Printable View
I have been working quietly since last August working with ivory,desert ironwood and G10.
I like all of those materials but ivory is my favorite:
I love how it comes alive with a classic glow, a few days afterwards the grains and familiar lines begin to form
I'm a little split on the ivory thing.
If I promote how nice it is on old razors where it's legal, people may want more of the stuff and thus killing elephants in the process.
I am a little split on that too but for old original razors I have no problem with ivory. The damage has already been done and it would be even more of a waste not to preserve the ivory. OTH I sure don't want to promote the illegal killing of Elephants or the sale of post ban ivory.
Bob
Just personally i reckon it's morally okay if you harvest the ivory yourself and ensure you utilise the whole animal with no waste... :w
Adam
Funny thing, I was waiting at the mechanics today and picked up a Nat. Geo mag. On the cover is a story about how the Ivory trade is picking up again. It went down after the ban but in the last few years the average is a staggering 53,000 elephants that die every year to illegal ivory poachers. I don't know for sure where the big demand is but I am guessing India and China. At -53k a year how long will there be wild elephants and then what's next ? I am not against using ivory or anybody that does. I will say after reading that article it lost it's appeal to me. I wanted to use some someday but I will pass on that and help keep the demand down. That's the best I can do for you and of course the elephants.
That's the problem with Ivory. There is no visual difference between pre- and post ban ivory. And as long as there is a demand, people will continue poaching elephants.
In general, I don't mind killing animals as long as the entire animal is used. But that is not what happens with poached ivory (or rhinoceros horn for that matter). The animal gets shot, the ivory removed, and then the carcass of the already endangered animal is let to rot.
But even if they'd eat the elephants, I still think it is wrong to hunt a species to extinction.
A while back, I saw a photo of a huge pile of confiscated ivory being burned. That made me sad. I'm sure that there is some reason for not doing it, but, why couldn't the government sell the ivory and use the proceeds to pay for taking care of the living elephants? Burning it, to me, seemed to be a final insult to the dead elephants. It didn't bring them back, it didn't send a message to any poachers, it just made an ugly fire. I don't know, it just seemed really messed up.
Attachment 130956
I think the rationale (or at least part of it) is that doing anything other than utterly destroying the ivory - i.e. releasing it somehow into the market - would serve to further encourage or embolden the trade, or simply play into the system that creates demand for the ivory which leads to poaching, and the whole cycle continues.Quote:
Originally Posted by donv
Any way you look at it though, it's a sad situation. Ivory is a beautiful material but the price is (for me) too high and I want nothing to do with it. But that's just me.
That's exactly it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cangooner
Release it to market, and the very next thing, you'll just have the poachers bribe a couple of officials who 'confiscate' poached ivory. The poachers get their cut via a shady company for consulting services, the officals get their bribes, the customers get their ivory, and the elephants just get the shaft.
Seriously. Destroying it is the only good solution.
I am not so sure about the benefits of burning confiscated ivory. After all how long have they been doing that in the drug war WRT drugs and how successful has that been? Reducing the supply of anything just serves to increase it's value regardless if it is legal to have or not, further increasing the incentive to poach.
I think a better approach would be to try and eliminate the poverty that makes the poachers see their profession as a viable and in a lot of cases only way to make a decent living. At the other end, to also change the long historical use of ivory in certain cultures. Both of those are extremely difficult to do and there seems to be an almost complete lack of will to even try.
Burning poached ivory is a zero sum game and a band aid solution ay best. It is hard to come up with a workable plan to manage a renewable natural resource when so much money is involved and demand so high.
Bob
I have only used preban. There is still alot of it in the US. I have never poached any animal and would never trade in.
Difficult. I finally reasoned that it was here before the ban was in place thus legal. If no one does anything with it then it will never be used.
Elephant numbers are soaring. I am very glad for that. There is an annual sale of legal ivory, most goes to Japan
Soaring?
African Forest Elephant Population Plummeting - ScienceNOW
I agree with Bob that the key here is to address the forces that drive poaching. Without that, any efforts to eliminate or even reduce the practice will be doomed.
