Anti-Ivory Groups Take Aim at WA, IA & CA (Mammoth Included) + Fed Update

[Critter]

[Post approved for General by Spark]

Anti-Ivory forces are hard at work trying to enact more draconian state Ivory Bans. With the success we have had to date slowing down the publication of a Federal Ivory Ban (see below) and with at least the possibility we may get something done in Congress to stop the Feds completely, Clintons, HSUS, et al, have turned to the states. They passed draconian Ivory Bans in NY and NJ last year (which also included Mammoth Ivory – something the Feds aren’t touching). Bills have already filed been this year in Washington, Iowa and California (see below).

Washington State Ivory Ban Bill

In Washington State the anti-Ivory forces are hard at work trying to enact another draconian Ivory ban. House Bill 1131 has been introduced that is similar to the draconian Ivory bans enacted in New York and New Jersey last year. It also would include Mammoth Ivory in the ban.

The preamble to the bill is virtually a copy of that used in NJ, including the same lies, half-truths and misrepresentations. As with both the NY and NJ Ivory Bans, this feel-good ban would primarily hurt individuals and small businesses and there's not a shred of evidence it would do anything to save a single elephant in Africa.

If you live, work or travel in Washington State, please contact your Representative and ask them to oppose HB 1131. To locate your Legislator and/or the Legislator who represents where you, or where you work or travel you have to first identify the District, and then you can identify the Representative.

Click here for a model letter opposing HB 1131.

Iowa Ivory Ban Bill

In Iowa, Senate File 30 has been introduced that is also similar to the draconian Ivory bans enacted in New York and New Jersey last year. It also would include Mammoth Ivory in the ban.

As with both the NY and NJ Ivory Bans, this feel-good ban would primarily hurt individuals and small businesses and there's not a shred of evidence it would do anything to save a single elephant in Africa.

If you live, work or travel in Iowa, please contact your Senator and ask them to oppose SF 30. To locate your Legislator and/or the Legislator who represents where you, or where you work or travel go to: https://www.legis.iowa.gov/legislators.

Click here for a model letter opposing SF 30.

California Ivory Ban Bill

In California there is already an existing ban on Ivory import and sales, but that ban has an exemption for sale of Ivory that had been imported prior to January 1, 1977, which protected a significant portion of the Ivory owners in California at the time. Experts tell us that exemption covers millions of dollars of ivory objects in the state that don't fall into the otherwise very narrow exemptions in the existing law.

Assembly Bill 96 has been introduced that would eliminate that exemption, "taking" millions of dollars from citizens of California by making it impossible to sell their possessions that are Ivory or incorporate Ivory.

Federal Ivory Ban Update

The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service has again postponed publishing the regulation we expect will alter or revoke the Special Rule on African Elephants that allows pre-ban ivory to trade in the United States.

The latest estimate for when that might be issued is later this month or next. The delays are the direct result of opposition to the ban from those who recognize that it will only serve to punch innocent Ivory owners and will do nothing to stop poaching in Africa or the trade in poached Ivory to China, where over 90% of that Ivory is traded. We appreciate your support.

With a new Congress, the legislative and appropriations strategies opposing the Federal Ivory ban will be renewed. We are working with our allies to get an appropriations rider to prevent any money being spent to enforce a ban and also to introduce and pass bills to protect the huge investment in Ivory owned by millions of Americans. With the changes in Congress as a result of the election, we feel more confident that a legislative solution may be within reach. We will keep you updated on all this as it happens.

 

[skyhorse]

I'm sure that somewhere at a California University, students are protesting the wholesale slaughter of the Wooly Mammoth.

 

[RX-79G]

Why don't the folks who bought ivory as investments sell them before any more laws protecting endangered species kick in, and those who bought ivory to admire just keep their ivory on the shelf? The whole point of the sales bans is that as long as ivory is a commodity, elephants are going to keep getting slaughtered.

And maybe that's a bigger deal than decorative nick-knacks.

 

[Twindog]

I support the ivory ban. Elephants are in danger of being extirpated from most of their range. So many are being slaughtered for their tusks that the remaining herds have lost most of their institutional memory and mature leadership, leading to behavioral problems that reduce the herds' fitness and put them into yet more conflict with people.


