吉他,铅笔和莱西法案的遵守

这张照片是我父亲在上世纪70年代访问日本东京的北桥铅笔公司时拍的,我今天也去过那里。杉谷一家的一位顾客用我们的铅笔条制作了他们的产品,并赠送给他一把加利福尼亚香柏木制作的吉他。这位先生现在已经退休了,但我今天碰巧见到他,他说他仍然每天弹吉他,那把吉他是他特别为我父亲指定的礼物。寻找我即将发表的关于Kitaboshi铅笔的历史和他们的产品,我们将开始销售ob战队下个星期。我们的铅笔板使用的加利福尼亚香雪松,我们的客户使用我们的板条的铅笔(在这种吉他中)完全符合美国莱西法案,这是这篇文章的主要主题。

最近新闻的美国鱼类和野生动物服务raid和扣押的紫檀木和乌木木材原材料以及从吉布森吉他吉他和随后的吉布森的首席执行官声称美国政府在达到其行动有一个有趣的关联公司所面临的挑战也和我们的客户在美国铅笔行业。以下是过去一个月有关吉布森事件的三篇文章的链接:

争论的焦点是2008年《莱西法案修正案该法律最初于1900年制定,旨在管理跨州非法贩运被猎杀的野生动物和猎物。自该法律成立以来,其范围和广度不断扩大,包括鱼类和植物。该法律由美国农业部下属的动植物卫生检验局(APHIS)执行,并与美国渔猎部(U.S. Department of Fish & Game)共同执行,后者是吉布森吉他案的牵头机构。根据2008年的修订,该法律扩展到植物、木材以及由木材和植物材料制成的产品。修正案要求适用产品的进口商证明其产品中使用的木材材料不是来自非法采伐的材料,或包括任何受保护或受威胁的树种。该修正案实施了若干文件和声明要求,这些要求现在必须随每次进口货物一起提交,涉及所使用的具体品种、生产木材产品的树木的原产国以及与合法采伐木材有关的说明。明知明知而进口受法律保护的木材或木制产品,即属违法行为,将受到民事和刑事处罚。该修正案被认为是环境政策的改善,也得到了布什政府的支持,作为针对低成本进口木材的美国木材和木制品行业的保护主义措施。虽然我没有特定的知识,不能说话和吉布森的案例所涉及的具体问题,我当然可以,不合逻辑的和不一致的应用程序规则的过程,政府机构负责执行《雷斯法案》是一个成熟的例子“意外后果定律”与政府监管。欧宝博彩CalCedar一直深入参与解决2008年莱西法案修正案,涉及到我们自己的铅笔木材供应,以及理解法律对我们公司、我们的客户和整个铅笔行业供应链的影响。长期以来,我们在确保我们所利用的木材资源的采伐方面一直处于行业领先地位管理良好的森林根据适用的规则和规定,我们的木材来源的任何国家。我们已经并将继续支持业界提高整体可持续性的努力,并一直是实施的先锋FSC和SFI第三方认证增加了我们的木材供应比例。因此,在2008年的莱西法案修正案的概念实施中,是一个积极方向的一步,其目的是消除非法采购的原材料或使用任何受威胁的植物物种。虽然标准适用于非法或法律或威胁或不可能因国家而异,但由于Lacey法案只是要求遵守收获国家的适用法律。因此,这里增加的环境保护水平与国家到国家不一致。LACEY ACT要求增加了全新的文档水平和尽职调查,为我们提供Slats向我们的美国铅笔制造客户提供。这包括我们木材供应链的更新调查和文件,并在调查的调查中增加了咨询费用,以适当的预防措施,包括增加负担和/或消除任何潜在关注的木材,并保持清除链所有通过供应链的监护权。所有这一切都是在雪松和贝斯伍德的FSC和SFI材料方面发生的,但我们觉得将这些流程应用于我们的Basswood供应链的余额很重要。在我们无法清楚地记录精确的原点,我们整理了材料以创建库存的另一个分类。因此,我们现在必须保持单独的库存并跟踪三种不同的产品组; FSC certified, Lacey Compliant and standard inventory which we do not believe is a compliance concern but will not take the risk of selling into the US market without clear chain of custody back to the forest. However, this burden of declaration documentation was not extended to the importers of pencils themselves. Thus wood sold to our customers who produce pencils in the US is subject to the documentation requirements while finished imported pencils are not, placing an added burden on U.S. pencil producers. Given that the majority of pencils consumed in the U.S. today and before the amendment took effect were imported this inconsistent application of the statute to intermediate vs. finished products hardly serves to protect US manufacturing jobs or to ensure that the majority of pencils sold in the US are indeed Lacey Act compliant. This does not mean many or even most pencils are not compliant, just that the chances are higher that they could be. As far as musical instruments are concerned importation of pianos and stringed musical instruments, including guitars, seem to have become subject to the documentation and declaration requirements in April 2010, so in this case it appears the compliance playing field may be a bit more level between US and Foreign producers in that industry. Next, the rules are not very specific on the level of sufficient due diligence to protect an importer from prosecution and civil and criminal penalties under the act. The “due care” principal is used which is generally contextually applied depending upon the level of organizational expertise and level of involvement in the supply chain of the importer of record. Thus as an experienced wood products manufacturer standards for “due care” applied to our company may be interpreted by the relevant agency differently than that of an importer of finished pencils who tends to rely solely upon the level of documentation they choose to request from their supplier. In many cases such suppliers are simply foreign trading companies, not manufacturers themselves, relying on the say so of their own supplier. With much pressure put on the price of imported pencils and other wood products this provides some level of incentive to less ethical suppliers to fudge in the information provided to their U.S. import customer. If a U.S. importer does not perform an on the ground investigation or use a knowledgeable third party certification agency, which is not specifically required under the statute, and simply relies on the paperwork provided by their supplier, they may be at some elevated risk of exposure to prosecution as to whether they employed “due care” in the event there is ultimately some problem found with the legality of the raw materials. This essentially becomes a risk management exercise for each importer with differing levels of risk tolerance and exposure. Finally, as a knowledgeable U.S. company operating our own facility in China and selling globally we are more at risk of punishment under this U.S. act than are our foreign competitors. It’s going to be difficult for a U.S. importer penalized under the act to recoup any fines even if they have some form of guarantee. As such we’ve taken a more conservative approach to managing this issue in our company. This is also more costly than most of our foreign competitors especially those who are exporting finished pencils to the US where no specific requirements for their U.S. import customers to file the import declarations. This does not mean those pencils are not subject to requirement to be legally harvested, but they have less risk of being challenged as to compliance.

作为一家公司,我们不断努力,以确保我们越来越多的木材供应给铅笔行业,实际上是一个或多个接受第三方认证项目的一部分,最具体的是FSC或SFI,在PEFC的伞下。考虑到通货膨胀成本和供应发展,由于中国政府正在实施更大的收获限制,我们目前正在测试并引入一个新的100% FSC认证的产品线,名为Pacific Albus。这种新产品是美国种植园种植和完全符合莱西法案。与中国或俄罗斯种植的巴斯伍德相比,太平洋阿不思在我们公司的供应项目中变得越来越重要,而且该产品将是我们公司的专有产品。我希望在我们的客户更广泛地采用和接受这个新产品的过程中发布更多关于这个新产品的信息。

1 回复
  1. 铅笔评论家
    铅笔评论家 说:

    土拨鼠,感谢你提供这篇信息丰富的文章,描述了莱西法案在铅笔行业的应用。如果有一件事是你希望每一个重视美国铅笔制造的铅笔爱好者做的,那会是什么?联系一位代表?造成交流吗?

评论都关门了。