New Jersey Ivory ban....

VANDOO · 18th August 2014, 08:37 PM

I AM NOT FOR THE KILLING OF ANY RARE ANIMALS FOR TROPHY'S OR BODY PARTS ELEPHANTS OR RHINO INCLUDED.
REGULATION IS NEEDED FOR ITEMS ALREADY REMOVED FROM ANIMALS NO LONGER LIVING. LEGISLATION MADE BY PEOPLE WITH AN EMOTIONAL AGENDA AND OFTEN VERY LITTLE KNOWLEDGE OF THE SUBJECT IN FULL OFTEN LEADS TO POOR LAWS CONFISCATION AND DESTRUCTION WILLY NILLY. WITH NO LOGIC OR PLAN TO BENEFIT ANYONE INCLUDING THE ANIMAL TO BE SAVED, SUCH LAWS DO MORE HARM THAN GOOD. THE HYPOTHETICAL MASTER CARVER IS JUST A FOR INSTANCE AND THE THOUGHT COULD BE APPLIED TO ANY FORM OF ART IF IT WAS ELIMINATED THRU LAW.
TRUE WE COULD REPLACE ALL IVORY PARTS ON OLD WEAPONS WITH PLASTIC AND REQUIRE OWNERS TO REPLACE THEIR IVORY CARVINGS WITH PLASTIC ONES AND THEN BURN ALL IVORY IN SHAME FOR HAVING EVER KILLED AN ELEPHANT THRUOUT HISTORY.
I SUSPECT A MASTER CARVER WILL GO OUT OF BUSINESS QUICKLY CARVING PLASTIC WHEN IT CAN BE EASILY CAST SO THE SKILL CAN BE LOST WHICH IS NO BIG DEAL. AFTER ALL THE HUMAN RACE HAS MORE ARTS AND CRAFTS THAN WE NEED ALREADY. THERE ARE MORE THAN ENOUGH COUNTRY'S IN THE WORLD THAT WILL CONTINUE THEIR PRACTICES TO ELIMINATE THE SPECIES IN DEMAND IN TIME ESPECIALLY IF SOME OR THE RESOURCES THAT COULD HAVE BEEN USED TO ACQUIRE THE FUNDS TO PROTECT THOSE SPECIES ARE WASTED.
I HAVE SAID ALL I CAN AND PERHAPS MORE NO FURTHER DISCUSSION WILL CHANGE ANYTHING ESPECIALLY THE CURRENT AGENDA I JUST WONDER IN DREAD WHO THEY PLAN TO GET NEXT. SAVE THE SHARK, SAVE THE TREE, SAVE THE FOSSIL, SAVE THE TRIBAL ARTIFACT, MINERAL OR WHAT HAVE YOU, NO FUR, FEATHERS, BONE, TEETH, LEATHER, WOOD ,OIL OR COAL, ECT. AFTER ALL THERE ARE NOW SEVERAL TV PROGRAMS FEATURING NAKED HUMANS IS THAT WHERE WE ARE HEADING. I AM WAY TOO OLD AND OUT OF SHAPE TO APPEAR IN PUBLIC NAKED.

spiral · 18th August 2014, 09:24 PM

Thanks for the links David they explain it well.

I just knew about it as 12 or so years ago Jon Chapman & other leading Rhino horn sculpture "experts" had what they thought was the oldest rhino horn carved cup known tested..... to date it... they were shocked to find out that instead of being c.500 years old or some such it was post nuclear age.

Which shows even the experts can get such things wrong.

{Hence the problem.}

I understand your reaction Vandoo, but although some campaigners are emotional as you say, the likes of the NJ & NY mayors & Obama are probably not emotional about it.

There may be many factors behind the current US laws, but they could also involve international politics, so we cant discus that on this forum. {Send me a pm if you would like quick info bulletin on what I rightly or wrongly think may be a factor.}

Or maybe the worlds just turning & changing & views are changing? I don't know.

Selling captured illegal ivory to fund elephant care does seem morally bankrupt to me. Its like selling heroin & crack to fund an anti drugs measure or help druggies... It doesn't really add up when examined...{to my way of thinking anyway.}

Your last sentence is very true, I think... What's next indeed?

Hopefully something sensible & well thought out... but probably not..

spiral

drac2k · 18th August 2014, 09:51 PM

So VANDOO was right; there was a post WW2 master carver who was so good that he fooled all of the experts and as such he could have legally obtained his ivory, but based on our current laws, his work will be lost forever ?

spiral · 18th August 2014, 10:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by drac2k

So VANDOO was right; there was a post WW2 master carver who was so good that he fooled all of the experts and as such he could have legally obtained his ivory, but based on our current laws, his work will be lost forever ?

