I'm confused about your position. I asked what Knife Rights' position was on the current limited federal ban, which allows sale of pre-ban ivory and all other types of non-elephant ivory. You said that the official stance is the same as it is on the state bans, which block all ivory trading. Now you say you're for the existing limited ban?
Even by your own estimates (which, to be fair, I think you got from USFW estimates), the feds find only 10 percent of the blood ivory that enters the United States. And the feds have seized several tons recently, not counting the states. The feds, based on their experience with the limited ban that you support, say that limited ban actually encourages illegal trading in ivory.
Knife Rights' own position on proving whether ivory is legal or illegal is that it is too expensive for owners to go through a testing process rigorous enough to establish the true identity of ivory. That's the fly in the ointment. Without such testing, only a total ban can stop illegal ivory trading; and that testing is too expensive to implement.
I'm sorry, I misunderstood you when you asked the question about the current ban. The current federal ban that we have had since 1989 is acceptable to almost everybody and I think would make most people happy. Kniferights is not fighting that ban. The one we are fighting is the new one that the President signed into law by executive order early last year. It is actually our "current" federal ban. It just has not been enforced yet. That's where the confusion comes from. We actually have two "current" federal bans. One we live under now, since 1989 and one that is actually law now but has not yet been enforced.
Those estimates of ten percent were from the ETIS studies and the one from "Out of Africa". That's where I got my figures and I am pretty sure that's where USF&W got them too. There were actually three different estimates arrived at by the research, 10%, 14% and 17% catch rate, everyone uses the 10% figure to be on the safe side.
The feds have not seized several tons recently. My figures show that between the years 2008 and present it falls below the lowest measured category, that being under 2000 kg in that whole 6 year period. Not 2000kg a year, throughout the whole period. And let me remind you, it doesn't even fall into that category, it falls below the lowest measured category, that's why it is said to be "statistically insignificant". That includes the ton that Gorden got caught with. I'm not sure where you arrived at "several tons recently" (please don't show me an article from some internet magazine)
The states don't count seized ivory, it all gets turned over to the feds, and gets counted in their totals. At least not until New York and New Jersey passed laws banning the sale of ivory.
I'm not sure how expensive the testing is. Until the
new federal ban we were considered innocent until proven guilty, the accuser had to prove that the ivory in question was illegal. The writing in the new federal ban puts the onus of proof on the accused, we are now assumed guilty until proven innocent, if the law is enforced as written. So now the owner of the ivory would have to bear that expense, what ever it is.
With the methods the feds use now to prove guilt there is no need for any testing at all. They don't seize a bunch of ivory and then try to decide if it is pre-act or post-act. From time to time they just contact people in the ivory business and try to sell them something that is illegal. They do it through email, internet contact, (like on Blade Forums), over the phone and in person. Everyone one I know that is in the ivory business gets checked a few times a year in this way. It's a fact on life being in the business. We know it happens and we accept it. I know this is true because I have gone into my local USF&W office and I tell the Chief there that I had a call about this or that, and I ask him, "Was that you guys?" He will say with a muted smile "Well, I can neither confirm nor deny..."
One time there was a guy calling all of us in the business with the same story, he had sixteen walrus heads (skulls and tusks) that he inherited from his father who visited Alaska in the late 1970's and traded for them or bought them. This guy wanted to sell them, he said he was from Florida. They were illegal because the Marine Mammal act of '72 made it illegal for "white guys" to buy them. I told him the only legal thing for him to do with them is surrender them over to the USF&W service, he would not be charged in a case like this. A little later we heard of sixteen heads that had been seized from a guy in southeast Alaska, these was the same sixteen heads the feds were trying to pedal. Eventually they were able to get a guy from Blade Forums to trade one of his knives for a couple of these tusks. They caught him and prosecuted him.
So just because only ten percent of the illicit ivory gets caught at the border don't think that means they only catch ten percent of the bad guys, I am pretty sure they get them all.
We, in the industry, have all known of a few guys that we suspected were doing the wrong thing, and you know what, they all got caught. And they were all caught by undercover agents and sting operations. We are all being watched constantly.
One more thing, just because we read that the USF&W agents at the border are understaffed, that doesn't mean they are the only ones watching the border. There are customs agents and TSA too, they are all watching. Then, if stuff gets buy, there are the USF&W field agents in every medium to large city of every state, Fairbanks has 4 or 5 stationed here all the time. Anchorage has more, and when our bear season opens up here, we get a lot more up here temporarily. People don't last long in illicit wildlife activities up here, I hope it's the same all over the U.S.
