Anti-Ivory Groups Take Aim at WA, IA & CA (Mammoth Included) + Fed Update

stabman said:
A mod should probably close this one up.
It is getting a much meaner tone than most threads here, and has rather lost the "watching a car wreck" fun it had going for a bit.

It's getting sad. :(
Click to expand...

Indeed. :thumbup: I'm stunned it has lasted this long.
 
AVigil said:
Me...oh no.

You obviously are a character of suspicion due to the frequent attempts of undercover agents to get you to buy illegal items.

You probably know more about smuggling then you are letting on. But you are not admitting it is a problem and a big reason for the ban.

but of course the US Fish and Wild Life says... " we believe a substantial amount of elephant ivory is illegally imported and enters the domestic market.It is extremely difficult to differentiate legally acquired ivory from ivory derived from elephant poaching. Our criminal investigations and anti-smuggling efforts have clearly shown that legal ivory trade can serve as a cover for illegal trade."
Click to expand...

Everybody in the ivory business is being checked constantly, it's how they catch the bad guys.
That's how I know they are doing a good job.
I don't care at all for the insinuation in your next statement at all. You obviously cannot make clear decisions on this matter. You must be too emotionally involved or something to have made an accusation like that.

I won't even address the last pet of what you said. I see no point to do it again.
 
So is there anyone who is against this ivory ban that does NOT have any personal stake in ivory?

Mark, you don't want to people to make logical leaps, but you do the use when you say the ban won't effect illegal ivory trade. You say there is nothing to prove it would. Wouldn't we need to try it to get that proof?

More, is there anyone in this thread against the ban who dies NOT have any stake in ivory? If not, that says a lot.
 
It boils down to two fairly engrained camps... ban or no ban. The only people who have changed their minds on the issue appear to be those that felt mammoth and walrus ivory should be excluded. I feel this is about enforcement in country and enforcement at the borders of countries like the US. I don't see any practical gain by making the resale of products containing ivory here a crime without documentation that is nearly impossible to get. There is likely not much illegal ivory in the US in terms of relative quantity that make any difference in the big picture. The problem is elsewhere and I don't see China or other eastern asian countries doing anything and they are the primary recipients of the illegal ivory. Hence a ban here in the US is a political feel good thing like gun control with measures making little practical reductions in crime or illegal activity here.

I have no practical personal stake in this argument. I have a few ivory things. They are just oddities. I thought they were cool and really don't care about re-sale. But I do care about being able to sell a piano and whether I ever want to sell anything ivory makes little difference to me. I have always said that when I die, they can haul my knives to the landfill. Guns are a different matter as I could buy a pretty nice house with my gun collection and really would hate to see them go to the landfill or scrap yard.
 
Last edited:
BenchCo Spydermade said:
So is there anyone who is against this ivory ban that does NOT have any personal stake in ivory?

Mark, you don't want to people to make logical leaps, but you do the use when you say the ban won't effect illegal ivory trade. You say there is nothing to prove it would. Wouldn't we need to try it to get that proof?

More, is there anyone in this thread against the ban who dies NOT have any stake in ivory? If not, that says a lot.
Click to expand...

There are people here that have said they do not use ivory don't want to and do not have any ivory handled knives.=, and they are against the bans. A few of them. They said so in the thread several times.

We already have examples of bans that have not stopped or even slowed poaching in Africa. The 1989 ban of all new ivory to the US did not stop it. Further more the experts in the research say it has little chance of doing anything
 
Mark Knapp said:
There are people here that have said they do not use ivory don't want to and do not have any ivory handled knives.=, and they are against the bans. A few of them. They said so in the thread several times.

We already have examples of bans that have not stopped or even slowed poaching in Africa. The 1989 ban of all new ivory to the US did not stop it. Further more the experts in the research say it has little chance of doing anything
Click to expand...

Again, every major group (without a financial interest in the ivory trade) dedicated to protecting the elephants supports a total ban on ivory sales. It is one part of the solution. You sell ivory. You are against a ban.
 