Interesting leap there...But I can see why you made it but no, it wasn't a masterpiece..

It was a very plain & naïve bowl/cup with a rough & weathered texture & deep patina, which is why it fooled the "experts" {I cant recall whether it had fake provenance as well.}

The perception being its So weathered, patined & simple it must be ancient!

But it wasn't..... it was just well faked modern crap of very little artistic value. {Ill try to get a photo of it tomorrow to illustrate.

}

Spiral

drac2k · 18th August 2014, 10:38 PM

Thanks, it would be great to see an example...........just in case I'm ever in the market for one, I wouldn't want to buy a fake.

Shakethetrees · 19th August 2014, 04:25 AM

As I read the new law and talked with people who collect who are also lawyers, as well as others in the antique auction business, I realize that you all might be missing a very important point.

When an item is seized the owner has to prove beyond any shadow of a doubt that the ivory in question is old. A coin or sterling silver tea set with maker's marks, engraved inscriptions and other information will mean absolutely nothing to a government inspector. What they need to see is original paperwork that is for the item in question, such as an 1890's bill of sale. Just because the company that made the set went out of business in 1900 is not proof enough to bank on. Paperwork is the only criteria they are willing to accept. So, a tea set with a couple of 1/4"x1/4"x1" pieces of ivory as insulators in the handle is in danger of being seized, unless new bone or other substitute insulators can be custom made and installed, and at not too small a price, I may add.

Now, the good thing I see in this: this crazy new law brings together antique weapon, musical instrument, furniture, objects d'art, and other collectors and museums in a way that any other law restricting the rights of collectors has never yet done.

In the opinions of the people I spoke to, almost universally they feel that if everybody hunkers down and lays low for a while re:any transactions, there is a more than reasonable chance this will be straightened out.

spiral · 19th August 2014, 08:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shakethetrees

As I read the new law and talked with people who collect who are also lawyers, as well as others in the antique auction business, I realize that you all might be missing a very important point.

When an item is seized the owner has to prove beyond any shadow of a doubt that the ivory in question is old. A coin or sterling silver tea set with maker's marks, engraved inscriptions and other information will mean absolutely nothing to a government inspector. What they need to see is original paperwork that is for the item in question, such as an 1890's bill of sale. Just because the company that made the set went out of business in 1900 is not proof enough to bank on. Paperwork is the only criteria they are willing to accept. So, a tea set with a couple of 1/4"x1/4"x1" pieces of ivory as insulators in the handle is in danger of being seized, unless new bone or other substitute insulators can be custom made and installed, and at not too small a price, I may add.
.

Interesting concept STT. But it seems to me you seem to have missed a very important & relevant point about documentation?

To date, such documents are not usually an 1890 bill of sail as you refer to, They are usually a certificate from, Defra {in the UK},Cities, the fish & wildlife gang or whichever relevant party, based on written reports from people they except as experts, dating such items based on their experience.

Style, manufacture date based on makers etc. all helps provide such evidence for the experts report.

Have you any evidence that is no longer how it will be done?

