The Issue of Ivory

drac2k · 10th October 2017, 11:19 PM

David, You have caught the fulcrum of my argument.The African and Asian law enforcement agencies have limited resources and thus often only offer token enforcement in endangered species protection; this infusion of money would greatly enhance attitudes and efforts.Yes the protection of these animals would seem to be a self-defeating effort as more and more protection would lead to less money, however, these games preserves once established could transition into more effective models and expand to accommodate tourists with cameras and not guns.It could offer jobs to the local inhabitants, some who poach because they have no other means of livelihood.
If that source of revenue isn't sufficient than how about this for another idea; worldwide all governments could offer a 12-month grace period on ivory, where anyone who brings a piece or pieces to the government agency can have that ivory registered with them and microchipped for a fee and afterward it would be legal.When the 12 month period ends all subsequent ivory can be handled in an appropriate way.These funds can be managed and doled out accordingly based on merit and need to the preserves.We would be talking about hundreds of millions of dollars.
In conclusion, let me state that maybe my ideas have flaws, but they are constructive ideas, which I hope beget other and better ideas because bemoaning the demise of noble beasts at the hands of man or crushing ivory just doesn't help.

A. G. Maisey · 10th October 2017, 11:39 PM

And you, drac, have endorsed my argument for management.

In this matter there is really only one way forward, and it is risk identification + risk control + management.

In essence this seemingly complicated problem is really a relatively simple management problem, all it requires is commitment and money to solve it.

Regrettably both these commodities always seem to be in short supply for anything that is deemed to be either politically unnecessary or commercially unprofitable.

drac2k · 11th October 2017, 03:14 AM

Wow; maybe world peace really is possible.

A. G. Maisey · 11th October 2017, 05:36 AM

Of course World Peace is possible --- just nuke everybody who disagrees with one.

Easy.

David · 11th October 2017, 03:34 PM

And here we are, as far off-track from discussion of keris as possible, discussing nuclear war. Though admittedly i am as much at fault as any for our diversion you will have noticed in my last post that i also repeatedly call to bring this discussion in towards the particulars that do apply to our specific topic. For instance, if someone knows of petitions or organizations that are lobbying for collectors rights when to comes to antique ivory items i would love to hear about them. If someone can suggest people in specific governments that we can write to to state our cases, please bring that to the forum. I believe we can all save our person world philosophies and political preferences for Facebook or some forum more pertinent to such discussions. Thanks!

A. G. Maisey · 11th October 2017, 10:25 PM

I agree with you completely David. We are most certainly off the topic of keris.

However, when we begin to discuss the topic of ivory, even though that topic may be related in some degree to the topic of keris, we are compelled to involve ourselves in discussion of cultural and societal attitudes and changes to those attitudes. Failure to do so deprives any discussion of ivory in the context of the present day, of any meaning at all.

The people who will make the decisions in respect of ivory are politicians.

Politicians are heavily influenced by the people, both as individuals and as groups, whom they believe sway public opinion.

Politicians make their decisions based upon their own belief of the expected result of any decision, as that result is perceived by their electorate.

In other words politicians constantly count votes.

Do collectors who have an interest in ivory have any political clout at all?

I would suggest not.

Can we expect controls on ivory to become more stringent in the near future?

I believe that we can. I am not alone in this belief.
A very good friend who is a citizen of the USA gifted me his collection of ivory keris hilts because he is in fear of the possibility that possession of ivory in any form will become illegal in the USA in the foreseeable future. My friend is a highly respected authority on SE Asian art, and a very pragmatic person.

David, in an earlier post I mentioned the pendulum theory. This is not my invention, it is an idea that has many applications and has been used widely in many fields for a long time.
The problem with it is that the speed of the pendulum swing is not a part of the equation. Right now the pendulum is still swinging towards the place where it can go no further in that direction. We can expect that it will be a very long time before it starts to swing back again. By that time I venture to say that most, if not all, people reading this will be dead.

