Heads Up: eBay Ivory Ban

I would love to keep this thread going but Its time to take the walrus out of the pillars and streach him out on the rack. Be back later.
 
jdm61 said:
The ban on the ivory trade from legitimate souces, like government stockpiles of elephants that died from natural causes, legally hunted or culled animals and confiscated tusks actually serves, IMO, to hinder the anti-poaching effort. Like others have said, the money could be used to hire and equip more game wardens. Those guys are doing the best they can and they are making headway, but they have traqdtionally been outnumbered AND outgunned by the poachers in certain areas of Africa. In the areas where they have been succesfull, you are seeing instances where you have an "overpopulation" of elephants in certain areas.
Click to expand...

Releasing the stockpiled ivory would be a temporary fix at best. The price wouldn't stay low forever, and it still might not go low enough to dissuade poachers. The cash investment in killing an elephant can't be that high, and the more ivory there is on the market, the easier it is for the illegal stuff to blend in. The money could be used to equip game wardens, but this ivory is sitting in countries that have much bigger problems than poaching at the moment.
 
A fellow BF member that hunts and cleans his own game says there is something interesting about ivory when it becomes wet with blood. He says that it sticks to your hand whereas other materials tend to be slippery. It may be natures perfect knife handle material. It's too bad that there are evil people in the world that would exploit this natural resource and cause something that is good to be bad. :confused:
 
JTknives said:
I thought they just killed them i did not know that they tortured them as well
Click to expand...

Well, putting an elephant out of commission with a tranquilizer gun and then taking the tusks off with a chainsaw I believe would count as torture. And I've seen footage of that happening.
 
If people watched videos about how ANY processed animal is treated in its processing, many wouldn't do it. Heck, half the beef we eat comes from cattle that simply have their throats cut and are left to bleed to death. Dont even start looking into how chickens are treated.

I get riled up when people pick and choose what animals' treatment they get outraged about. Most complaining are doing so wearing their leather shoes, eating their steak dinners, and wearing clothes made by HUMANS who are treated almost as badly as animals.
 
I agree that the treatment of animals in industry is terrible almost across the board but I don't think it means that we have to discount the particular trials of pachyderms in particular. I think it's stupid to have huge stockpiles of ivory sitting in a warehouse. I can't imagine that the life of a poacher is a particularly rewarding one. The guys doing the actual poaching (on the sharp end of the tusk, if you will) are not exactly rolling in Bentleys. It's the distributors of the illegal stuff who are making real walking-around money. The actual poachers, well, I'm guessing it seems like relatively easy money to people whose alternatives are pretty grim. Africa is a rough damn place to live. And my understanding is that most poachers use AK-47s, not tranquilizer guns. It seems they're easier to come by there than a steak dinner, which ties in the international small arms market. Of course, the most effective solution to what is obviously a huge problem is, unfortunately, not as immediately apparent. I sure don't know it.
 
jackrabbitslim said:
I agree that the treatment of animals in industry is terrible almost across the board but I don't think it means that we have to discount the particular trials of pachyderms in particular. I think it's stupid to have huge stockpiles of ivory sitting in a warehouse. I can't imagine that the life of a poacher is a particularly rewarding one. The guys doing the actual poaching (on the sharp end of the tusk, if you will) are not exactly rolling in Bentleys. It's the distributors of the illegal stuff who are making real walking-around money. The actual poachers, well, I'm guessing it seems like relatively easy money to people whose alternatives are pretty grim. Africa is a rough damn place to live. And my understanding is that most poachers use AK-47s, not tranquilizer guns. It seems they're easier to come by there than a steak dinner, which ties in the international small arms market. Of course, the most effective solution to what is obviously a huge problem is, unfortunately, not as immediately apparent. I sure don't know it.
Click to expand...
If adequately armed game wardens come across poachers, then the problem, shall we say, tends to solve itself. And you are correct about the preferred tool for poachers being an AK variant as opposed to a tranquilizer gun. The are cheaper and infinitely more plentiful in Sub-Saharan Africa. The ban is eesntially another example of the "law as a blunt instrument" theory. I seriously doubt that many Americans are out there trying to buy products made from ivory, rhino horn, tiger nuts, etc when a simple dose of Viagra will do the job. Nor do we mark our passage to manhood by receiving a dagger with a rhino horn handle. The demand for luxury goods made out of ivory seems to be satisfied from existing pre-ban stock or mammoth ivory in the U.S. But we can't punish those who support the activities of the poachers and let those who actually follow the rules be and permit countries that need the money to sell some of their legally obtained stock, now can we?
 