Mark Knapp said:
Everybody in the ivory business is being checked constantly, it's how they catch the bad guys.
That's how I know they are doing a good job.
I don't care at all for the insinuation in your next statement at all. You obviously cannot make clear decisions on this matter. You must be too emotionally involved or something to have made an accusation like that.

I won't even address the last pet of what you said. I see no point to do it again.
Click to expand...

Yes that is how they catch the bad guys...they look at who is a possible culprit form a plan and see if they take the bait. You are on their list of people to keep an eye on.

You claim to be to know so much more then others and I am sure that applies to all aspects of the matter including smuggling since that is one of the main reasons for the ban. You know agents, you are in contact with agents and you should know more about what is going on with smuggling. Don't be so easily offended.

My decision is crystal clear on this matter and have no emotional stake in it at all.

You on the other hand do have a high emotional stake, imply you know more then every one else and have nothing to learn from those here.

You will ignore all information that might impact your ivory trade. You claim the Fish and Wild life are not telling the truth and they are just "political" and do not care about the elephants.

Somehow they seem more reliable and knowledgeable on the matter.
 
22-rimfire said:
...I feel this is about enforcement in country and enforcement at the borders of countries like the US...
Click to expand...
An extremely tiny amount of cargo crossing the border and entering our posts, particularly seaports, is inspected. It would be cost and time prohibitive to inspect it all, and unless that occurs true "enforcement at the borders of countries like the US" is not just impractical, it's impossible.
 
Last edited:
Will a mod please close this thread.

Mark has said his peace, D Ritter is not posting here so I assume he is done with this thread, and all of the folks that support a total ban on ivory and oppose Knife Rights position on this issues have said everything they want to say. Nothing is going to be solved if this thread continues. It is just going to get snarky, and I cannot see the good in that.
 
This is a long and contentious thread on a topic which is obviously important to many people on both sides and in the middle. I am not going to close it because some of you feel it is not going well in some way or other. There is clear interest on the part of the most involved contributors in continuing. If you disagree, there are many other threads on this and other websites to entertain you.

If your idea of crashing the thread is to troll it until I close it, you will find me more likely to shut you down. If your only contribution is to whine, we have a place for that, and I can move you there.

For real.
 
Esav Benyamin said:
This is a long and contentious thread on a topic which is obviously important to many people on both sides and in the middle. I am not going to close it because some of you feel it is not going well in some way or other. There is clear interest on the part of the most involved contributors in continuing. If you disagree, there are many other threads on this and other websites to entertain you.

If your idea of crashing the thread is to troll it until I close it, you will find me more likely to shut you down. If your only contribution is to whine, we have a place for that, and I can move you there.

For real.
Click to expand...

No worries. I am happy to continue the discussion with Mark in a civil manner. I just feel like both of us (and others) seem to be saying the same things again and again. You, and others, feel differently. That is cool. I have NO desire to troll this thread in an effort to get it closed.

Back to the discussion...
 
ncrockclimb said:
Again, every major group (without a financial interest in the ivory trade) dedicated to protecting the elephants supports a total ban on ivory sales. It is one part of the solution. You sell ivory. You are against a ban.
Click to expand...

Does that include safari hunting organizations? Or do they count as having a financial interest in ivory?
 
AVigil said:
Yes that is how they catch the bad guys...they look at who is a possible culprit form a plan and see if they take the bait. You are on their list of people to keep an eye on.

You claim to be to know so much more then others and I am sure that applies to all aspects of the matter including smuggling since that is one of the main reasons for the ban. You know agents, you are in contact with agents and you should know more about what is going on with smuggling. Don't be so easily offended.

My decision is crystal clear on this matter and have no emotional stake in it at all.

You on the other hand do have a high emotional stake, imply you know more then every one else and have nothing to learn from those here.

You will ignore all information that might impact your ivory trade. You claim the Fish and Wild life are not telling the truth and they are just "political" and do not care about the elephants.

