# Help stop the ivory ban.



## Sandra Brady (Apr 22, 2014)

Hi Guys! This is my first post on your forum, so forgive me if I fumble  a bit. I am a professional scrimshaw artist (37 years), and as such have worked on ivory in everything from pens to pool cues. My reason for getting on here is to inform you all of the ivory ban that the US government is trying to put over on us. Now right away I can hear a lot of you saying "well I don't work on ivory so this doesn't effect me" . But hold on - It's just a start, first ban all legally imported ivory, then on the rosewood and who knows, it's a slippery slope! It might not effect you right now, but maybe you've turned an ivory pen in the past, or collect old pens and happen to have one in your collection. This new law will make you a felon if you try to sell it! So I am passing on this new website that was established to fight the ban, and also to promote sane and responsible ways to actually help the elephants. Please take a few minutes to check it out. Home


----------



## John Pratt (Apr 22, 2014)

Hmmmm. New member, first post, the post looks a little sketchy......... I think I'll pass on clicking on the link. Who will be the brave one and click on it first?????


----------



## tbroye (Apr 22, 2014)

This could be a start of a very political discussion.  In fact this is purely political and will end up bad.  The person just joined for her own agenda


----------



## Indiana_Parrothead (Apr 22, 2014)

Almost as bad as people who's first post is in the Classified's...


----------



## ed4copies (Apr 22, 2014)

Although we can guesstimate what COULD happen, it might be a nice gesture to welcome a new member first.

HI Sandra!!!!

A little investigation turned up her website as well as articles about her scrimshaw accomplishments.  On her website, she is consistent, talking about the ivory ban, here:  Scrimshaw - by Sandra Brady!

If the government was planning to ban all sharp tools, our industry would be threatened and we would react.  Eliminating ivory will have a similar effect on scrimshaw.  

Although it does seem, to me, that mastadon ivory will be legal and it should be a good medium---I admit to having very limited knowledge on this subject---so a discussion COULD make me better informed!!

Hope that is what we get!!

Ed


----------



## OLDMAN5050 (Apr 22, 2014)

This link is for real about the ivory ban here in the states:Obama Bans U.S. Commercial Trade of Elephant Ivory | Environment News Service


----------



## kovalcik (Apr 22, 2014)

I will pass on this thread.  While I hope I am wrong, IMO it is going to cross the line into a "political post" way too quickly and will not be pretty.


----------



## ed4copies (Apr 22, 2014)

Oh, by the way, I clicked on her "home" link and my computer still works!!!!

Also I learned a little.


----------



## fisher (Apr 22, 2014)

link is fine to click on .


----------



## skiprat (Apr 22, 2014)

I will never understand why some people try to justify using endangered species of Mother Nature's flora or fauna, especially when there are often perfectly good manmade alternatives readily available.
Elephants need their tusks more than we need scrimshawed ivory trinkets.:wink:

Just my perhaps ignorant opinion.....


----------



## rblakemore (Apr 22, 2014)

*If it is legal*

I will not use banned or illegal materials; but, there is legal elephant ivory.
There are other forms of ivory also which can be used.  And, there are artificial materials which look similar to ivory. If a person wants a political issue, then they should have a political web site.  In fact I have two scrimshaw pocket knives (real favorites) that I obtained in Hawaii.  Those I believe are legal; pre-ban, whale bone.


----------



## Edgar (Apr 22, 2014)

I'll try to avoid political commentary, but I think that one of Sandra's main complaints is that the proposed regulations would make it almost impossible for someone owning pre-ban legal ivory to be able to resell it because of the difficulty in proving that fact.

I don't knowingly own or use any banned plant or animal products either, but I do have a few pre-ban bois de rose pen blanks and if the feds decided to impose similar rules for proving that my wood is legal, I would never be able to do so.


----------



## low_48 (Apr 23, 2014)

Her threat of this law leading to the banning of other materials is standard method of using fear to further an agenda. Not a method that attracts me. I have no tolerance for those that want to use any form of ivory in any human trinket or amusement. It repulses me that anyone wants a piece of such a majestic, thinking mammal made into a pen or other desk trinket. Reminds me of my favorite quote by Winston Churchill. "I'm fond of pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals."


----------



## workinforwood (Apr 23, 2014)

skiprat said:


> I will never understand why some people try to justify using endangered species of Mother Nature's flora or fauna, especially when there are often perfectly good manmade alternatives readily available.
> Elephants need their tusks more than we need scrimshawed ivory trinkets.:wink:
> 
> Just my perhaps ignorant opinion.....



Whats your thought on oosik?? 

Sharpening my chisels....


----------



## workinforwood (Apr 23, 2014)

Wait wait,,,Steve, i know you will answer question with question...we talking about a married walrus or is he single? Haha!


----------



## Quality Pen (Apr 23, 2014)

I'll be the first to admit my gross lack of knowledge on the subject. So take that for what it is.

But why is the government stopping ivory trade? Is all/vast majority ivory "bad" as in poached? 

The topic makes me think of Bethlehem Olivewood. Yes it is illegal for them to cut the tree down, but that doesn't mean there is no olivewood to use. You just use the clippings and it's essentially a win-win. Trees live and prosper and craftsmen get their materials.

But, how does this relate to ivory? Is it similar? I do not know.


----------



## bruce119 (Apr 23, 2014)

The thing that troubles me about this Ivory band...And I am certainly not in the know BUT I thought I heard it even covers Mastodon & Mammoth...
I am an advid fossil collector and had some Mastodon, tusk it's fossilized rock, but still...
I have a ton of fragments of fossil tusk also...
I used to sell a piece here and there on eBay, then eBay put the band with ANYTHING with tusk or ivory attached to it...


Hopefully when they get the rules in place they will sharpen the edges....????


.


----------



## Steve Busey (Apr 23, 2014)

Will I ever be able to resell my old piano, or will I have to remove most of the keys first?


----------



## ashaw (Apr 23, 2014)

I went to my local Piano retailer a couple of years back and asked if they would sell the keyboard of their old pianos that they were throwing out.  They said they could not sell them to me because of a law on the books.  They would be fined as well as myself.  Not sure if this was a Federal law or PA sate law.  Pass on the whole deal.  They were throwing out about 50 keyboards from old pianos that could not be saved.


----------



## ed4copies (Apr 23, 2014)

If you have mammoth ivory that came from an animal LESS than 100 years ago, it would be of VERY great value!!!  Exceptionally rare.

EVEN the government should be willing to accept that as a FACT.


----------



## Ed McDonnell (Apr 23, 2014)

There are two possible outcomes that I see:

1) ban all trade in Ivory and have all elephants (and other source animals) driven to extinction by poachers in a decade or two.