So, we are now in the position of the man standing in the middle of the road with a steamroller moving towards him. Our only decision is whether we move to one side and let it go past, or try to stop it and be crushed.

If I lived in some country other than the one I do live in, I would not identify myself by engaging in any discussion of this nature, let alone a discussion that can be read by everybody in the known world. Government bureaucracies have long memories, and the memories of some misguided activists can be even longer.

We all reap the rewards of our own actions.

At the present time, and depending upon a number of factors, including our place of residence, any action taken to try to stop that Ivory Steamroller is very likely to have a negative reward.

Think before acting.

Laowang · 12th October 2017, 01:22 AM

Just to be clear, the proposed UK ban is in regard to the purchasing and selling of ivory, not the possession of ivory. The US ban is in regard to the purchasing and selling of African ivory, not the possession of African ivory. The burden of proof is on the seller/buyer, which certainly complicates things for people like us, who appreciate antique ivory, as the average customs agent cannot see the difference.

But, there is no discussion within the US about banning the possession of ivory, and to think that the US government, or agents thereof, will raid American homes and confiscate their ivory is sheer paranoia. I own a few ivory keris hilts, and I have no fear of their loss. As a matter of fact, I've purchased a couple off of eBay since the ban was put in place, and have yet to have a customs agent knocking on my door.

It is worth noting that South Africa will soon allow again the farming of black rhinos, which many people fear will exacerbate poaching. To farm rhinos (or elephants) for the purposes of harvesting their horns (or ivory) requires both land and capital; poachers often have neither, but in many parts of the world firearms are comparatively cheap, conservation rangers are scarce and underpaid, and rhinos and elephants can be found in the wild or on national parks, if you're willing to do the work and take the risk. The logic of the CITES agreement is that stopping all trade reduces poaching because you can't launder illegally harvested horn or ivory as legally-farmed horn or ivory. It's not a perfect solution, and undoubtedly has many flaws, but would we prefer a world where rhinos and elephants do not exist outside of zoos?

10th October 2017, 11:19 PM	#1
drac2k Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Posts: 1,258	David, You have caught the fulcrum of my argument.The African and Asian law enforcement agencies have limited resources and thus often only offer token enforcement in endangered species protection; this infusion of money would greatly enhance attitudes and efforts.Yes the protection of these animals would seem to be a self-defeating effort as more and more protection would lead to less money, however, these games preserves once established could transition into more effective models and expand to accommodate tourists with cameras and not guns.It could offer jobs to the local inhabitants, some who poach because they have no other means of livelihood. If that source of revenue isn't sufficient than how about this for another idea; worldwide all governments could offer a 12-month grace period on ivory, where anyone who brings a piece or pieces to the government agency can have that ivory registered with them and microchipped for a fee and afterward it would be legal.When the 12 month period ends all subsequent ivory can be handled in an appropriate way.These funds can be managed and doled out accordingly based on merit and need to the preserves.We would be talking about hundreds of millions of dollars. In conclusion, let me state that maybe my ideas have flaws, but they are constructive ideas, which I hope beget other and better ideas because bemoaning the demise of noble beasts at the hands of man or crushing ivory just doesn't help.

10th October 2017, 11:39 PM	#2
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,015	And you, drac, have endorsed my argument for management. In this matter there is really only one way forward, and it is risk identification + risk control + management. In essence this seemingly complicated problem is really a relatively simple management problem, all it requires is commitment and money to solve it. Regrettably both these commodities always seem to be in short supply for anything that is deemed to be either politically unnecessary or commercially unprofitable.

11th October 2017, 03:14 AM	#3
drac2k Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Posts: 1,258	Wow; maybe world peace really is possible.

11th October 2017, 05:36 AM	#4
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,015	Of course World Peace is possible --- just nuke everybody who disagrees with one. Easy.

