-
The BladeForums.com 2024 Traditional Knife is available! Price is $250 ea (shipped within CONUS).
Order here: https://www.bladeforums.com/help/2024-traditional/
Rhinoceros horn!?!
- Thread starter TAH
- Start date
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2006
- Messages
- 207
I do not see anything all that appealing about the rhino horn but ivory is another story.Who would have thought one of the most beautiful materials around would cause such a ugly debate. I LOVE IVORY!!!!!!
- Joined
- Feb 5, 1999
- Messages
- 1,068
David,
What's inside this cynical noggin is this: I spent a career protecting animals and the environment. I've even been shot at for it. I managed to retire to a nice little area here in So Oregon where I have deer, turkeys, and all other manner of wildlife around me. I'm also surrounded by a slew of eco wacko environmentalists. I get daily doses of their drivel.
If you really want to see where they are headed, google Green Anarchy. That's some of their favorite reading material.
I can tell you this from experience: not one of the many preservationists I have ever met has contributed one penny toward helping anything other than their own ego. I hear the BS about how they can't conscience hurting an animal, but they take a deer skin for their drum circles any time. And let's kill trees to build houses, but only our houses.
We did have a Lt on the local volunteer fire dept. He's currently doing 7 years at Club Fed for being a gas can carrying member of the Earth Liberation Front. It seems, IIRC, that he was involved in burning down a ski resort at Vail and a horse facility in Eastern Oregon. He also recruited quite a posse to become fire fighters. As soon as they got their fire science training paid for and done, they promptly quit. I'm sure that he feels like a political prisoner.
I attended the eco wacko meetings locally, to see what was going on. What was going on was the biggest campaign of deceit and lies about timber harvest that you could imagine. The stated goal was to sue and sue again so there would be no money in timber sales, and to burn out those mills that didn't get the picture. All for the environment. And they do want to reduce the world's population substantially, just at someone else's expense.
A conservationist wants to maintain animal populations for maximum sustainable yeild. A preservationist wants zero take of anything and regression to the stone age. Environmentalists are political activists. They spout drivel they don't understand and reject reason over tree hugging about every time.
So what my career taught me, through observation and experience, not training, is that the conservationists ante up a pile of money for habitat improvement and other things that stimulate the ability for wildlife to flourish. The other side would rather see the the forests burn down before anyone can use any of it. Except for growing dope. Preservationists are consumer organisms that provide little return for their existance.
I was the person who authorized the Exxon Valdez to enter California for repairs. That was after they produced a 16 mile long oil slick that missed Ca and went into Mexico. The fuuny thing is that the many protesters who were there all we running powerboats. Their sails may have been up yet they were using their engines. And the one boat that had a banner supporting Exxon got rammed and pushed almost ashore. Only they have a right to be heard.
So, after the self righteous drivel over something Ron Lake didn't post and may have made 40 years ago, I decided to state an opposing view.
My head really is screwed on straight and my eyes are wide open. And that drivel is as shallow now as it was before I retired to a quiet little place in Oregon. And BTW, colleges here in OR give degrees in environmental activism. And we wonder why we are having a hard time competing in the world market.
Gene
What's inside this cynical noggin is this: I spent a career protecting animals and the environment. I've even been shot at for it. I managed to retire to a nice little area here in So Oregon where I have deer, turkeys, and all other manner of wildlife around me. I'm also surrounded by a slew of eco wacko environmentalists. I get daily doses of their drivel.
If you really want to see where they are headed, google Green Anarchy. That's some of their favorite reading material.
I can tell you this from experience: not one of the many preservationists I have ever met has contributed one penny toward helping anything other than their own ego. I hear the BS about how they can't conscience hurting an animal, but they take a deer skin for their drum circles any time. And let's kill trees to build houses, but only our houses.
We did have a Lt on the local volunteer fire dept. He's currently doing 7 years at Club Fed for being a gas can carrying member of the Earth Liberation Front. It seems, IIRC, that he was involved in burning down a ski resort at Vail and a horse facility in Eastern Oregon. He also recruited quite a posse to become fire fighters. As soon as they got their fire science training paid for and done, they promptly quit. I'm sure that he feels like a political prisoner.
I attended the eco wacko meetings locally, to see what was going on. What was going on was the biggest campaign of deceit and lies about timber harvest that you could imagine. The stated goal was to sue and sue again so there would be no money in timber sales, and to burn out those mills that didn't get the picture. All for the environment. And they do want to reduce the world's population substantially, just at someone else's expense.
A conservationist wants to maintain animal populations for maximum sustainable yeild. A preservationist wants zero take of anything and regression to the stone age. Environmentalists are political activists. They spout drivel they don't understand and reject reason over tree hugging about every time.