True.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cangooner
Burning is not a solution to the root cause problem. But not burning would not fix the problem either, and -due to corruption- only make the poaching problem worse.
I just can't connect the dots between the total waste of burning confiscated poached ivory and corruption or the lack of it. The elephant has already paid the price, the poachers likely caught and dealt with and selling it would put money back into communities that drastically need it. We can't eliminate poaching all together but wasting any possible benefit from a dwindling renewable natural resource seems rather pointless.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruno
Bob
It's really simple.Quote:
Originally Posted by BobH
If you allow poahed ivory to be sold after confiscation, the following will happen:
1) poachers will allow ivory to be confiscated by corrupt officials.
2) the corrupt officials will sell the ivory, and the poachers will get their cut of the money.
3) poaching will still be profitable and just continue under a new format.
Corrupt officials in African countries are a given.
If you allow the ivory to be sold at all, poaching will continue because the poachers will still get their cut of money.
You're right that it won't matter to the elephant who is already dead. But as long as you allow the ivory from that elephant to be profitable, there will be a next elephant which will be killed.
If you hunt the Elephant legally during a Cull Hunt, then it is your choice what to do with the Ivory, most end up hanging on a wall, they are after all the "Trophy"
This is why there is poaching, there is no "Commercial" Ivory :hmmm:
I'd like ivory a lot more if its favorite pastime weren't finding new and interesting ways of cracking. Over the long-term, most of it will not remain intact unless it's specifically cared for.
Hey Bruno
That point is there will always be "another elephant" whether you sell the confiscated poached ivory or not. Nobody wants to address the root causes and there is too much money to be made. Burning the confiscated poached ivory, which is a very small amount compared to the total poached, just gives the illusion that something concrete is being done when it really isn't and that satisfies most of the rest of the planet. Everyone likes to feel good. Anyway everyone has a different view point.
Bob
Burning ivory is simply a photo op by people who want you to think they are doing something about the problem, “Shaking the bush boss”, Kind of like firing the head of the IRS weeks before he retires.
It’s not just Africa lacking in leadership…
I was under the impression that there was a way to tell if it was pre ban and the newer stuff. I think it's beautiful and would like to have a pair of tusk to display. I know that it's out there But the Price would be thru the roof
Yep, it can be tested,and is tested in major smuggling cases,carbon 14,They can tell if the animal died one week before we nuked Japan or two weeks after.Quote:
Originally Posted by Slamthunderide
Other thing with elephant Ivory you need to know,is it Indian or african,Indian is 100% banned,takes DNA testing to know the diff.
I think the main concern is that one day there may not be another elephant!Quote:
Originally Posted by BobH
Which, unless there is a more accessible test, means there is effectively no way for folks like us to know whether it is pre or post ban.Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelfixed
I fully realize that I personally won't bring the international ivory trade to its knees by not participating, but since I much prefer seeing ivory in its original form still attached to an elephant, I *personally* choose to have nothing to do with the stuff. As long as ivory, be it pre-ban or post-ban, is coveted in the marketplace, it will be poached. So I choose not to partake. I personally want nothing to do with anything that will - however tangentially - support a practice that I abhor.
All of which I realize ultimately means little in the grand scheme of things other than me not competing with you guys on ebay for ivory-scaled razors. But it makes me feel better. :)
Some sanity has to prevail here,read and understand the laws.I have over past couple yrs posted all the links to all the laws and regulations,am not doing that anymore.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cangooner
An Elephant that was killed 90 yrs ago,is of no matter,it was 100% legal and the tusks are 100% legal and traded every day in this country.
I used to buy Ivory Billiard balls to turn brush handles,these were 100++ plus yrs old,do you have an issue with that??
Wood products such as lignum (the real deal) Ebony,some dalbergias,some Rosewoods are today banned from import and are not legal to even buy unless they are in this country at this time.
The martin Guitar company was told to cease and desist from importing exotic woods by the feds two yrs ago
, you do not like the new rules,move your company to China.