2) allow trade in "legally harvested" Ivory, but keep the ban on harvesting new Ivory with the likely result being all elephants would be exterminated by poachers in a couple of years.

I don't see a happy ending here.  

Ed


----------



## Smitty37 (Apr 23, 2014)

skiprat said:


> I will never understand why some people try to justify using endangered species of Mother Nature's flora or fauna, especially when there are often perfectly good manmade alternatives readily available.
> Elephants need their tusks more than we need scrimshawed ivory trinkets.:wink:
> 
> Just my perhaps ignorant opinion.....


 Well why not?  

Elephants are not considered endangered the world wide population is around 750,000 animals.  They are considered *vulnerable* due to loss of habitat and they are in much greater danger from that loss than from Ivory hunters or poachers.  Maybe the ban on imports has helped stableize the elephant population and maybe it hasn't.  

Whether we like it or not Mother Nature is a harsh parent, species come and go including humans (science now believes that Neanderthal was a true human). 


There is a great deal of legally obtained Ivory around...Natural deaths, legally hunted animals (I think there is still some of that but not much), Animals recovered from illegal poaching...there is, in my mind, no sound reason to ban imports of that ivory.


----------



## ed4copies (Apr 23, 2014)

parklandturner said:


> There are two possible outcomes that I see:
> 
> 1) ban all trade in Ivory and have all elephants (and other source animals) driven to extinction by poachers in a decade or two.
> 
> ...



Hang convicted poachers!
Severe prison time (or death) for those who "fence" the illegally poached ivory.

Instead of trying to play with demand, make an example of the criminals.


----------



## stonepecker (Apr 23, 2014)

Amen ED.......Amen!


----------



## Smitty37 (Apr 23, 2014)

ed4copies said:


> parklandturner said:
> 
> 
> > There are two possible outcomes that I see:
> ...


 The problem here is that the people who seem to be most upset by ivory trade are Europeans and North Americans - neither of which are in any position to do a single thing about poachers - they, and we, have no wild elephants and hence, no poachers.

Poaching thrives in areas where there are unstable governments unable to concentrate resources on stopping or catching poachers. In places where there are more stable governments, great strides have been made in slowing poaching.


In my opinion, a lot that has been done in attacking "trade" has made poaching more lucritive by increasing the black market value of ivory.  Much like prohibition in this country increased the value of black market wiskey to levels that made the criminals very rich and very willing and able to bribe law enforcement and political folks to 'look the other way'.


----------



## ed4copies (Apr 23, 2014)

UN "peacekeepers" are of precious little use in other areas they have tried to control.

This task (catching poachers) sounds like a way to make them useful.


----------



## stonepecker (Apr 23, 2014)

How about Drones.......we fly them everywhere.

A few 'strikes' could make a difference.


----------



## Joe S. (Apr 23, 2014)

My head hurts now.


----------



## Smitty37 (Apr 23, 2014)

stonepecker said:


> How about Drones.......we fly them everywhere.
> 
> A few 'strikes' could make a difference.


Some people might consider drone strikes as acts of war....


----------



## Joe S. (Apr 23, 2014)

Most people actually.


----------



## GRMiller (Apr 23, 2014)

I have 3 Ivory Cue Balls which I received from my grandfather.  I recently tried to sell them to off set my addiction costs to turning.  NO ONE would touch them and I was told why.  Okay I have no problem with that but I cannot take them across state lines either.  Even though they was purchased in 1946 from the guys who had the pool tables in the bar at that time.  The most info I got was from Seth on Hard Core Pawn show.  He would love to have them but with these laws they wouldn't touch them.


----------



## Smitty37 (Apr 23, 2014)

ed4copies said:


> UN "peacekeepers" are of precious little use in other areas they have tried to control.
> 
> This task (catching poachers) sounds like a way to make them useful.


 The problem there is that where there are unstable governments the "head despot/dictator/tyrant" often does not want outside interference and some of those places are land locked making it difficult to supply a peace keeping force.


----------



## ed4copies (Apr 23, 2014)

If a drone kills a poacher in an area where the government admits to being too weak to fight poachers, are they really likely to consider the killing an attack on their government??

Sounds unlikely!!  Especially if we happen to take the time to be invited by the "controlling government", whatever it's condition.


----------



## ed4copies (Apr 23, 2014)

Smitty37 said:


> ed4copies said:
> 
> 
> > UN "peacekeepers" are of precious little use in other areas they have tried to control.
> ...




This MAY be as close as we will come to identifying the REAL problem!!

WE think the elephants should be protected.  The local population does NOT think it is important.  

Perhaps we should put the elephants on a troop plane and drop them off in Washington DC.  Then the legislators can keep tabs on them, first hand!!

(Two elephants mating in the middle of I-295--Can you imagine THAT traffic jam!!!)


----------



## Crashmph (Apr 23, 2014)

ed4copies said:


> Smitty37 said:
> 
> 
> > ed4copies said:
> ...



I-295 would not be so bad... not if your are talking north bound I-95 on a week day morning just south of the beltway... that would be akin to a 20 care pile up.


----------



## Crashmph (Apr 23, 2014)

I have to say, we are doing rather well keeping this conversation as non-political as possible. 

I see no issues with working with fossils, but brand new ivory, that's a different story.


----------



## southernclay (Apr 23, 2014)

There are still elephants legally killed in Africa on occasion as well

And Ed all that dung they leave behind, isn't there enough in Washington already? : ) Maybe too political sorry


----------



## dexter0606 (Apr 23, 2014)

skiprat said:


> I will never understand why some people try to justify using endangered species of Mother Nature's flora or fauna, especially when there are often perfectly good manmade alternatives readily available.
> Elephants need their tusks more than we need scrimshawed ivory trinkets.:wink:
> 
> Just my perhaps ignorant opinion.....


 
 + 1


----------



## Smitty37 (Apr 23, 2014)

Crashmph said:


> ed4copies said:
> 
> 
> > Smitty37 said:
> ...


 It is good that you identified which I-295 you are talking about since there are several of them.(and 395s and 495s)


----------



## Smitty37 (Apr 23, 2014)

GRMiller said:


> I have 3 Ivory Cue Balls which I received from my grandfather.  I recently tried to sell them to off set my addiction costs to turning.  NO ONE would touch them and I was told why.  Okay I have no problem with that but I cannot take them across state lines either.  Even though they was purchased in 1946 from the guys who had the pool tables in the bar at that time.  The most info I got was from Seth on Hard Core Pawn show.  He would love to have them but with these laws they wouldn't touch them.