So what my career taught me, through observation and experience, not training, is that the conservationists ante up a pile of money for habitat improvement and other things that stimulate the ability for wildlife to flourish. The other side would rather see the the forests burn down before anyone can use any of it. Except for growing dope. Preservationists are consumer organisms that provide little return for their existance.
I was the person who authorized the Exxon Valdez to enter California for repairs. That was after they produced a 16 mile long oil slick that missed Ca and went into Mexico. The fuuny thing is that the many protesters who were there all we running powerboats. Their sails may have been up yet they were using their engines. And the one boat that had a banner supporting Exxon got rammed and pushed almost ashore. Only they have a right to be heard.
So, after the self righteous drivel over something Ron Lake didn't post and may have made 40 years ago, I decided to state an opposing view.
My head really is screwed on straight and my eyes are wide open. And that drivel is as shallow now as it was before I retired to a quiet little place in Oregon. And BTW, colleges here in OR give degrees in environmental activism. And we wonder why we are having a hard time competing in the world market.
Gene
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2003
- Messages
- 1,362
eisman
Platinum Member
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2009
- Messages
- 6,999
And...(from our good friends at NPR)...
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=94979969
Note the dealer would buy "thousands of tons of rhino horn" for knife handles. Any guess on how many animals that would take?
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=94979969
Note the dealer would buy "thousands of tons of rhino horn" for knife handles. Any guess on how many animals that would take?
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 9, 2000
- Messages
- 29,205
The horns are being cut off of Rhinos in an effort to reduce the poaching of this endangered animal. If the horn comes from a supply taken legally, and not from poached animals, then I have no problem with its use.
- Joined
- Nov 17, 1999
- Messages
- 3,061
Since this thread seems to have expanded very quickly I admittedly did not read all of it.
Rhino Horn is the favorite of Middle Eastern Jambiya Makers, has been used there for centuries and those who use it often charge $30,000 for their knives with this handle, gold and jewel inlays, etc. Unlike Japanese Makers who painstakling craft the blade and apply a removable handle, Jambiya Makers are not at all concerned with the blade but the handle (which shows above the belt). A majestic animal is often killed so an overweight human can have a status symbol.
With that said, due to the loss of habitat, poaching, low birth rate and other factors Rhinos have been decreasing in numbers for a long time. Same with elephants. These are amazing creatures and its sad to think of the ignorance that removes them from the earth. They are targeted and often are easy prey due to their size. Man is removing them from existence and only Man can help increase their numbers by stopping what they are doing.
I have never nor will I ever own a knife with elephant Ivory, Rhino Horn or any other such creature. No matter what I hear of the harvesting methods it is not worth the risk to condone or support the use of these materials.
Rhino Horn is the favorite of Middle Eastern Jambiya Makers, has been used there for centuries and those who use it often charge $30,000 for their knives with this handle, gold and jewel inlays, etc. Unlike Japanese Makers who painstakling craft the blade and apply a removable handle, Jambiya Makers are not at all concerned with the blade but the handle (which shows above the belt). A majestic animal is often killed so an overweight human can have a status symbol.
With that said, due to the loss of habitat, poaching, low birth rate and other factors Rhinos have been decreasing in numbers for a long time. Same with elephants. These are amazing creatures and its sad to think of the ignorance that removes them from the earth. They are targeted and often are easy prey due to their size. Man is removing them from existence and only Man can help increase their numbers by stopping what they are doing.
I have never nor will I ever own a knife with elephant Ivory, Rhino Horn or any other such creature. No matter what I hear of the harvesting methods it is not worth the risk to condone or support the use of these materials.
- Joined
- Feb 5, 1999
- Messages
- 1,068
I left a voice mail for Ron. I don't know whether he's at home or gone, but when he checks his voice mail he will know about the thread.
Gene
Gene
The original post has generated about the most contentious responses I have seen in some time. Much of this response is really outside the scope of the original post. Consequently, I am hesitant to add my comments.
I don't believe the original post was intended to elicit one's views on the broad topic of conservation. Neither was it intended to elicit one's ethical views or eating preferences. That being said, IMHO there is a difference between the use of material from an extinct animal and a living species and, to the extent that the distinction can be made, I have no problem using the former for knife handles.
Having said that, we are left with material from living species. I am less comfortable with any arguments promoting their use. However, I would not presume to try to foist my personal views on others. When I was young, it was rare to see deer even in the Shenandoah National Park. Now they are everywhere. I even see them in my neighbor's yard. I believe it has been illegal to use even shed antlers on knife handles in VA. This may have changed this year. I don't know the history of this prohibition, but it is clear that today it cannot have much relation to specie endangerment.