Somehow they seem more reliable and knowledgeable on the matter.
Click to expand...

I told you, you missed it. Everyone one in the ivory business is checked constantly because they are in the ivory business. I am not singled out everyone in the business is on the list of people to check out.

Your second paragraph is an exact contradiction from your first. I have a very good relationship with my local enforcement officers.

For you to, all but, accuse me of being a smuggler is an attack on my character and an insult. What other way can I take it. There can be no meaningful dialog between two people if one shows so little respect for the other.

I did not say the USF&W service did not care about elephants.
 
timberweasel said:
I certainly think that ivory looks better on a live healthy elephant than on any man-made object. That said, images like this make me want to weep:

burning-ivory-stockpiles-in-kenya.jpg

Photo from: http://robshumaker.com/2012/10/blood-ivory/

Somehow, destroying seized ivory seems (to me) almost as senseless as the initial act of illegal slaughter and harvest conducted by criminal elephant poachers. Almost. Maybe burning contraband ivory slows the blackmarket trade but it does not stop it. What to do with seized ivory certainly presents a very sad catch-22...

I guess until humans can be trusted to harvest elephant ivory in a sustained and ethical manner (ie. only taking the tusks from an animal that died by happenstance or natural cause) I don't need any on my knives. Mammoth and fossil ivory is another matter...

Just my layman's perspective :o

-Brett
Click to expand...

seems to me the seized ivory should be brought to market and the money used to help the poor in those countries, also ivory that is older should be ok. this include fossilized ivory. there are ways to stop the poachers and still have a market for ivory? what about elephants that die of old age???

I like ivory - A LOT - but I also like elephants. . . . .
 
Mark Knapp said:
I told you, you missed it. Everyone one in the ivory business is checked constantly because they are in the ivory business. I am not singled out everyone in the business is on the list of people to check out.

Your second paragraph is an exact contradiction from your first. I have a very good relationship with my local enforcement officers.

For you to, all but, accuse me of being a smuggler is an attack on my character and an insult. What other way can I take it. There can be no meaningful dialog between two people if one shows so little respect for the other.

I did not say the USF&W service did not care about elephants.
Click to expand...


I am not accusing you of being a smuggler. Either you know more about smuggling or you do not.

Since you do not know more about the ivory smuggling operation....Then you should not act as if it is not a problem.
 
arden.ferris said:
seems to me the seized ivory should be brought to market and the money used to help the poor in those countries, also ivory that is older should be ok. this include fossilized ivory. there are ways to stop the poachers and still have a market for ivory? what about elephants that die of old age???

I like ivory - A LOT - but I also like elephants. . . . .
Click to expand...
So you want poached ivory to be sold anyway, and the money from the sale given to the countries whose poor poached the elephants in the first place? Why not just let them poach and cut out the middleman?


Elephants live for over 45 years, don't breed until their teens, gestate their young for 22 months and rely on herd size to protect their young from predators. Does that sound like an animal that is going to supply the ivory market by dying of old age?
 
http://www.ibtimes.com/illegal-ivory-trade-us-authorities-target-american-auction-houses-1656750

Their researchers attended auctions undercover and monitored online ivory sales from February to April, and found much of the millions of dollars worth of ivory sold had no documentation or proof it had not come from a recent kill. Plus, it seemed auction houses and dealers often left it up to buyers to determine the legality of ivory purchases.

“The scale of ivory trade in auctions, the confusing rules and regulations, and the suspect nature of a significant portion of ivory auction commerce, all contribute to making the auction industry a potential cover for illegal ivory trade,” the report says.
Click to expand...

and

And it’s not just a few pieces that slip through the cracks.

In 2012, federal and state officials seized more than $2 million worth of illegal elephant ivory from New York City retail stores, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service said.
Click to expand...

Despite what Mark want everyone to believe, the sale of illegal ivory is an alive an well in the US. The "legal" sale of ivory is often used as a front for the sale of illegal ivory. This is just one article, but there is a ton of information online that says the same thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top