Don't forget the drought and heat wave. Freaking 95 degrees here today.
99 tomorrow.
I'm moving to Mexico in 6 years.
California Legislation on Ivory Ban
- Thread starter Walkermine
- Start date
Don't forget the drought and heat wave. Freaking 95 degrees here today.
99 tomorrow.
I'm moving to Mexico in 6 years.
Oh....this is gonna be good........Pancho Villa will ride again.......but what about Donald's fence?
The line to get in on any return trip to the USA would be enormously long.......we don't need any
weed in California but if you could smuggle back a couple of ivory ferrules, I'd be beholding to ya.
Matt B.
The line to get in on any return trip to the USA would be enormously long.......we don't need any
weed in California but if you could smuggle back a couple of ivory ferrules, I'd be beholding to ya.
Matt B.
All the legislation I’ve read suggests that the burden of proof is on the owner. I’ve also seen where inspectors have several means for identifying whether the white stuff is ivory without damaging the goods. What isn’t so easy to determine is age without a lab sample. Hence, this is why California and a soon to be growing list of other states are abandoning pre-ban exception. It’s just too costly and time-consuming, plus destructive to ascertain. It now won’t matter whether the ivory joint in your cue came from a tusk of an elephant that may have died of natural cause 100 years ago or if it was an eight thousand year old mastodon tuck taken from an ice field. It won’t matter if you know little or nothing about cues but are just trying to sell stuff you inherited from dad. If caught, you may run the risk of confiscation of goods, fines, conviction and arrest. THAT’S why this is stupid and unfair.
That's interesting, didn't know that. Personally, I don't mind having such laws with all current and future products. It's a decent thing to do. But not allowing older products to be grandfathered in in some fashion just doesn't make sense in my opinion.
There are two problems with having ivory that is grandfathered in and legal. The first is that it there just isn't any practical and reliable way in most cases to tell pre-ban ivory from the banned ivory. There just simply isn't. And as you can imagine everybody always claims that their ivory (or item with ivory in it) is pre-ban even if the reality is that it came from an elephant poached illegally last year. It is way too easy to slip newly poached illegal ivory into the legal market and supply chain because there simply isn't a practical and effective way to reliably be able to differentiate between the two.
The second problem is that poaching will continue as long as ivory has any value, and ivory will always continue to have value as long as it can still be bought and sold relatively easily (whether or not it is legal to do so). If some ivory is grandfathered in, then ivory is certain to still retain value, particularly when it is allowed to be bought and sold. As long as there is any value to ivory then the poaching will continue.
As much as it sucks there are really only two choices here. If you want to save elephants, you must completely outlaw all buying and selling of all ivory regardless of source. This will almost completely kill the value of ivory and the market for it which is what will be required to stop the poaching. And it is possible that even this may not be enough and you may end up having to outlaw even the possession of any and all ivory as well, only time would tell. Only when ivory is made worthless and valueless through laws will the poaching stop.
Or you can allow anything short of outlawing all buying and selling of all ivory and have all wild elephants extinct within a relatively short few years. Period, end of story, no ifs, ands, or buts about it.
It is a tough choice for sure, and all comes down to what is more important to you:
--the ability to buy and sell some ivory
or
--having wild elephants on the earth instead of extinct
It is impossible to have both so pick one and get ready to deal with the consequences which really suck in both cases. You just have to decide which one sucks very slightly less than the alternative in your opinion.
Very good points on all accounts. Something just doesn't feel right to restrict people's rights to their own property simply because the authorities can't catch the trigger pullers. There has to be some middle ground to grandfather certain items. I'm no expert, and everything you said makes perfect sense. But it sounds to me like the best answer to the problem may still be out there somewhere.
"And as you can imagine everybody always claims that their ivory (or item with ivory in it) is pre-ban even if the reality is that it came from an elephant poached illegally last year. It is way too easy to slip newly poached illegal ivory into the legal market and supply chain because there simply isn't a practical and effective way to reliably be able to differentiate between the two"
American cue-makers have never been found guilty, or even officially accused, of using illegal ivory to the very best of my recollection. The sources they use to procure their ivory is documented and easily audited. The suppliers of ivory to American cue-makers can also be easily audited. One company was busted a few years ago so why not just tighten the supply/distribution line of legal ivory since it is after all......"legal".