I understand...I have an antique set of dominos that I've owned personally for about 68 years.  They were given to me by an Aunt who got them as a child (she was born in 1885) they were made using old ivory piano keys...today it is illegal for me to sell them, or for that matter even give them to one of my kids.


----------



## Smitty37 (Apr 23, 2014)

dexter0606 said:


> skiprat said:
> 
> 
> > I will never understand why some people try to justify using endangered species of Mother Nature's flora or fauna, especially when there are often perfectly good manmade alternatives readily available.
> ...


 Once the elephant is dead (from any cause) it doesn't.


----------



## Haynie (Apr 23, 2014)

OP has exactly one post in a 5 page thread.  Uses fear tactics in much the same way the NRA, and PETA do.  Scrimshaw can be done on different substrates.  Nothing more than a drive by political post.

I challenge the OP, if she even bothers to come back, to explain WHY she has to use ivory.


----------



## bruce119 (Apr 23, 2014)

Haynie said:


> OP has exactly one post in a 5 page thread.  Uses fear tactics in much the same way the NRA, and PETA do.  Scrimshaw can be done on different substrates.  Nothing more than a drive by political post.
> 
> I challenge the OP, if she even bothers to come back, to explain WHY she has to use ivory.



She has a point that was brought out in this discussion....


The law needs to be fine tuned...Is it actually a law yet...I don't know...


It really doesn't effect me too much except maybe for the few fossils I have..


But there is a LOT of legit Ivory out there....


.


----------



## Fireengines (Apr 24, 2014)

I looks like the original poster dropped a bomb, set back and looked and the responses, and offered no other comment.  If she was so passionate about this issue, I would have hoped she would have responded to some of the posts.


----------



## Quality Pen (Apr 24, 2014)

Fireengines said:


> I looks like the original poster dropped a bomb, set back and looked and the responses, and offered no other comment.  If she was so passionate about this issue, I would have hoped she would have responded to some of the posts.


She might come back

I went to her web site she posted and sent an email. Who knows...


----------



## Smitty37 (Apr 24, 2014)

Haynie said:


> OP has exactly one post in a 5 page thread.  Uses fear tactics in much the same way the NRA, and PETA do.  Scrimshaw can be done on different substrates.  Nothing more than a drive by political post.
> 
> I challenge the OP, if she even bothers to come back, to explain WHY she has to use ivory.


This is the most "political" post in this thread.


----------



## Joe S. (Apr 24, 2014)

It's all fine and good to use ligament ivory, in fact it would be a waste not to. One problem here is the demand is greater than the supply of "good" ivory. Poachers don't care about the elephants, so the social cost of killing them is not taken into account when they "produce". The other option then is to lower demand to a more acceptable level of output.

Another thing that will make solving (if it can be solved) the problem harder is that we are not the only consumers of ivory. If all ivory is banned in the U.S., it will just go somewhere else (I would need to look this up, but I think Japan has a strong market for ivory...).


----------



## bobleibo (Apr 24, 2014)

I am absolutely astonished that the moderators have allowed this post to continue. The OP joins with the sole purpose of promoting her personal agenda which has absolutely nothing to do with pen turning then disappears. We all believe in protecting our planet but using this forum in this manner as a personal soap box is - IMHO - in very poor taste. 
What happened to the forum rules? Sorry, but I've seen the moderators "sanction" long standing members for posts that were not nearly as controversial as this one, yet this is allowed?


----------



## Sylvanite (Apr 24, 2014)

What we need, are farm-raised elephants.  Then the world would have a steady supply of responsibly harvested "agricultural ivory", and the demand for "free range ivory" would diminish.  The wild elephant population would be less threatened by poaching and could go back to worrying about habitat destruction.

Seriously though, I expect the US ban on ivory trade will prove about as effective as the "war on drugs".

Also, the OP's claim that the ivory ban sets precedent for an exotic wood ban has some merit.  Remember that federal marshals raided Gibson Guitars for importing ebony.  The Lacey Act could easily be expanded to criminalize sales and transfer of pens (as well as guitars) made from legally acquired wood.

I'm afraid I've overstepped the bounds on political discussion, but woodworkers should legitimately be concerned about preserving the medium of their craft, and of others' crafts.  Pastor Martin Niemöller's famous quotation seems applicable here.

Regards,
Eric


----------



## JohnGreco (Apr 24, 2014)

Wow, I m quite shocked at the animosity being displayed towards the OP. Where is the welcoming helpful IAP I thought I knew? She says she has made scrimshaw pens yet people question what 'her problem' has to do with pens.

I have walked in her shoes. My first iteration of business was a wooden toy maker, that was until the government (Bush era) passed the CPSIA forcing a lot of required testing. This passed nearly unanimously in BOTH the Senate & House.

I was lucky my business was still young and could easily change. This woman has 37 years under her belt. I understand the sense of helplessness when all you get are canned replies from your Representatives in Washington (well, from their aides. The Rep's never see your email or get your voicemail).

People are asking why she hasn't returned. Would YOU? Read some of these posts. Look at the thread started just to mock her (banning sharp tools). If I were her I'd write this attempt at finding people who give a damn off as wasted breath.

I'll probably have some of this hatred spread my way for writing this. It doesn't matter, I'm just tired of seeing grown adults argue for the sake of arguing. Somebody came here looking for help. People jumped down her throat from the get-go with the untrusted link comment (a google search showed she was legit). 

Very disappointed.


----------



## bruce119 (Apr 24, 2014)

I think this thread is going pretty well, agreed, it would be nice if O.P. would chime in...I see no reason yet to close this...though it's getting close...


What it does is bring awareness to us...There are a lot of pens out there that has legitimate Ivory...And I sure quite a few with a stash... 


I need to look into it more I also have quite a few Wart Hog Tusk and other exotic horns that I got off eBay a few years ago...
Now I can't sell them on eBay...I think that is there rules and not the law????


.


----------



## Joe S. (Apr 24, 2014)

I think the thread has continued because it contains some good discussion and has mostly stayed civil.

And that other thread was making fun of Ed, not the OP.


----------



## bobleibo (Apr 24, 2014)

For what it's worth.....
No one disagrees with the OP on us needing to be good stewards of ALL of our planets' resources, but - again, IMHO - this is NOT the place for this discussion. I am sure there are far more appropriate forums to promote your personal agendas than to join a pen turning site for that sole purpose. 
I come here to escape the c**p of the real world, even if it is only artificial in a certain sense. I come here to see the works of art that are created. I get more enjoyment seeing the creations of a 10 year old youngster turning his/her first pen than I do seeing the masterpieces from long-time turners. I get a lot of enjoyment being able to give some helpful advice to the new turner just getting started like we all once were. I come here to get new ideas or learn new skills from people far more experienced than I. I come here to offer a bit of hope for someone going through a tough time. I do not come here to have someone preach to me about being a felon if I try to sell a banned piece of ivory or hear that person promote their political agenda. (for the record - I will never work with ANY endangered product).
I've been around here a long time and have never gotten even remotely involved with a thread like this. I have always focused on the good things that come from here but this time someone hit just the right button. 
Sorry, I'll get off my soap box now......I'll leave that to the OP.