Spiral

18th August 2014, 08:37 PM	#1
VANDOO (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: OKLAHOMA, USA Posts: 3,138	I AM NOT FOR THE KILLING OF ANY RARE ANIMALS FOR TROPHY'S OR BODY PARTS ELEPHANTS OR RHINO INCLUDED. REGULATION IS NEEDED FOR ITEMS ALREADY REMOVED FROM ANIMALS NO LONGER LIVING. LEGISLATION MADE BY PEOPLE WITH AN EMOTIONAL AGENDA AND OFTEN VERY LITTLE KNOWLEDGE OF THE SUBJECT IN FULL OFTEN LEADS TO POOR LAWS CONFISCATION AND DESTRUCTION WILLY NILLY. WITH NO LOGIC OR PLAN TO BENEFIT ANYONE INCLUDING THE ANIMAL TO BE SAVED, SUCH LAWS DO MORE HARM THAN GOOD. THE HYPOTHETICAL MASTER CARVER IS JUST A FOR INSTANCE AND THE THOUGHT COULD BE APPLIED TO ANY FORM OF ART IF IT WAS ELIMINATED THRU LAW. TRUE WE COULD REPLACE ALL IVORY PARTS ON OLD WEAPONS WITH PLASTIC AND REQUIRE OWNERS TO REPLACE THEIR IVORY CARVINGS WITH PLASTIC ONES AND THEN BURN ALL IVORY IN SHAME FOR HAVING EVER KILLED AN ELEPHANT THRUOUT HISTORY. I SUSPECT A MASTER CARVER WILL GO OUT OF BUSINESS QUICKLY CARVING PLASTIC WHEN IT CAN BE EASILY CAST SO THE SKILL CAN BE LOST WHICH IS NO BIG DEAL. AFTER ALL THE HUMAN RACE HAS MORE ARTS AND CRAFTS THAN WE NEED ALREADY. THERE ARE MORE THAN ENOUGH COUNTRY'S IN THE WORLD THAT WILL CONTINUE THEIR PRACTICES TO ELIMINATE THE SPECIES IN DEMAND IN TIME ESPECIALLY IF SOME OR THE RESOURCES THAT COULD HAVE BEEN USED TO ACQUIRE THE FUNDS TO PROTECT THOSE SPECIES ARE WASTED. I HAVE SAID ALL I CAN AND PERHAPS MORE NO FURTHER DISCUSSION WILL CHANGE ANYTHING ESPECIALLY THE CURRENT AGENDA I JUST WONDER IN DREAD WHO THEY PLAN TO GET NEXT. SAVE THE SHARK, SAVE THE TREE, SAVE THE FOSSIL, SAVE THE TRIBAL ARTIFACT, MINERAL OR WHAT HAVE YOU, NO FUR, FEATHERS, BONE, TEETH, LEATHER, WOOD ,OIL OR COAL, ECT. AFTER ALL THERE ARE NOW SEVERAL TV PROGRAMS FEATURING NAKED HUMANS IS THAT WHERE WE ARE HEADING. I AM WAY TOO OLD AND OUT OF SHAPE TO APPEAR IN PUBLIC NAKED. Last edited by VANDOO; 19th August 2014 at 12:41 AM.

18th August 2014, 09:24 PM	#2
spiral Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 1,712	Thanks for the links David they explain it well. I just knew about it as 12 or so years ago Jon Chapman & other leading Rhino horn sculpture "experts" had what they thought was the oldest rhino horn carved cup known tested..... to date it... they were shocked to find out that instead of being c.500 years old or some such it was post nuclear age. Which shows even the experts can get such things wrong. {Hence the problem.} I understand your reaction Vandoo, but although some campaigners are emotional as you say, the likes of the NJ & NY mayors & Obama are probably not emotional about it. There may be many factors behind the current US laws, but they could also involve international politics, so we cant discus that on this forum. {Send me a pm if you would like quick info bulletin on what I rightly or wrongly think may be a factor.} Or maybe the worlds just turning & changing & views are changing? I don't know. Selling captured illegal ivory to fund elephant care does seem morally bankrupt to me. Its like selling heroin & crack to fund an anti drugs measure or help druggies... It doesn't really add up when examined...{to my way of thinking anyway.} Your last sentence is very true, I think... What's next indeed? Hopefully something sensible & well thought out... but probably not.. spiral

18th August 2014, 09:51 PM	#3
drac2k Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Posts: 1,269	So VANDOO was right; there was a post WW2 master carver who was so good that he fooled all of the experts and as such he could have legally obtained his ivory, but based on our current laws, his work will be lost forever ?

18th August 2014, 10:38 PM	#5
drac2k Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Posts: 1,269	Thanks, it would be great to see an example...........just in case I'm ever in the market for one, I wouldn't want to buy a fake.

19th August 2014, 04:25 AM	#6
Shakethetrees Member Join Date: Apr 2014 Location: Louisiana Posts: 363	As I read the new law and talked with people who collect who are also lawyers, as well as others in the antique auction business, I realize that you all might be missing a very important point. When an item is seized the owner has to prove beyond any shadow of a doubt that the ivory in question is old. A coin or sterling silver tea set with maker's marks, engraved inscriptions and other information will mean absolutely nothing to a government inspector. What they need to see is original paperwork that is for the item in question, such as an 1890's bill of sale. Just because the company that made the set went out of business in 1900 is not proof enough to bank on. Paperwork is the only criteria they are willing to accept. So, a tea set with a couple of 1/4"x1/4"x1" pieces of ivory as insulators in the handle is in danger of being seized, unless new bone or other substitute insulators can be custom made and installed, and at not too small a price, I may add. Now, the good thing I see in this: this crazy new law brings together antique weapon, musical instrument, furniture, objects d'art, and other collectors and museums in a way that any other law restricting the rights of collectors has never yet done. In the opinions of the people I spoke to, almost universally they feel that if everybody hunkers down and lays low for a while re:any transactions, there is a more than reasonable chance this will be straightened out.