out of that exact combination.  

But a large number of high-end acoustics use rarer exotic woods, meaning that guitar manufacturers can quickly run afoul of foreign laws that prohibit the trade of particular woods that are illicitly harvested in that country.  For example, one of the most prized acoustic body woods in the world—Brazilian rosewood—has long been categorized as a species at high risk for extinction, along with (animal) species like white rhinos, leopards, and jaguars, under an international treaty called CITES that seeks to protect such species.  New acoustics that use Brazilian rosewood can be found, but those are sourced only from responsibly grown and harvested rosewood.  As a result, they are highly desirable and incredibly expensive.  $60,000 is all that stands between you a Martin D-45s Authentic 1936 (its beautiful Brazilian rosewood back and sides included).

In the United States, trade in illicit woods is prohibited by a law called the Lacey Act.  The Lacey Act was originally intended to prohibit the trade of poached animals.  In 2008, it was amended to include a broad range of plants and plant products, which swept up several types of foreign, exotic woods used in guitars.  According the United States Fish & Wildlife Service:

Under the Lacey Act, it is unlawful to import, export, sell, acquire, or purchase fish, wildlife or plants that are taken, possessed, transported, or sold: 1) in violation of U.S. or Indian law, or 2) in interstate or foreign commerce involving any fish, wildlife, or plants taken possessed or sold in violation of State or foreign law.

The Lacey Act and the Infamous Gibson Raids

The Lacey Act’s prohibition on the trade in illicit woods is well-known among guitar geeks for the government’s raids on Gibson in 2009 and 2011.  In 2009, Gibson factories were raided by the feds, who seized multiple shipments of Madagascar ebony.  In 2011, Gibson factories were again raided by the feds, who then seized several shipments of Indian rosewood.

The issue became a cause célèbre for some on the political right (and especially conservative talk radio hosts and guests), who chastised the federal government (and, of course, President Obama), for enforcing foreign laws at the expense of American businesses.  In an interview on Fox News, Gibson Guitar CEO Henry Juszkiewicz echoed as much, characterizing the raids as a shakedown and labeling them as an example of how scary weapons-wielding federal agents can be.  The far left, on the other hand, characterized the raids as a victory for the environment and the rule of law.

As is the case with most polarizing issues, the truth is actually somewhere in the middle.  In July 2012, Gibson and the Department of Justice settled all potential Lacey Act issues.  The Department of Justice agreed not to prosecute Gibson executives under the Lacey Act and admitted that the 2011 raid should not have happened, as it was unclear at the time whether the Indian ebony and rosewood that it had seized was illegal to possess.  As part of its concession, the government returned the seized Indian wood to Gibson.  That fact, of course, was overemphasized by Mr. Juszkiewicz during his media appearances and overlooked by environmentalists celebrating the settlement.

On the other hand, Gibson admitted that it knew the Madagascar wood it sought in 2008 and 2009 was illegal to possess before it bought that wood, but that it defied the law and bought that wood anyway.  For that admission, Gibson agreed to pay a $300,000 penalty and a $50,000 donation to the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, as well as set up a compliance program to ensure that all of its wood trading was above board.

Does It Matter?

Ultimately, yes.  Gibson had every right to be upset about the 2011 raid because there was no evidence that it was engaging in illegal activity.  By the same token, Gibson had every expectation to get busted for its Madagascar wood because it knew that buying and importing the wood was illegal, and it did it anyway.  On Fox News and other media appearances, Mr. Juszkiewicz was quick to point out that the fiasco cost Gibson over $2 million in legal fees and expenses.   Part of that cost, of course, can be attributed to Gibson’s own wrong-doing and will ultimately be passed on to its consumers.

More importantly, international treaties like CITES and domestic laws like the Lacey Act are intended to help stem the negative effects of globalization and trade on developing countries like India and Madagascar.  Around the time that Gibson knowingly imported Madagascar wood, the country was in a full-blown crisis caused by the illegal wood trade there, which promoted organized crime, government corruption, and species displacement.  In addition, Madagascar continues to face the same Catch-22 as a number of small, developing countries with exotic flora and fauna: the more that exotic flora and fauna is illegally taken out of the country, the more that country’s main economic driver—tourism—is diminished because the very resources that tourists come to see are wiped out by the illicit trade.

To its credit, Gibson (and other guitar manufacturers) have sought out sustainable tonewoods.  First introduced by Taylor guitars years ago, a sustainable African wood called ovangkol has taken the acoustic market by storm and sounds incredible.  I speak from experience—my Gibson Songwriter sounds warm and beautiful with its ovangkol back and sides.  At the end of the day, alternatives exist, and compliance (with the exception of the 2011 raid) isn’t difficult.  So what does a law that protects white rhinos have to do with that singer-songwriter playing a gig in Austin on Wednesday night?  If she’s playing a nice acoustic guitar, maybe a lot.

Resources

For an excellent, extended analysis of the Lacey Act and its impact on guitar manufacturing, check out this 2014 report from the Congressional Research Service, titled “The Lacey Act: Protecting the Environment by Restricting Trade.”