----------



## bjbear76 (Apr 24, 2014)

Bob, I understand where you're coming from.  The only point that I disagree with you is where it is appropriate to discuss.  Since this is the Casual Conversation forum, as long as it stays civilized, it IS appropriate IMO.  We are all going to have our difference of opinions, but to me, this has been interesting to listen to the different points of view.  I'll be honest and say there have been past topics that "ruffled my feathers" so to speak, I just don't read it.  It's up to the individual to decide what to read and what topics to ignore.  I personally enjoy the "how-to" forums most of the time.


----------



## stonepecker (Apr 24, 2014)

Isn't it wonderful that we can have this discussion.  In some countries you can be shot for what you think or even just talk about.  I am very happy to see that Admin and Moderators have allowed this posting to continue.
And I hope that this can continue when something is discussed that we are feel is important to our hobby.

"The land of the Free ... because of the Brave."


----------



## Karl_99 (Apr 24, 2014)

This has been an interesting thread.  As far as how it relates to pen turning, for me this hits home as I have been asked to make some pens with prehistoric mammoth and pre-ban elephant ivory. I have been very interested from both a legal and ethical perspective.


----------



## bobleibo (Apr 24, 2014)

I figured out why this OP's post bothers me so much.....other than the fact that she joined for the sole reason of hopefully gaining an audience. She has not contributed one single piece of additional support or commentary. She basically got people riled up (seemingly just me) and vanished. In my world, you stand behind your beliefs from center stage, not from the shadows. 

There's a big difference between someone talking *WITH* me or talking *AT *me*. *
Again, just my simple-minded opinion.


----------



## bjbear76 (Apr 24, 2014)

It does make one wonder, doesn't it?  It would seem appropriate that she would contribute with some facts, I agree.


----------



## Smitty37 (Apr 24, 2014)

bobleibo said:


> For what it's worth.....
> No one disagrees with the OP on us needing to be good stewards of ALL of our planets' resources, but - again, IMHO - this is NOT the place for this discussion. I am sure there are far more appropriate forums to promote your personal agendas than to join a pen turning site for that sole purpose.
> I come here to escape the c**p of the real world, even if it is only artificial in a certain sense. I come here to see the works of art that are created. I get more enjoyment seeing the creations of a 10 year old youngster turning his/her first pen than I do seeing the masterpieces from long-time turners. I get a lot of enjoyment being able to give some helpful advice to the new turner just getting started like we all once were. I come here to get new ideas or learn new skills from people far more experienced than I. I come here to offer a bit of hope for someone going through a tough time. I do not come here to have someone preach to me about being a felon if I try to sell a banned piece of ivory or hear that person promote their political agenda. (for the record - I will never work with ANY endangered product).
> I've been around here a long time and have never gotten even remotely involved with a thread like this. I have always focused on the good things that come from here but this time someone hit just the right button.
> Sorry, I'll get off my soap box now......I'll leave that to the OP.


 Personally I think that joining a thread simply to state that you think the thread doesn't belong in this site doesn't make much sense - if you don't like it don't follow it.  The thread does address an issue that we all have some interest in (using imported materials in our hobby).


----------



## Sandra Brady (Apr 24, 2014)

Thank you Ed for at least giving me a chance!  I don't want to start a political discussion here, as I understand that is not appropriate. But you all should be aware of the possible changes. Basically what the government is trying to do is make all ivory even 100 yr old stuff illegal, if you don't have "proper paperwork" and it's up to the individual to prove that it meets  impossible criteria in order to get paperwork. Like what port it entered the country in. Since there are no records it's impossible to prove. I know at least a few of you must have used some ivory in the past. The other problem that I foresee is mammoth ivory ( and some imitation material) can be mistaken for elephant, and so you should carry receipts with you just in case.


----------



## ed4copies (Apr 24, 2014)

To clarify, I sent Ms. Brady an email and she replied that she was not able to locate the thread.  So, I sent a link.

I believe we should "hear out" more of this issue and what we might be able to do to protect live elephants without making all ivory (even that currently in your possession) un-marketable.

BTW, I have a very small amount of mastadon ivory, NO elephant ivory--so this is NOT a matter of protecting any self-interest.

FWIW,
Ed


----------



## Sandra Brady (Apr 24, 2014)

And FYI I didn't post my opinion on here, just one website where you can find the facts. follow the links. You can look up the info, or not. You can be against using ivory, and I'm ok with that too. But there is a lot of ivory that is  here in the country. And it is legal, for now at least. The US hasn't allowed any importation of ivory for over 25 years. What is here is pre-ban. Pre 1989.


----------



## Sandra Brady (Apr 24, 2014)

bjbeaar do you want facts? What facts would you like to see?The government site where they say they are going to make it illegal?  and a link to USFWS questions and answers.           Interior Announces Ban on Commercial Trade of Ivory as Part of Overall Effort to Combat Poaching, Wildlife Trafficking


 
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service - International Affairs.


----------



## Sandra Brady (Apr 24, 2014)

To bruce119, ebay has dis allowed all ivory items to be sold because there is no way to police it. It has been illegal to import ivory since 1989, and there was a lot of antique items coming in from England, and I am sure other countries bypassing the need for proper  C.I.T.E.S. documentation. So rather than try they just made a rule. The VP of EBay is one of the people on the advisory commitee.


----------



## bobleibo (Apr 24, 2014)

Smitty37 said:


> bobleibo said:
> 
> 
> > For what it's worth.....
> ...


 
So, if one disagrees with something, they should basically keep their mouth shut and not participate?


----------



## Smitty37 (Apr 24, 2014)

The first thing to determine is "Do live elephants NEED any extra ordinary protection?"  If the answer to that question is "yes" then we need to answer the next question.  "What is the most effective way to provide protection?" The demand for ivory in largely Asian but doing some reading I personally have concluded that loss of habitat having nothing to do with Ivory trade is a far greater problem in the long haul than poaching.  Particularily for the African Elephants.  

In addition, Africa is notorious for unstable governments so their law enforcement is pretty bad in a lot of places making it very difficult to stop poaching in those areas.  


A third problem that I see is that many African nations are extremely poor this again impedes their law enforcement efforts, even if they want to stop poachers they lack the where-with-all to do it.