Most of the ivory is poached to fund extremist terrorist movements that seek to kill Americans and strip people worldwide of their freedom.

Massive amounts of illegal ivory are coming to the United States, and even more is going to China, where it is made into trinkets. Enforcement of the ivory ban is virtually impossible in the US because groups led by Doug Ritter and others have made sure there is no enforcement money. Ritter has even tried to pitch his opposition to ivory importation as a veterans issue. I am a combat vet, and I work with a lot of vets. Ivory ownership has never once come up as an issue.

There is no effective way to distinguish legal from illegal ivory with the resources that enforcement officials are given.

Whenever Doug Ritter has been challenged on the facts, he has brought ivory traders into the discussion on this forum -- one of whom even admitted to trafficking in illegal ivory. Another was a lobbyist who told us to just go on safari to kill elephants as a way to support corrupt African governments on the assumption that they would use the money to go after poachers. What the lobbyist didn't say is that he runs a safari business on the side.

This is not a knife-rights issue. This is a test to see whether we have the courage and integrity to stand up to people like Doug Ritter and to stop the eradication of elephants.

 

[dozer2025]

America may have its flaws, but we are still the best nation in the world. The problem is, our freedom has spoiled or citizens into believing any changes to their way of life or any restrictions to anything they may or may not enjoy this a personal attack on their freedom. Your gun (which in many nations you wouldn't even be allowed to own) can only hold 15 bullets? You can't use the tusks of an endangered animal to decorate your pocketknife? Plans are being made to replace oil with more effective and clean energy sources? An unhealthy cooking oil is being taken off the shelves when there are dozens of alternate methods and oils to use? Wow, we practically live in North Korea now!
I was on Facebook and a meme asked the question "Who is the worst president in history?" A lot of people said Obama because he's the current president, but many people said Abraham Lincoln, because he didn't allow the southern states to breakaway into a slave owning separate nation. Needless to say everyone who said a Abe was white. As a privileged people we want so hard to believe that we don't have it easier than the entire world, that we will scream "Dictatorship!" At the drop of a hat!

 

[J85909266]

Yeah, I don't need ivory on my knives. Any law that works to protect endangered animals, I support.

 

[MTURBO]

Yeah, I don't need ivory on my knives. Any law that works to protect endangered animals, I support.

Even extinct mammoth ivory???

 

[dozer2025]

Deleted

 

[J85909266]

Even extinct mammoth ivory???

It would be nice if the bills included a distinction for fossil ivory, but the most important thing is fighting elephant poaching and illegal ivory trafficking. I'm not going to fight a good cause over that omission.

 

[Mark Knapp]

We have covered this issue extensively in the past. What it all boils down to is weather or not a ban on pre-act ivory in the US will save any elephants. The experts agree that none of the ivory from elephants being poached in Africa today is coming to the U.S. "None" in this case means below the smallest quantifiable amount that makes it statistically negligible. It has been stated by the experts that laws controlling the use of ivory in the U.S. have no effect on the population of elephants in Africa.

The thrust of the ivory ban in the U.S. is based on emotion and is politically motivated, not on sound science by biologists and expert wildlife managers.

The main reason for the ban given by proponents of it is to send a message to the rest of the world.

It has not, and cannot be demonstrated that banning the use of pre-act ivory in the U.S. will save a single elephant. If it was so, I would be for the ban.

Changes in the law that effect so many people so drastically should be based in sound science and passed through legislative action not executive order.

It's fine if you don't like the poaching of elephants, I don't either, but to really have a meaningful conversation about what can be done about it and weather or not a ban in the U.S. would help, you need to be more knowledgeable.

I am happy to let wildlife management experts figure out a way to help save elephants in Africa. Politicians are not experts and Animal protectionist groups are not experts. It used to be that the US Fish and Wildlife Service made decisions concerning wildlife with a basis in science, that is no longer true. Now these decisions are politically motivated. Instead of taking direction from biologists they get there direction from politicians.