I have a different take on elephant ivory or rhino tusk. Even when the use of these materials is legal, it results in at least a perceived demand for these materials that leads to more illegal activity. Herein lies my problem with the use of these and similar materials. Whether the ivory is pre-ban or not and whether it results from Government confiscation is not a compelling argument in my opinion. Neither is conservation, however defined, really persuasive for me. Unless the use of pre-ban ivory and similar materials can be proven to not promote further poaching of animals, I choose not to have it used as handle materials. "[O]ld stock, recycled antique sources, ..." or conservation has very little to do with influencing my personal decision. What does influence it is my belief that as long as these materials are used, there will be a perceived demand for these and similar materials that will lead to more poaching of these animals to the detriment of ours and future generations enjoyment of these animals.
One can argue that, notwithstanding any forbearance on our part on the use of these materials, others will not, so we may as well use these materials when we know they come from legitimate sources. That is an individual choice that I choose not to debate.
Paul
I don't believe the original post was intended to elicit one's views on the broad topic of conservation. Neither was it intended to elicit one's ethical views or eating preferences. That being said, IMHO there is a difference between the use of material from an extinct animal and a living species and, to the extent that the distinction can be made, I have no problem using the former for knife handles.
Having said that, we are left with material from living species. I am less comfortable with any arguments promoting their use. However, I would not presume to try to foist my personal views on others. When I was young, it was rare to see deer even in the Shenandoah National Park. Now they are everywhere. I even see them in my neighbor's yard. I believe it has been illegal to use even shed antlers on knife handles in VA. This may have changed this year. I don't know the history of this prohibition, but it is clear that today it cannot have much relation to specie endangerment.
I have a different take on elephant ivory or rhino tusk. Even when the use of these materials is legal, it results in at least a perceived demand for these materials that leads to more illegal activity. Herein lies my problem with the use of these and similar materials. Whether the ivory is pre-ban or not and whether it results from Government confiscation is not a compelling argument in my opinion. Neither is conservation, however defined, really persuasive for me. Unless the use of pre-ban ivory and similar materials can be proven to not promote further poaching of animals, I choose not to have it used as handle materials. "[O]ld stock, recycled antique sources, ..." or conservation has very little to do with influencing my personal decision. What does influence it is my belief that as long as these materials are used, there will be a perceived demand for these and similar materials that will lead to more poaching of these animals to the detriment of ours and future generations enjoyment of these animals.
One can argue that, notwithstanding any forbearance on our part on the use of these materials, others will not, so we may as well use these materials when we know they come from legitimate sources. That is an individual choice that I choose not to debate.
Paul
DavidZ
Gold Member
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2004
- Messages
- 4,265
Yes we do, and we do it all day every day, 24/7 and 365, since the beginning of time. You use all that nature has to offer, all day, every day. Your very existence depends on it! Air, water, food, everything. do not try to fool yourself. If you did not, you would be dead!
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2006
- Messages
- 2,264
I'm with just about everyone here that poaching elephants just for ivory is wrong.
However,
Elephant's aren't immortal. They die on their own for all sorts of reasons.
It is my understanding that some African countries have large storehouses of ivory gathered from already dead elephants, and those culled from untenably large herds (they do manage larger herds sometimes so they don't all die out from starvation, etc).
This ivory is sold mostly into Japan, among other places.
In terms of volume, I suspect the amount of fresh ivory sold legally by African governments into Asia and trickling out from there probably dwarfs the amount poached, which means if your knife has an ivory handle, chances are it wasn't poached.
Some people think ivory should be treated as a sin in general to dissuade demand in any form. That only seems to be working on Americans and some Europeans, however.
Frankly, I think Mammoth ivory is 10X cooler than elephant ivory, but that's just me.
However,
Elephant's aren't immortal. They die on their own for all sorts of reasons.
It is my understanding that some African countries have large storehouses of ivory gathered from already dead elephants, and those culled from untenably large herds (they do manage larger herds sometimes so they don't all die out from starvation, etc).
This ivory is sold mostly into Japan, among other places.
In terms of volume, I suspect the amount of fresh ivory sold legally by African governments into Asia and trickling out from there probably dwarfs the amount poached, which means if your knife has an ivory handle, chances are it wasn't poached.
Some people think ivory should be treated as a sin in general to dissuade demand in any form. That only seems to be working on Americans and some Europeans, however.
Frankly, I think Mammoth ivory is 10X cooler than elephant ivory, but that's just me.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Feb 5, 1999
- Messages
- 1,068
I just spoke with Ron Lake. He doesn't do the internet.
Ron said that he has never made a fixed blade with rhino horn and that the knife in question probably has Cape Buffalo horn on it.
He said that he did get some Cape Buffalo and rhino horn years back by way an estate sale. The horn in question was taken by Teddy Roosevelt's hunting buddy, while hunting with TR in Africa. He said that he used some rhino horn from that estate on a couple of folders for the customer who provided it.