Notice that none of the above problems is likely be impacted to any great extent, if at all, by what our government is proposing to do internal to the USA.


----------



## Joe S. (Apr 24, 2014)

No, but they can add meaningful input as to why they disagree rather than complain about the topic being posted.


----------



## Quality Pen (Apr 24, 2014)

This seems to be getting quite political and heated. I think before we get going any further we need to address some basic, fundamental questions:

First of all, are we -- as rational human beings -- truly able to experience anything in an objective manner?

Secondly, why is there a universe at all? And if we can begin to answer that then it begs the following question, "Where did it originate?"


----------



## Smitty37 (Apr 24, 2014)

bobleibo said:


> Smitty37 said:
> 
> 
> > bobleibo said:
> ...


No that is very clearly  not what I said and you and I both know that.


----------



## Cmiles1985 (Apr 24, 2014)

Well this has certainly been an interesting read. I'll do my best to leave my personal thoughts of OUR government out of my post. The nature of the way laws work is very typically a slippery slope. This, IIRC, is what the OP was mentioning. I do not own any ivory. However, if I did, and had intentions of selling something made of it, I'd be upset. Especially if I obtained it legally! I know I'd feel this way about some stuff that I do have.

Thanks for sharing, and welcome to the forum!


----------



## bruce119 (Apr 24, 2014)

I think the O.P. did a good thing...this needs to be brought to our attention...Yes politics dose get involved but heck what we supposed to do just roll over and take it...
There are legit points being made worthy of writing your congressman...


I did read some sad stories about the older Guitars that are going to be devastated and the story's about the old pianos being destroyed...


Bye the way Sandra your work looks outstanding and you have made quite a few achievements...


THANK YOU FOR TAKING A STAND 


Someone has to, as most don't because, 'that don't effect me', 'I can't do anything'  


This thread has accomplished it's intention I think bringing awareness...


Our bickering among our self's is what deteriorates a thread and this is getting close...


I want to thank you Sandra...maybe you can show us some of your work on a pen...
.


----------



## mark james (Apr 24, 2014)

bruce119 said:


> I think the O.P. did a good thing...this needs to be brought to our attention...Yes politics dose get involved but heck what we supposed to do just roll over and take it...
> There are legit points being made worthy of writing your congressman...
> 
> 
> ...




Hmnnn.......  Waiting...... for a ....... a........PEN!


----------



## bobleibo (Apr 24, 2014)

Smitty37 said:


> bobleibo said:
> 
> 
> > Smitty37 said:
> ...


 
Smitty, you are the first person I have EVER challenged on this site - EVER! 
You may know it, I don't. What I see is you saying "....if you don't like it, don't follow it". 
I stand by my assertion Sir.


----------



## Smitty37 (Apr 25, 2014)

bobleibo said:


> Smitty37 said:
> 
> 
> > bobleibo said:
> ...


I don't want to argue so I will withdraw all of my responses to your posts....


----------



## maxwell_smart007 (Apr 25, 2014)

There have been no rules broken, nor has it become overtly political....but that being said, please try an ensure that we're discussing the pertinent points, and not attacking others' right to have an opinion...

When this thread was about ivory, it was interesting....let's keep it so.  

Andrew
assistant moderator


----------



## maxwell_smart007 (Apr 25, 2014)

After looking at the site, it looks like the government isn't banning all ivory - it makes specific reference to antique ivory:
To qualify as an antique, an item must be more than 100 years old and meet other requirements under the Endangered Species Act. The onus will now fall on the importer, exporter, or seller to demonstrate that an item meets these criteria.


----------



## Sandra Brady (Apr 25, 2014)

They are banning all pre ban elephant ivory which is 25-100 yrs old. Up to now this ivory has been bought sold and traded with out a problem. It was imported when there was no restrictions on it. So there was never any paperwork. The most a person might have is a receipt from the seller and that won't be enough to allow you to legally sell it. You will be assumed guilty and prosecuted if caught. Fossil walrus and mammoth are exempt. But is a fish and wildlife agent comes thru a show, spots something he thinks is ivory, he has the authority to confiscate. Often the similarities between the ivories are so great that the average person could easily make a mistake. See the problem? And your are assumed guilty. As a person who takes raw materials and fashions them into a finished product, I see the burden of proof aspect of this very troubling. At the March 20 th meeting it was stated that they would like to see 100 prosecutions / month. Up from 100/ yr. that they now have. By changing the laws to make a legal commodity illegal, they will be able to reach this quota at the expense of law abiding citizens. All in the name of saving the elephant. It's a slippery slope!


----------



## Joe S. (Apr 25, 2014)

The more I read about this, the more I think maybe the ban isn't a terrible thing... It is defiantly a pain and it is a shame that you can't use most (if not all) pre-ban ivory, but now the cost of elephant poaching IS on somebody, it just happens to be us. There is a negative externality in the market for ivory, and somebody needs to pay the added cost. We seem to have established that you can't really do that to the producers without starting a war.  :biggrin: I realize that this is our equivalent to banning exotic wood, but if that is what it takes to save a species from extinction, I would be ok with it.

Thank you for posting this thread, there were some bumps in the road, but this has been one of the most interesting threads in a while. I'm actually inspired to get some Ivory with the proper paperwork and make a pen out of it, but I'm pretty sure that inspiration will dim when I see the price of a stick of ivory. :biggrin:


----------



## bruce119 (Apr 25, 2014)

Sandra Brady said:


> They are banning all pre ban elephant ivory which is 25-100 yrs old. Up to now this ivory has been bought sold and traded with out a problem. It was imported when there was no restrictions on it. So there was never any paperwork. The most a person might have is a receipt from the seller and that won't be enough to allow you to legally sell it. You will be assumed guilty and prosecuted if caught. Fossil walrus and mammoth are exempt. But is a fish and wildlife agent comes thru a show, spots something he thinks is ivory, he has the authority to confiscate. Often the similarities between the ivories are so great that the average person could easily make a mistake. See the problem? And your are assumed guilty. As a person who takes raw materials and fashions them into a finished product, I see the burden of proof aspect of this very troubling. At the March 20 th meeting it was stated that they would like to see 100 prosecutions / month. Up from 100/ yr. that they now have. By changing the laws to make a legal commodity illegal, they will be able to reach this quota at the expense of law abiding citizens. All in the name of saving the elephant. It's a slippery slope!



Sandra,
Again I would like to thank you for bringing this to our attention....
The problem (I know it is for me) is that when you start looking into the actual laws and written martial it is over whelming and most give up, with a head ache and move on...