It's not that hard to do....there's no new source of legal ivory........the amount is admittedly finite but the surplus in the USA is enormous. There are specific exemptions under the US Fish & Wildlife reg when ivory is permitted to come into the USA. Any other ivory isn't allowed and so the problem is truly with smuggling, not the legal ivory already in the USA. Since the ban was enacted, I am unaware of any incidents where American cue-makers have been charged with making pool cues using poached ivory. I am pretty sure the record speaks for itself. So the assumption now is all of a sudden the American cue-makers will start to use poached ivory unknowingly since they were duped by their supplier into thinking the ivory they purchase was legal ivory? Or is it there's no legal ivory they can buy......it's all been used......Nope, plenty around so that's not going to float. Maybe it's because USA cue-makers hate elephants.....that's it....they hate elephants......their new slogan is "Let's get Dumbo!".
Why not just license American cue-makers to get certified and approved to use legal ivory which hurts no one and the US Gov't can get license fees and inspection fees and audit fees. The same applies to licensed suppliers of pre-ban ivory.....;license, thoroughly inspect & tightly audit these firms .....but then in all likelihood some asshol_ politician would then come along and propose pricing these fees so high no one could afford to maintain their license and just price it out of existence..
The truth is the ivory in my cues is all legal....you know that......Tim, Ed, Jerry & both Bobs did not use illegal ivory making my cues and American cue-makers are not going to start now. USA cue-makers abide by the ivory ban and prohibiting California cue-makers from using any ivory after July 1, 2016 is just conspicuously stupid.
I can still sell my pool cues outside of California after next summer and still purchase ivory adorned pool cues outside of California after the ban takes effect. Possession of a pool cue with ivory is allowed and realistically speaking, the CA ban will genuinely jeopardize some new business for CA cue-makers. The only thing that happens from this new CA ivory ban is commerce will suffer......it's a hugely dumb idea.
Matt B.
American cue-makers have never been found guilty, or even officially accused, of using illegal ivory to the very best of my recollection. The sources they use to procure their ivory is documented and easily audited. The suppliers of ivory to American cue-makers can also be easily audited. One company was busted a few years ago so why not just tighten the supply/distribution line of legal ivory since it is after all......"legal".
It's not that hard to do....there's no new source of legal ivory........the amount is admittedly finite but the surplus in the USA is enormous. There are specific exemptions under the US Fish & Wildlife reg when ivory is permitted to come into the USA. Any other ivory isn't allowed and so the problem is truly with smuggling, not the legal ivory already in the USA. Since the ban was enacted, I am unaware of any incidents where American cue-makers have been charged with making pool cues using poached ivory. I am pretty sure the record speaks for itself. So the assumption now is all of a sudden the American cue-makers will start to use poached ivory unknowingly since they were duped by their supplier into thinking the ivory they purchase was legal ivory? Or is it there's no legal ivory they can buy......it's all been used......Nope, plenty around so that's not going to float. Maybe it's because USA cue-makers hate elephants.....that's it....they hate elephants......their new slogan is "Let's get Dumbo!".
Why not just license American cue-makers to get certified and approved to use legal ivory which hurts no one and the US Gov't can get license fees and inspection fees and audit fees. The same applies to licensed suppliers of pre-ban ivory.....;license, thoroughly inspect & tightly audit these firms .....but then in all likelihood some asshol_ politician would then come along and propose pricing these fees so high no one could afford to maintain their license and just price it out of existence..
The truth is the ivory in my cues is all legal....you know that......Tim, Ed, Jerry & both Bobs did not use illegal ivory making my cues and American cue-makers are not going to start now. USA cue-makers abide by the ivory ban and prohibiting California cue-makers from using any ivory after July 1, 2016 is just conspicuously stupid.
I can still sell my pool cues outside of California after next summer and still purchase ivory adorned pool cues outside of California after the ban takes effect. Possession of a pool cue with ivory is allowed and realistically speaking, the CA ban will genuinely jeopardize some new business for CA cue-makers. The only thing that happens from this new CA ivory ban is commerce will suffer......it's a hugely dumb idea.