Anyone that thinks this is just about weather or not Joe Blow knife maker gets to make a knife with an ivory handle is sadly misinformed. This is about retroactively making billions of dollars worth of valuable private property and family heirlooms and antiques valueless. What was legal yesterday will become illegal tomorrow. It changes three basic tenants of American law, the assumption that we are innocent until proven guilty and the 5th amendment. It's about government over-reach.

If you don't understand these things you need to study it more before you come out in favor of bans like these.

 

[RX-79G]

Even extinct mammoth ivory???

If I handed you a freshly carved ivory handle, would you be able to tell if it was mammoth or not by eye?

 

[RX-79G]

We have covered this issue extensively in the past. What it all boils down to is weather or not a ban on pre-act ivory in the US will save any elephants. The experts agree that none of the ivory from elephants being poached in Africa today is coming to the U.S. "None" in this case means below the smallest quantifiable amount that makes it statistically negligible. It has been stated by the experts that laws controlling the use of ivory in the U.S. have no effect on the population of elephants in Africa.

The thrust of the ivory ban in the U.S. is based on emotion and is politically motivated, not on sound science by biologists and expert wildlife managers.

The main reason for the ban given by proponents of it is to send a message to the rest of the world.

It has not, and cannot be demonstrated that banning the use of pre-act ivory in the U.S. will save a single elephant. If it was so, I would be for the ban.

Changes in the law that effect so many people so drastically should be based in sound science and passed through legislative action not executive order.

It's fine if you don't like the poaching of elephants, I don't either, but to really have a meaningful conversation about what can be done about it and weather or not a ban in the U.S. would help, you need to be more knowledgeable.

I am happy to let wildlife management experts figure out a way to help save elephants in Africa. Politicians are not experts and Animal protectionist groups are not experts. It used to be that the US Fish and Wildlife Service made decisions concerning wildlife with a basis in science, that is no longer true. Now these decisions are politically motivated. Instead of taking direction from biologists they get there direction from politicians.

Anyone that thinks this is just about weather or not Joe Blow knife maker gets to make a knife with an ivory handle is sadly misinformed. This is about retroactively making billions of dollars worth of valuable private property and family heirlooms and antiques valueless. What was legal yesterday will become illegal tomorrow. It changes three basic tenants of American law, the assumption that we are innocent until proven guilty and the 5th amendment. It's about government over-reach.

If you don't understand these things you need to study it more before you come out in favor of bans like these.

Elephants didn't become endangered because of events since 1977. This isn't just about science or messages: The majority of all ivory out there has significantly contributed to the devastation we have today. Maybe it is time to stop admiring the fruits of this slaughter?

Like slave plantation riches and concentration camp medical research, a lot of us don't feel that ivory should have ANY intrinsic value.

De-valuing billions is ivory means that the market value of ivory is about to take a nose dive. Awesome. It is time for the humans to grow up and stop seeing everything around them as nothing more than a crop to be harvested. Ivory has NEVER been a necessary construction material. Like dog fighting, it is something that people should recognize as sad and disgusting. Let it die.

 

[timberweasel]

I certainly think that ivory looks better on a live healthy elephant than on any man-made object. That said, images like this make me want to weep:

Photo from: http://robshumaker.com/2012/10/blood-ivory/

Somehow, destroying seized ivory seems (to me) almost as senseless as the initial act of illegal slaughter and harvest conducted by criminal elephant poachers. Almost. Maybe burning contraband ivory slows the blackmarket trade but it does not stop it. What to do with seized ivory certainly presents a very sad catch-22...

I guess until humans can be trusted to harvest elephant ivory in a sustained and ethical manner (ie. only taking the tusks from an animal that died by happenstance or natural cause) I don't need any on my knives. Mammoth and fossil ivory is another matter...

Just my layman's perspective

-Brett

 

[Mark Knapp]

I support the ivory ban. Elephants are in danger of being extirpated from most of their range. So many are being slaughtered for their tusks that the remaining herds have lost most of their institutional memory and mature leadership, leading to behavioral problems that reduce the herds' fitness and put them into yet more conflict with people.