That seems like a pretty fair assessment, Joe.

One other thing that just occurred to me.
hevy ev's, dude, it's really not cool to judge somebody because of where they're from. I mean, if I said, "This hevy ev's guy is from Mississippi, he doesn't care about animal rights, civil rights, fair trade, or human rights. He's probably just some redneck," you would be really pissed. And you would be right to be pissed. This is an international forum. To a very limited extent, we are ambassadors for the USA. Let's be good ones. That doesn't mean we have to agree but we should be civil. And as for Dr. Heelhooks's use of profanity in his initial post, well, he doesn't represent my country. Sweden can take care of their own. :D
Sermon ends here.
 
The issue I have with this ban is that since there is no significant illegal ivory trade in the US why are they banning the sales of the ancient material?
It is my understanding that all the legal and poached elephant is going to China and Japan.
 
It is ironic that South Africa has just been given permission for a one off sale of 51 metric tons of Ivory. About half the current stockpile. This ivory is as a result of culling, naturally dying animals and breakages. All the proceeds of the sale, to China and approved by CITES, will go back into Elephant conservation.

We have no poaching problem in South Africa but the increase in Elephant numbers in the national parks means that the only way to control the population is culling. It is an unpleasant process which requires an entire herd to be destroyed including the little ones.

It is a very contentious issue as to wether a sale of legal ivory is beneficial to the Elephants. Some say it will stimulate the demand for ivory and increase poaching. Conservationists here argue that we really need the revenue that the sale will bring for added security and land.
A very difficult issue.

As for the rest of Africa...the continent is a basket case and within the next 30 years much of the wildlife north of Southern Africa will be eaten...... all the bans in the world will not prevent that.

For those interested... http://www.southafrica.info/about/sustainable/ivory-180708.htm
 
The language is to strong for me to comment on this one. So, list it as elephant task or something along them lines. --------:D
 
The ban on animal products whether ivory ,fur or anything else is never based on rational
thought but on the emotions of a few fanatics and duck squeezers and their well funded lobbies. The damage these people have done to the indians here in northern saskatchewan who had relied on the fur trade for hundreds of years is unimaginable unless you were here to see it with your own eyes. Now they are trying to do the same thing to the seal hunt on our east coast even though seals are not only not endangered but are so over populated that they are damaging other species of fish.

The animal lobby uses 30 year old photos and blatant lies and has even caused collisions with much smaller sealing vessels. These are fascists who have decided that they should have the right to control what everyone else does because their emotions gives them the right.

Here in Saskatchewan a meat packing plant has just closed down because of constant harassment complaints have bankrupted them even though they were completly false.
This has put dozens of people out of work and pretty much killed a small town. All because a few people in Calgary and Vancouver do not like the idea of processing horsemeat.

Even the gopher derby ,an annual event designed to clear out some of the vermin that infest our fields had to be canceled because people who don't live here have decided they have the right to tell us how to live. Not only are gophers a menance they kill dozens of horses(ironically) a year and cost millions in damages and lost habitat for other animals.

These people are nothing but fascists in ivory towers(pun intended) who know nothing about the animals they are trying to save or what it is like to live here. If you don't want to use ivory or animal products I have no problem but when you try to force me to live by your rules and steal my civil liberties you can go to hell.
 
Alfaholic said:
As for the rest of Africa...the continent is a basket case and within the next 30 years much of the wildlife north of Southern Africa will be eaten...... all the bans in the world will not prevent that.
Click to expand...