11th October 2017, 03:34 PM	#5
David Keris forum moderator Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Nova Scotia Posts: 7,218	And here we are, as far off-track from discussion of keris as possible, discussing nuclear war. Though admittedly i am as much at fault as any for our diversion you will have noticed in my last post that i also repeatedly call to bring this discussion in towards the particulars that do apply to our specific topic. For instance, if someone knows of petitions or organizations that are lobbying for collectors rights when to comes to antique ivory items i would love to hear about them. If someone can suggest people in specific governments that we can write to to state our cases, please bring that to the forum. I believe we can all save our person world philosophies and political preferences for Facebook or some forum more pertinent to such discussions. Thanks!

11th October 2017, 10:25 PM	#6
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,015	I agree with you completely David. We are most certainly off the topic of keris. However, when we begin to discuss the topic of ivory, even though that topic may be related in some degree to the topic of keris, we are compelled to involve ourselves in discussion of cultural and societal attitudes and changes to those attitudes. Failure to do so deprives any discussion of ivory in the context of the present day, of any meaning at all. The people who will make the decisions in respect of ivory are politicians. Politicians are heavily influenced by the people, both as individuals and as groups, whom they believe sway public opinion. Politicians make their decisions based upon their own belief of the expected result of any decision, as that result is perceived by their electorate. In other words politicians constantly count votes. Do collectors who have an interest in ivory have any political clout at all? I would suggest not. Can we expect controls on ivory to become more stringent in the near future? I believe that we can. I am not alone in this belief. A very good friend who is a citizen of the USA gifted me his collection of ivory keris hilts because he is in fear of the possibility that possession of ivory in any form will become illegal in the USA in the foreseeable future. My friend is a highly respected authority on SE Asian art, and a very pragmatic person. David, in an earlier post I mentioned the pendulum theory. This is not my invention, it is an idea that has many applications and has been used widely in many fields for a long time. The problem with it is that the speed of the pendulum swing is not a part of the equation. Right now the pendulum is still swinging towards the place where it can go no further in that direction. We can expect that it will be a very long time before it starts to swing back again. By that time I venture to say that most, if not all, people reading this will be dead. So, we are now in the position of the man standing in the middle of the road with a steamroller moving towards him. Our only decision is whether we move to one side and let it go past, or try to stop it and be crushed. If I lived in some country other than the one I do live in, I would not identify myself by engaging in any discussion of this nature, let alone a discussion that can be read by everybody in the known world. Government bureaucracies have long memories, and the memories of some misguided activists can be even longer. We all reap the rewards of our own actions. At the present time, and depending upon a number of factors, including our place of residence, any action taken to try to stop that Ivory Steamroller is very likely to have a negative reward. Think before acting.

12th October 2017, 01:22 AM	#7
Laowang Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: 40˚00' N, 83˚00' W Posts: 52	Just to be clear, the proposed UK ban is in regard to the purchasing and selling of ivory, not the possession of ivory. The US ban is in regard to the purchasing and selling of African ivory, not the possession of African ivory. The burden of proof is on the seller/buyer, which certainly complicates things for people like us, who appreciate antique ivory, as the average customs agent cannot see the difference. But, there is no discussion within the US about banning the possession of ivory, and to think that the US government, or agents thereof, will raid American homes and confiscate their ivory is sheer paranoia. I own a few ivory keris hilts, and I have no fear of their loss. As a matter of fact, I've purchased a couple off of eBay since the ban was put in place, and have yet to have a customs agent knocking on my door. It is worth noting that South Africa will soon allow again the farming of black rhinos, which many people fear will exacerbate poaching. To farm rhinos (or elephants) for the purposes of harvesting their horns (or ivory) requires both land and capital; poachers often have neither, but in many parts of the world firearms are comparatively cheap, conservation rangers are scarce and underpaid, and rhinos and elephants can be found in the wild or on national parks, if you're willing to do the work and take the risk. The logic of the CITES agreement is that stopping all trade reduces poaching because you can't launder illegally harvested horn or ivory as legally-farmed horn or ivory. It's not a perfect solution, and undoubtedly has many flaws, but would we prefer a world where rhinos and elephants do not exist outside of zoos?