What is here in the U.S. at this time is legal,Killing animals today should be banned,agreed 100%
Again, I agree so lets really do something effective about it and not get overly smug about the feel good exercise of the burning of confiscated ivory. You will never eliminate poaching altogether but the amount that is going on is hardly under control with present practices. Hell they are even poaching black bears in North America just for the gall bladders.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cangooner
Bob
Don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to tell anyone else what to do, I'm just saying what my own personal position is. I tried to be careful to say that what I was saying was my own personal approach. I don't presume to tell anyone else what to do or not to do. As for the laws, I honestly don't know what the law on ivory is up here in Canada. But again, this is not a legal decision for me. There are plenty of things that are legal for me to do that I choose not to do because they don't sit right with me. But again, that's my own personal choice regarding how I govern myself, and has really nothing to do with what anyone else should or should not do.Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelfixed
As for guitar woods - there is a domestic crisis looming too: a shortage of sitka spruce. So it's not all a domestic/foreign issue at all.
I read an article a few years ago, discussing the different ways various African states were going about protecting the elephants and other large species.Quote:
Originally Posted by donv
The places with flat out bans were struggling had were dealing with diminishing herds.
The nations that had seasons and sold hunting rights were experiencing exponential growth of their herds. Plus where funding their conservation programs.
You know, in our wealth we have no concept of true poverty. I can't say I wouldn't harvest an elephant if the Choice was the elephant or my kid...
And we're not even going to TALK about what happens to Mr Badger!
It can't be C14 they test, that gives an uncertainty of 40-50 years at best, but there is other tests I'm sure.Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelfixed
This is not an easy subject, some of us really love ivory but I think none of us want to see the elephant gone.
The pop. numbers of elephants is for political means being pushed both up and down.
As for total ban or not I just hope they find some solution that works.
You may be correct about the C14.Cannot remember how it is tested but have read that can be done.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur
Ivory is banned from import in many countrys to curtail the killing of Elephants which is a good thing for sure,but as long as China and japan keep buying it the market will always be active.
Is sort of like the whaling industry today,the slaughter go's on.
Oh no - first thebigspendur provokes me into posting something stupid, now you:Quote:
Originally Posted by carlmaloschneider
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=gx6TBrfCW54
That is why one of the major things you have to change is the historical cultural habits of the end users. Those two countries represent about 20% of the worlds population which gives an idea of the enormity of the problem.
Bob
You have to understand the Politics of hunting...
In my home state and a few surrounding it years back some of the Western states decide to re-introduce the Wolf to the area, the DOW which is one of the few Government agencies that actually does a pretty good job, specifically brings in a seperate Sub-Species that was never "Native" to this area.. This was done to make sure that what is happening, would not happen :)
See what DOW knows to be fact is that if an animal can be made into a "Game Animal" the chances of it proliferating is much higher, that is just a fact that has been found to be true.. So years later we have the numbers that the DOW decided would be sustainable for the Wolves and the Prey Herds, in fact a slight mistake was made as the Wolves that they introduced are much better hunters then they figured.. these wolves are 30% larger, longer of leg, they are very adept at hunting "Herds" as their natural prey are the Caribou of the far North, and they keep much larger packs.. These slight differences have made them an apex predator.. They are so dangerous that we now have not only Bear warnings but Wolf Pack warnings about hiking, especially with a dog..
So now comes the point where the states involved step up and allow hunting, this was always the plan, to allow hunting to keep the packs at a certain number, so what happens???
Yep exactly, the Animal Rights people file suit to put the Wolves on the endangered lists to "protect" them, now the fight is going on whether there is a Grey Wolf only, or several Sub-Species..
My point here is that even with the best intentions some people will never, be happy with ANY hunting..
The difference is a managed sustianable animal that is a source of income to the people and the government, or a small group that continues to be hunted illegally anyway..
We are having the same issue up here, if the Wolves become protected, the ranchers will shoot them anyway on sight, without any oversite, without any benefit to anyone, what they call "Shoot, Shovel, Shutup" the ranchers will not accept losses in either their Herds, or the Elk and Moose populations... Regardless of any law imposed, the Wolves will be killed, same as the Elephants are, so an effective game management program is best for the animals and the people...