+1. I'm not an animal rights activist, true. And cheers to Dr. Heelhook for taking a few jabs after that initial post - calmer minds and all that. But it still seems to me that human rights in many African countries is a more worthy subject to be frustrated about. Of course poaching, in all its forms, is very bad and deserves the disgust I imagine most of us feel about it. But I think it's a long way from the worst things that have happened in Africa in our lifetimes.

And I guess since I said all that, it's too late to complain about how many of these types of discussions are popping up in this area lately...although I guess this one didn't start out that way.
 
+1 Unsub

I lived in Alaska in the early 70's. People in the lower 48 made laws that effected us and our way of life without any idea as to what that way of life was. To a Yuppy in Southern.Calif. the Eskimo annual seal hunt was senseless slaughter. To a small Village on the Bearing sea it was life or death. ( not a Safeway in a hundred miles)
 
sharpeknives said:
+1 Unsub

I lived in Alaska in the early 70's. People in the lower 48 made laws that effected us and our way of life without any idea as to what that way of life was. To a Yuppy in Southern.Calif. the Eskimo annual seal hunt was senseless slaughter. To a small Village on the Bearing sea it was life or death. ( not a Safeway in a hundred miles)
Click to expand...
Good point, Andy. The same people who bemoan the loss of the native culture because of the oil business try to deny the very same natives the right to engage in cultural activities they they have been doing for millenia. I seriously doubt that these folks even want the natives to hunt the caribou and moose either, but saying they do suits their agenda. As for the previous comment about all of the animals north of South Africa being eaten in 30 years, the scarier part is whether or not their will be any people left to eat them in 30 years.
 
jdm61 said:
The answer ro one of your questions is that, in the minds of many buyers, there isn''t a "better" material to subsitute for ivory. That is why a really nice stag carver, whihc is probably the runner-up in perference might cost you $50-60 and a block of presentation grade mammoth ivory in some of the rare colors like blue or red can run you as much as $400. The ban on the ivory trade from legitimate souces, like government stockpiles of elephants that died from natural causes, legally hunted or culled animals and confiscated tusks actually serves, IMO, to hinder the anti-poaching effort. Like others have said, the money could be used to hire and equip more game wardens. Those guys are doing the best they can and they are making headway, but they have traqdtionally been outnumbered AND outgunned by the poachers in certain areas of Africa. In the areas where they have been succesfull, you are seeing instances where you have an "overpopulation" of elephants in certain areas.
Click to expand...

sharpeknives said:
I personally like ivory. I do have a small stock-pile. (Mammoth and walrus that I know is pre ban because I've had it since 1974.)
I watched a documentary on elephant poaching. Since then I have refused to use elephant ivory. One thing that was discussed in the film was the warehouses of confiscated ivory, and that which was recovered from the bodies of animals that died of natural causes. They were talking about releasing tagged ivory to the world market. Then using the money to fund their game reserves and hire more game wardens. This would also drive the price and demand for illegal ivory down. Thus putting poachers out of business.
Dr Heelhook, as per your post I take it that you are an animal advocate. How would you feel about this. I am curious to your feelings on this matter.
Click to expand...

Well, personally I just don't understand why ivory, rhino horn etc. is so extremely important to people, just to make knife handles out of it. I mean there are tons of different materials you can use to make a knife handle. But if it actually is that important (which I guess it must be, since people are ready to pay so much for it) I guess what you're proposing might be a way to make the best out of a bad situation.

The only problem about it though, is that it seems pretty hard to know for sure that the ivory you're buying actually is produced from animals deceased from natural causes, especially since it has to be transported from very far away. Since there are so much money involved, people are of course going claim that the ivory they sell is legal, eventhough it's not. The benefit of banning ivory alltogether is of course that you don't have to worry about this at all.

But like I said, if people are going to buy ivory anyway, nomatter if it's legal or not, the suggestion you're talking about might be the best alternative after all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top