Most of the ivory is poached to fund extremist terrorist movements that seek to kill Americans and strip people worldwide of their freedom.

Massive amounts of illegal ivory are coming to the United States, and even more is going to China, where it is made into trinkets. Enforcement of the ivory ban is virtually impossible in the US because groups led by Doug Ritter and others have made sure there is no enforcement money. Ritter has even tried to pitch his opposition to ivory importation as a veterans issue. I am a combat vet, and I work with a lot of vets. Ivory ownership has never once come up as an issue.

There is no effective way to distinguish legal from illegal ivory with the resources that enforcement officials are given.

Whenever Doug Ritter has been challenged on the facts, he has brought ivory traders into the discussion on this forum -- one of whom even admitted to trafficking in illegal ivory. Another was a lobbyist who told us to just go on safari to kill elephants as a way to support corrupt African governments on the assumption that they would use the money to go after poachers. What the lobbyist didn't say is that he runs a safari business on the side.

This is not a knife-rights issue. This is a test to see whether we have the courage and integrity to stand up to people like Doug Ritter and to stop the eradication of elephants.

Twin Dog, Most of what you say here is not true, not even close. Science, and statistics prove otherwise. I am sure your heart is in the right place but you have been fed some very bad information. The studies by ETIS (Elephant Trade Information System) set up by CITES proves otherwise. They show that from the years 2008 to 2013 the amount of illicit ivory coming to the US is statistically insignificant. What comes here is by unknowing tourists to other countries bringing jewelry back, but the amount is so small they fall out of the lowest category in the study. The study shows that out of 98 countries studied the U.S. is the world leader in fighting the trafficking of illicit ivory.

I urge you to look up the studies so that you can talk more knowledgeably about this subject, try not to get your information from one place.

 

[RX-79G]

I certainly think that ivory looks better on a live healthy elephant than on any man-made object. That said, images like this make me want to weep:

Photo from: http://robshumaker.com/2012/10/blood-ivory/

Somehow, destroying seized ivory seems (to me) almost as senseless as the initial act of illegal slaughter and harvest conducted by criminal elephant poachers. Almost. Maybe burning contraband ivory slows the blackmarket trade but it does not stop it. What to do with seized ivory certainly presents a very sad catch-22...

I guess until humans can be trusted to harvest elephant ivory in a sustained and ethical manner (ie. only taking the tusks from an animal that died by happenstance or natural cause) I don't need any on my knives. Mammoth and fossil ivory is another matter...

Just my layman's perspective

-Brett

So, this ivory still has fresh blood on it, but because a government seized it someone should get to buy it? That doesn't seem a little screwed up to you?

 

[timberweasel]

So, this ivory still has fresh blood on it, but because a government seized it someone should get to buy it? That doesn't seem a little screwed up to you?

No, the image represents a very tragic waste. Think of the herd of live elephants it took to make that pile. It saddens me.

 

[Screwdriver]

Why the F do you need ivory? Seriously......just because you are a human and God gave you the right to pillage whatever you want?

 

[Mark Knapp]

If I handed you a freshly carved ivory handle, would you be able to tell if it was mammoth or not by eye?

Yes, Depending on the shape of the handle, if I could see end grain. But that's not the point. The point is that we should all be working toward actually stopping the poaching of elephants in Africa. By funding the groups that guard elephants from poachers not groups that do nothing but lobby for laws that restrict the rights of law abiding citizens.

 

[RX-79G]

No, the image represents a very tragic waste. Think of the herd of live elephants it took to make that pile. It saddens me.

It is sad. How is chopping their remains into $500 knife handles honoring those deaths?

 

[RX-79G]

Yes, Depending on the shape of the handle, if I could see end grain. But that's not the point. The point is that we should all be working toward actually stopping the poaching of elephants in Africa. By funding the groups that guard elephants from poachers not groups that do nothing but lobby for laws that restrict the rights of law abiding citizens.

This is the same logic as defoliating South America because Americans can't stop shoving cocaine up their noses.

You have to stop supply AND demand.


If the best soap you could buy was made of human fat, would that be okay as long as it was made before 1945?