Thank you for bringing out important rite to the point details....Hopefully it helps awareness...I know I can't do too much but support you...and just talking about it maybe someone with the time and authority will notice....


----------



## Joe S. (Apr 25, 2014)

-but as I said before, the market will likely just move somewhere else.


----------



## low_48 (Apr 25, 2014)

"Often the similarities between the ivories are so great that the average person could easily make a mistake. See the problem?" In your last post, you added that statement. You are correct, that is the problem! Most can't tell the difference in two week old ivory, and 25 year old ivory. So the market for ivory items continues. With any kind of ivory market, you will still get the poaching.


----------



## Smitty37 (Apr 25, 2014)

low_48 said:


> "Often the similarities between the ivories are so great that the average person could easily make a mistake. See the problem?" In your last post, you added that statement. You are correct, that is the problem! Most can't tell the difference in two week old ivory, and 25 year old ivory. So the market for ivory items continues. With any kind of ivory market, you will still get the poaching.


I suggest that all people participating hers do a little reading up on elephants.  African elephants are a *problem *and are not endangered at all.  There are probably too many of them and they are very expensive to protect.  They need lots of water, and tons of land to provide enough food (adults consume about 300 to 600 pounds per animal per day) and in addition they need to kept out of agricultural areas....it is no small matter and it has nothing to do with Ivory stop all poaching, stop all harvesting, stop all trade in ivory and these problems will continue to exist.

I have no skin in this game, I don't own and don't particularily want to do anything with ivory but I do object to government taking radical steps to solve a non-problem..


----------



## sbell111 (Apr 25, 2014)

As I understand your post, it appears that the solution to humans encroaching into areas where animals live is to simply kill the animals.

Many in history have agreed with you.


----------



## sbell111 (Apr 25, 2014)

Those people who believe that this ban is going to put grandma's piano at risk are either misunderstanding the ban or misrepresenting it.  All the owner would have to do is show the manufacture date of the piano.


----------



## Smitty37 (Apr 25, 2014)

sbell111 said:


> As I understand your post, it appears that the solution to humans encroaching into areas where animals live is to simply kill the animals.
> 
> Many in history have agreed with you.


You understand wrong Steve.  I did not make any suggestion about how to deal with the issue.  I stated what some of the problems are and one approach that I believe will have no positive effect.


----------



## Smitty37 (Apr 25, 2014)

sbell111 said:


> Those people who believe that this ban is going to put grandma's piano at risk are either misunderstanding the ban or misrepresenting it.  All the owner would have to do is show the manufacture date of the piano.


 As I understand it not if Grandma's piano happened to be imported.  Aside from that there are a lot of items other than Grandma's Piano.  One instance, when I was in the Navy we visited Italy (several times between 1957 and 1959) and while there I purchased a couple pieces of Cameo Jewelery made from black onyx and Ivory because compared to US prices they were very inexpensive.  I gave them to various women including my mother my sisters and sisters-in-law....some of them are no doubt still in the family being passed on when the women I gave them to died.  Under the new rules they won't be saleable because there is no way on earth to positively establish when they were imported.  I would say there are litterly millions of various ivory pieces imported the same way from 1946 to 1989 - I'm sure no one can even guess how much.


----------



## low_48 (Apr 25, 2014)

Smitty37 said:


> low_48 said:
> 
> 
> > "Often the similarities between the ivories are so great that the average person could easily make a mistake. See the problem?" In your last post, you added that statement. You are correct, that is the problem! Most can't tell the difference in two week old ivory, and 25 year old ivory. So the market for ivory items continues. With any kind of ivory market, you will still get the poaching.
> ...



You've got to be kidding me. You are making a joke right? In case you aren't, too many elephants? Who gets to decide that a species has too many numbers and is a nuisance? How about too many people! They take up lots of space and are extremely costly to the environment to take care of those people. Were there too many elephants 100 years ago? Or are there just too many since their habitat has been changed over to farming? I don't get the theory that all creatures on earth are for humans to use up. One of these days, humans will be desperate for biodiversity. Once we get the oceans emptied out, bees eliminated from poisoning them, and on and on. It will down to Soylent Green time then. Saw on TV that in Texas, some communities are making a closed loop on their water. Sewage goes to the plant, is processed, then get piped to the drinking water side. Do you think food will be next?


----------



## Edgar (Apr 25, 2014)

sbell111 said:


> Those people who believe that this ban is going to put grandma's piano at risk are either misunderstanding the ban or misrepresenting it.  All the owner would have to do is show the manufacture date of the piano.



If the piano is intact, that "might" be possible. If  all you have is the keyboard or the individual keys, then probably not. And if you make something else out of the keys, then even more unlikely.


----------



## bruce119 (Apr 25, 2014)

sbell111 said:


> Those people who believe that this ban is going to put grandma's piano at risk are either misunderstanding the ban or misrepresenting it.  All the owner would have to do is show the manufacture date of the piano.




Now I did look at Sanda's O.P. post a little there are some interesting facts about pianos HERE a short quick read. Also the one on the guitars HERE watch the video....


*Lets not let bickering among our self's destroy this thread.......*


----------



## Smitty37 (Apr 25, 2014)

low_48 said:


> Smitty37 said:
> 
> 
> > low_48 said:
> ...


People who have to live with them should be.  At the turn of the last century things in Africa were much different than today and like it or not, you and I had nothing to do with the changes  Those changes would have occured even if we never existed.  If elephants are to survive, it will not be because of what you and I do, it will be because of action taken on the ground where the elephants are and that will most likely include maintaining some maximum herd size in each area set aside for elephants (there are some huge such areas).  Overpopulation of any species (humans included) leads to none of the species, but particularily the younger members, having enough.  So the idea is to maintain the herd at a level that provides the best chance of survival for the most.

I happen to know of a sewage plant in Pennsylvania that water pure enough to drink is a by-product of the plant. Now in that case they don't drink the water it gets pumped into a lake to keep the lake water pure enough that the fish are absolutely edible in any amount.


Who do you think will find the solution to the bee problem?  My thinking is that it will probably be people who have a direct economic interest in healthy bees - the bee keepers, and banning honey from the tables of those who like honey won't contribute a single thing to the solution.


I personally don't think human's need to be too concerned about saving the planet...the planet was here long before we came and will be here long after we're gone.  I have seen many TV specials speculating about how the planet might end, how human life on the planet might end and on and on.  They all have one thing in common - no matter what we do we really can't prevent something catastrophic from happening.  So I don't intend to loose any sleep over any of this.


----------



## Joe S. (Apr 28, 2014)

After looking into it more, I don't think I want to use ivory at all, so I take that part of my statement back.