So, there is the word from the man himself. Sorry folks, no rhino horn here, nothing to see, time to move on.
Whether you find it morally reprehensible to use animal parts on your knives, would you use the parts provided by a client to put on the client's knife? Especially if said parts were lawfully taken, imported and possessed?
Gene
Ron said that he has never made a fixed blade with rhino horn and that the knife in question probably has Cape Buffalo horn on it.
He said that he did get some Cape Buffalo and rhino horn years back by way an estate sale. The horn in question was taken by Teddy Roosevelt's hunting buddy, while hunting with TR in Africa. He said that he used some rhino horn from that estate on a couple of folders for the customer who provided it.
So, there is the word from the man himself. Sorry folks, no rhino horn here, nothing to see, time to move on.
Whether you find it morally reprehensible to use animal parts on your knives, would you use the parts provided by a client to put on the client's knife? Especially if said parts were lawfully taken, imported and possessed?
Gene
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2007
- Messages
- 161
As usual, it seems that the problem is a lack of ownership combined with a scarce resource.
If elephants were raised for their ivory rather than hunted in the wild, there would be an equilibrium population that could be supported sustainably by the production and sale of ivory. It would be expensive as sin, but would actually HARNESS the desire for ivory to ensure elephants never go extinct.
Elephants will always be killed for their tusks as long as there are people (and there are) who want ivory. How we deal with that fact will probably determine the fate of the species.
The same goes for rhinos. If you think of the demand around the world for the products derived from African fauna, it's just pathetic that no one has managed to harness all that demand to ensure the ecosystems a future. Ideology gets in the way though, and people are unwilling to even look at options that include continued harvest. Even if they would work better than anything else being proposed.
It's sad.
If elephants were raised for their ivory rather than hunted in the wild, there would be an equilibrium population that could be supported sustainably by the production and sale of ivory. It would be expensive as sin, but would actually HARNESS the desire for ivory to ensure elephants never go extinct.
Elephants will always be killed for their tusks as long as there are people (and there are) who want ivory. How we deal with that fact will probably determine the fate of the species.
The same goes for rhinos. If you think of the demand around the world for the products derived from African fauna, it's just pathetic that no one has managed to harness all that demand to ensure the ecosystems a future. Ideology gets in the way though, and people are unwilling to even look at options that include continued harvest. Even if they would work better than anything else being proposed.
It's sad.
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2002
- Messages
- 2,125
I disagree with this stance.. completely ignorant to think you can create a safe supply-demand scenario with Rhino horn.
It encourages the illegal poaching and trade having ANY demand at all.
David
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2009
- Messages
- 4,421
2knife, has Ron's reputation been restored in your eye's? I am just curious, of course you are entitled to your own feelings. I, for one, would never have been able to afford one of Ron's knives regardless of the material he puts on the handle. Mark
Last edited:
I love animal parts mostly right beside my potatoes. PETA= people eating talty animals. I use Ivory and if Rhino was legal I would use it. Animals die thank goodness or we would be run over by them.
If you don't like a certain show on the tube change it, you don't like a certain knife handle buy a different knife or use a rock.
The problem is liberals that don't like meat or animal parts think everyone should do what they like,
Conservatives that don't like animal parts or meat eat something else and keep their mouth shut about what someone else eats.
Anyway I like ivory and animal parts, if you don't like that buy a knife from someone else.
I have sold every knife I have made in the last 20 years and someone doesn't mind what is on the handle.
Have a great day I just wanted to ramble.
Percy
If you don't like a certain show on the tube change it, you don't like a certain knife handle buy a different knife or use a rock.
The problem is liberals that don't like meat or animal parts think everyone should do what they like,
Conservatives that don't like animal parts or meat eat something else and keep their mouth shut about what someone else eats.
Anyway I like ivory and animal parts, if you don't like that buy a knife from someone else.
I have sold every knife I have made in the last 20 years and someone doesn't mind what is on the handle.
Have a great day I just wanted to ramble.
Percy
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2002
- Messages
- 2,125
Mark,
My problem with the presentation of this thread in general, it gives an impression of rhino horn as "interesting" or acceptable material, and this has been argued using everything else as a "cloak".
Anyone with a conscience would agree it is not. Ron Lake isn't the problem. It's attitudes like Percy, who just posted, that are the problem. If I were Ron Lake I would attempt to find these couple of past knives in rhino and rehandle, if nothing more - as a symbolic gesture.
It is a waste of time arguing with people who feel it is a very attack on their life's "liberty and pursuit of happiness".. people are sometimes idiots, through choice.
Take care,
Signing off.
Support the Rhino.
David
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2002
- Messages
- 2,125
Good post.