Just some rambiling thoughts..
What is really sad about all this is it could be stopped, if the right people wanted to.
Like the black bear problem here in our own backyard here in the US, where we assign only a handful of officers to track down serial offenders and then hand out “slap on the wrist” punishment to those convicted. I can only imagine the level of enforcement and prosecution in countries like Africa.
It is much like the gun control issue, it’s the user, not the gun that’s the problem. If we gave the death penalty to anyone using a firearm in the commission of a crime… and then enforced it, gun crimes would dramatically decrease. But it is not economically or politically expedient, to do so… for both sides.
Instead of burning the ivory they could sell it in countries that have bans. Use the money to pay bounties on poachers. Burn piles of poachers instead. This is not politically or morally correct and so it won't happen. And as long as 1 country condones the sale there will be a demand. I am all for using ivory to make beautiful things and I love to see a moose head hanging over a bar. (better yet a politician's head) :<0) As many of you state there are right and wrong ways of doing it. Wild life management can be a real joke. Sometimes it seems like the decisions are made by city dwelling soccer mom's who have no clue what wild life is. And what I say to them is shut up. You own /enslave a dog, cat,or worse yet an animal that should live it's life in nature,you over feed it food it should never eat, and you over breed/cross breed them until they become something god never intended to have living on this planet and you have the gall to point your finger at hunters for doing what is natural ? Sigh....... The simple fact is humans are going to do what is best for themselves. Some will have no concern for their soul when it comes to making money and others just have no concept of the damage their actions can cause. I have concluded in my own mind that this is all a part of nature. People not only kill to survive but they also kill for profit. Humans will use every resource on this planet until it is gone. We can't help it, it's what we do. And when we have come to the point where our resources can no longer support the populations we will start to die off. Isn't that the way nature works? Plenty of rain brings plenty of grass. More grass means more rabbits. More rabbits means more wolves. Then the rain stops...........
this is going to keep going on till there are no more elephants. or there will be a tiny genetically isolated portion of them left. this is really a people problem. there are people who lust after ivory, and there are people who are willing, against all right-thinking arguments against it, to provide that ivory at whatever cost. greed, avarice and lust for ivory is one part, and poverty is another.
the Chinese, i read over the weekend in the nytimes, have come up with a solution for the age-old problem of not enough gall bladders from bears to satisfy the demand. so someone over there has a bunch of captive bears with gall bladder pumps installed in them. they want to double the number of bears being used and some Chinese people had a big demonstration against it.
i think there should be a special circle in hell for people who will not see that this kind of exploitation, of gall bladders or tusks, is just wrong. can't buy legal ivory? oh well, it was fun while it lasted. guess i'll have to use something else.
i can't think of one legitimate reason why any elephant should die because someone somewhere feels entitled to a part of it's body.
The reason they burn the tusks is so as to not fuel (no pun intended) the market. If it's released and sold though seemingly innocent it just whets the appetite around the world for more.
You know what U.S Customs does with all the stuff they Seize?
it's similar to several years ago, at one time the U.S Border Patrol were issued B.A.R.'s and then one day they decided to not issue them any more. They were all collected in their wood cases and all sent to a smelter and guess what they did to them.
Anyone who thinks there is plenty of pre ban Elephant ivory in the U.S, well, I've got a pet badger who uses a straight to shave himself and sells the hair a few times a year.
Very little gets burned.
Ivory auctions raise $15 million in Africa - World news - World environment | NBC News
As long as there is money to be made,as much as I detest the slaughter of Elephants,the carnage will continue.
Are basically two countrys fueling the trade in Ivory,China and Japan,both are approved Buyers by the international community.
These same two countrys are wiping out Millions of sharks ea.year and dissimate the whale populations.
Great Britain has huge stocks of Ivory from when they raped africa and india. England is an approved seller of Ivory,but only to countrys that are approved buyers:)