----------



## Smitty37 (Apr 28, 2014)

OK - don't use ivory.  I personally have never made anything at anytime (before or after the ban) and it's highly unlikely that I ever will.  To me the question we ought to be thinking about is  " What should be done for the elephants?"  Asian elephants might well be endangered the estimate is around 35000 total (there are a number of subspecies there and I think that number includes all of them) remaining.

African elephants (2 subspecies) there are according to figures I've read about 600,000 to 750,000 remaining.  


In both cases, habitat loss seems to me to be the biggest threat.  Since much of Africa has stopped culling - overpopulation which can lead to sudden huge decreases in number due to starvation and/or disease - is in fact a problem in a number of areas.  Elephants are big animals and they travel in herds of 8 to over 100 animals adult females require about 350 pounds of food per day and adult males require up to about 700 pounds.  Being large animals they also require a lot of water.  In addition, they do not have sweat glands and that two edged sword helps in one way and hurts in another.  They don't have the loss of water problem which helps avoid dehydration but the need water (wallows) for cooling.


Now, like it or not - your fault, my fault or nobody's fault - elephants are competing more and more with humans over habitat.  Decisions have to be made about what is going to go to the elephants and what is going to go to humans and how are sustainable herds of elephants going to be maintained on the lands that go to elephants.  Elephants share one thing with humans - they alter the landscape when they go through an area and it takes years to recover.


Hence, it is my opinion, that this habitat competition is going to end up having far more impact on the elephants that the Ivory trade will have and even if all ivory trade is eliminated the habitat loss problems remain and still need to be resolved.


----------



## bruce119 (Apr 28, 2014)

Pretty good analogy....

I am or was a hunter some my hate me for that..but to the point...
Hunting helps the deer population for the exact reason you described...
If it weren't for controlled hunting the deer would suffer to disease and malnutrition...
Due to habitat lose due to humans...
So those that think hunting is bad when controlled it is really a good thing for the whole population...  
I think the key word is controlled and there lays the problem....

Human greed and poaching....
.


----------



## Haynie (Apr 28, 2014)

Bruce, I realize this is completely off topic but your statement is false logic.  Nature seeks out and preys upon the weaker members of a herd.  The hunter seeks out the prize member of the herd, leaving the weaker less desirable specimen to procreate.

I have no issue with hunting and see it as necessary but I think we often fool ourselves.


----------



## bruce119 (Apr 28, 2014)

Haynie said:


> Bruce, I realize this is completely off topic but your statement is false logic.  Nature seeks out and preys upon the weaker members of a herd.  The hunter seeks out the prize member of the herd, leaving the weaker less desirable specimen to procreate.
> 
> I have no issue with hunting and see it as necessary but I think we often fool ourselves.



Yes I can see the truth in that...We try to manage and fix what we screw up...
A difficult situation...


.


----------



## ed4copies (Apr 28, 2014)

bruce119 said:


> Haynie said:
> 
> 
> > Bruce, I realize this is completely off topic but your statement is false logic.  Nature seeks out and preys upon the weaker members of a herd.  The hunter seeks out the prize member of the herd, leaving the weaker less desirable specimen to procreate.
> ...



Hunters in Wisconsin have solved that problem.  They shoot at anything that moves---sometimes bagging trophy cows during deer season:biggrin::biggrin::biggrin:

The prize, smart deer are hidden from the second day of deer season!


----------



## Smitty37 (Apr 28, 2014)

Haynie said:


> Bruce, I realize this is completely off topic but your statement is false logic.  Nature seeks out and preys upon the weaker members of a herd.  The hunter seeks out the prize member of the herd, leaving the weaker less desirable specimen to procreate.
> 
> I have no issue with hunting and see it as necessary but I think we often fool ourselves.


Believe it or not - his statement is not false logic...you will read it in the conservation department writings of practically any state. In an over population situation the "weaker" members of the herd are the young immature members not able to compete with the larger more fully developed adults.

The prime members of a herd are among the best to remove because they usually are big males who have already passed their genes along to a lot of young.  And, removing the bucks will acturally have little impact on the size of the herd.


You are thinking of the natural culling of weaker individuals by predation.  Die offs due to over population don't work that way.


----------



## Smitty37 (Apr 28, 2014)

bruce119 said:


> Haynie said:
> 
> 
> > Bruce, I realize this is completely off topic but your statement is false logic.  Nature seeks out and preys upon the weaker members of a herd.  The hunter seeks out the prize member of the herd, leaving the weaker less desirable specimen to procreate.
> ...


In many areas today the deer herd is larger than it has ever been (Delaware is one of those places).  I grew up in the Pocono Mts of PA and the deer population in and around my home town is much larger now than it was 60 years ago. Largely because of human development, deer, like grey/brown rabbits and squirrels live well in conjunction with humans and are much easier to find in moderately populated areas than in the outback.

I think more deer are killed annually by cars than buy hunters, but I'd need to check on that to be sure.


----------



## Smitty37 (Apr 28, 2014)

ed4copies said:


> bruce119 said:
> 
> 
> > Haynie said:
> ...


 That would probably be by noon on the 1st day Ed.  Deer tend to go where there is no shooting.:biggrin:

It is well known that 50% of all deer taken are taken of the 1st day of the hunting season.  That is usually a Monday, and 50% of the rest are taken of the 1st Saturday.  25% are taken on all the other days combined.  In New York Thanksgiving Morning was the next hot day because it was a day off and might fall before the 1st Saturday.


----------



## Sandra Brady (Apr 29, 2014)

You guys have all hit on the many problems with this whole mess. The bottom line is, the US government has done a good job at keeping illegal ivory out of our country. We already have plenty of laws on the books, and making more is only going to be an injustice to those of us who have used ivory in a legal manner. If there is illegal ivory entering the country than beefing up the ports of entry will do more good than anything, and that is where the effort should be.  Also these changes will not stop the poaching, or in any way help those countries that are dealing with herds of these animals. Throw in the fact that there is at least 100 tons of natural attrition ivory each year that those countries are collecting but are not allowed to sell on the open market. So they are stockpiling, but our government is putting pressure on them to  destroy it.  That ivory could be released and controlled much like diamonds are now. Funds could go toward elephant conservation. That is what I would like to see happen. and that is what I am working for.


----------



## Joe S. (Apr 29, 2014)

Sandra Brady said:


> You guys have all hit on the many problems with this whole mess. The bottom line is, the US government has done a good job at keeping illegal ivory out of our country. We already have plenty of laws on the books, and making more is only going to be an injustice to those of us who have used ivory in a legal manner. If there is illegal ivory entering the country than beefing up the ports of entry will do more good than anything, and that is where the effort should be.  Also these changes will not stop the poaching, or in any way help those countries that are dealing with herds of these animals. Throw in the fact that there is at least 100 tons of natural attrition ivory each year that those countries are collecting but are not allowed to sell on the open market. So they are stockpiling, but our government is putting pressure on them to  destroy it.  That ivory could be released and controlled much like diamonds are now. Funds could go toward elephant conservation. That is what I would like to see happen. and that is what I am working for.


 But is that realistic? Can ivory exist as a valuable material without people poaching?


----------



## Smitty37 (Apr 29, 2014)

Joe S. said:


> Sandra Brady said:
> 
> 
> > You guys have all hit on the many problems with this whole mess. The bottom line is, the US government has done a good job at keeping illegal ivory out of our country. We already have plenty of laws on the books, and making more is only going to be an injustice to those of us who have used ivory in a legal manner. If there is illegal ivory entering the country than beefing up the ports of entry will do more good than anything, and that is where the effort should be.  Also these changes will not stop the poaching, or in any way help those countries that are dealing with herds of these animals. Throw in the fact that there is at least 100 tons of natural attrition ivory each year that those countries are collecting but are not allowed to sell on the open market. So they are stockpiling, but our government is putting pressure on them to  destroy it.  That ivory could be released and controlled much like diamonds are now. Funds could go toward elephant conservation. That is what I would like to see happen. and that is what I am working for.
> ...


The point is -- the nations where the elephants actually live -- have ivory.  The nations where the elephants don't live are preventing them from selling it on the grounds there is poaching in the countries where the elephants live.  Isn't there something that is just totally wrong with that picture.  Actually doesn't it make sense that 100 tons of legal ivory going on the market each year would make ivory less valuable and more available and hence make poaching less profitable and less likely to happen?


----------



## Joe S. (Apr 29, 2014)

Is a strong market for ivory a good thing? How can you know for sure the ivory is from an elephant that wasn't poached?


----------



## Joe S. (Apr 29, 2014)

A strong market for ivory does not sound like a good thing to me. How can you know for sure if an elephant wasn't poached? It is too bad to not use the ivory from an elephant that died anyway, but it is naive to think that poaching will go away if we set rules against it.


----------



## Joe S. (Apr 29, 2014)

Sorry, I didn't think the first post posted, so I retyped it.


----------



## Smitty37 (Apr 29, 2014)

Joe S. said:


> A strong market for ivory does not sound like a good thing to me. How can you know for sure if an elephant wasn't poached? It is too bad to not use the ivory from an elephant that died anyway, *but it is naive to think that poaching will go away if we set rules against it.*


and just as naive to think it will go away by banning the sale of legitimate ivory.  

We did that with Pot years ago, made the sale, use and importation as well as growing locally illegal - did we succeed in stopping any of those things?  No.  Evan seizing a ship now and then didn't help.


An approach that won't work, won't work and wishing that it will, won't make it work.  Banning the legitimate sale of Ivory has not stopped poaching and won't.  Destroying legitmate ivory surely won't discourage poachers, in fact it will have the opposite effect of making poaching more profitable.  Poaching can only be stopped by catching the poachers - making the chance of getting caught high enough that it outweighs the prospect of profits.  You do not do that by driving the price of ivory up which banning does.


----------



## Joe S. (Apr 30, 2014)

Banning is a rule against it, and won't stop poaching. The idea behind this ban is to make us not want to use ivory. If there is less demand, there will be less of an incentive to risk getting shot. Poachers already face that danger, and short of drone strikes it would be very hard to make poaching riskier. Perhaps after the demand for ivory has gone down, we can use the "good" ivory. Until then, however, the more ivory we use, be it poached, antique, or legally harvested we are creating incentives to poach.

But, as mentioned in this thread, poaching isn't the biggest problem elephants face. Also, the US is not the only consumer of ivory, so this ban is more anti-poacher than it is pro-elephant.

Finally, how do you know that all of that 100 tons isn't poached? If somebody risks getting shot for some elephant tusks, I'm pretty sure they would have ways of leaking that ivory into the market.


----------



## Kenny Durrant (Apr 30, 2014)

I didn't want to post on this but each time I read new ones I'd get the urge to do so. I remember a phrase "Get to the root of the problem". I don't think the use of ivory in the U.S. is the root. They need to combat poaching in the countrys where elephants live. If it's a poor country that doesn't have the funds to do that then they can sell legal or confinscated ivory to raise money to do so. That way the elephants that were poached won't go to waste. On another thread it was stated tons of ivory was destroyed to send a message to poachers. I think the only message sent was that there was a need for more ivory. I'm all for conservation but I also think there is a way to use all resourses in a positive way. That goes for everything. If you abuse something if it's animals, trees, or land it's not going to have a good impact. Sorry I couldn't hold back any longer. Thanks Kenny


----------



## Smitty37 (Apr 30, 2014)

Joe S. said:


> Banning is a rule against it, and won't stop poaching. The idea behind this ban is to make us not want to use ivory. If there is less demand, there will be less of an incentive to risk getting shot. Poachers already face that danger, and short of drone strikes it would be very hard to make poaching riskier. Perhaps after the demand for ivory has gone down, we can use the "good" ivory. Until then, however, the more ivory we use, be it poached, antique, or legally harvested we are creating incentives to poach.
> 
> But, as mentioned in this thread, poaching isn't the biggest problem elephants face. Also, the US is not the only consumer of ivory, so this ban is more anti-poacher than it is pro-elephant.
> 
> Finally, how do you know that all of that 100 tons isn't poached? If somebody risks getting shot for some elephant tusks, I'm pretty sure they would have ways of leaking that ivory into the market.



I know what the idea is Joe, I also know that historically such bans to not work. And by their own acmission (C.I.T.E.S.) this one has not worked either as elephand herds continue to decline and poaching continues to be a problem.

Joe you have this  backwards.  The incentive to poach is because the black market price is driven up because open market ivory is not available.  Making each poached tusk worth more.  That is economics 101. C.I.T.E.S. statements that legal sale of ivory has driven up the demand and price for poached ivory just don't make any sense - they are totally contrary to economics.


As for knowing the source of all 100 tons --- this is now in the hands of legitimate governments. Even if it came from confiscation  of a poached animal from the poachers .... the animal was already dead and nothing can be done for it but sale of the ivory could help finance efforts to catch more poachers.


Part of the problem is Poachers - you solve that part of the problem. by going after the poachers, trying to dry up the market for a comodity that has been used and traded at least since the time of the ancient greeks just ain't gonna work.


Witness that there are already plastic alternatives (of course they use crude oil which has it's own negatives) for Ivory that are a lot cheaper, but the users still want the real thing.


----------