Matt B.
Last edited:
You left out the freedom choice that has proven to work throughout human history that has resulted in billions of cattle, sheep, etc. being abundant and affordable for most with almost zero chance of extinction.
Jeff Livingston
I hate when policymakers make laws that want to prove a point so badly that they're willing to punish the innocent in addition to the guilty.
If something was created legally and sold legally, then it must be allowed to be re-sold legally. To me that's a non-negotiable. Better to leave the innocent alone and allow a few guilty ones to slip thru, than to go so hard after the guilty that the innocent get caught in the crossfire.
If something was created legally and sold legally, then it must be allowed to be re-sold legally. To me that's a non-negotiable. Better to leave the innocent alone and allow a few guilty ones to slip thru, than to go so hard after the guilty that the innocent get caught in the crossfire.
All you can prove is that a cue maker bought some legal ivory. You can never know if they also bought illegal ivory. Nor can you ever know if the ivory in your cue was legal or not. If ivory only consisted of whole tusks that always stayed whole, then it would be easier to track. But they don't. They get cut and sanded and ground etc, resulting in lots of waste and making it literally impossible to know whether the inlay in my cue did in fact come from one of the legal orders of ivory my cue maker made or if it came from another illegal source.
Sounds good but in reality it is impossible to do. Yes I know it has been done in rare cases when they were huge idiots about it (like only being able to show where you bought 500 pounds of legal ivory but sold 5000 pounds you claimed was legal ivory) but if people want to get away with it it is pretty easy to do and there isn't any way to prevent it. You will never get rid of the black market unless ivory loses its value and as a result you will never get rid of poaching.
Which brings up another point. Finite supply means that prices will go up as the supply becomes less and less, creating even more incentive to poach elephants. So why not release all these government ivory stashes then? Because there isn't enough to drive prices down enough to make the poaching go away. And even if there was, it would only be a temporary effect and that supply would also dwindle over time through use and then you are back in the same boat we are in now with not enough supply and the high prices leading to poaching.
Correct, but smuggling and poaching exists and will always exist as long as ivory has a high value. Unless laws are created that completely devalue ivory (like making it illegal to buy or sell and possibly even possess) it will not only always have great value, but that value will even increase as supply continues to decrease.
Because it is too hard to prove where the ivory inlay in my cue came from. You can prove that a cue maker is using some legal ivory but it is about impossible to prove that they are ONLY using legal ivory. This is true with almost all use of ivory, not just with cue makers. If you think you can prove where the ivory inlay in my cue came from I have some money that says otherwise. You simply can't do it with any reasonable certainty. You might be able to prove my cue maker has bought legal ivory, but that says nothing about where the ivory he used for my inlay came from
The bottom line is that as long as ivory has a high value, poachers will continue to kill elephants until they are extinct--period. If you are ok with that then just say so, it is your right to have the opinion that the ability to buy and sell ivory is more important to you than the survival of that species. Just don't delude yourself into the false belief that elephants can or will survive as long as ivory has significant value. The only way to avoid the extinction of the elephants is to make ivory next to worthless, and the only way to do that is to make it universally illegal to buy or sell in any form and perhaps even to possess. As long as ivory still has value the poacher will always be able to find somebody unscrupulous to buy it and will therefore will always continue to poach it.
This is the one I struggle with. While it might be a solution, I don't like the methods. Not sure the ends justify the means.
I wonder what the penalties are for elephant poaching, and I wonder how much elephant poaching would continue if the reward didn't justify the risk anymore? This is where most of the focus should be...at the root.
I believe this is very important.. in Asia where ivory is thought to "detect" poison in food (ivory chopsticks at $3800), and have other health benefits.. EVERYONE is a smuggler... http://sinosphere.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/11/05/chinese-presidents-delegation-tied-to-illegal-ivory-purchases-during-africa-visit/?_r=0 The US doesn't need a ban of this magnitude, the Pacific Rim does.
JV
JV
Care to explain how that would work here (assuming I understand what you are getting at which I'm not absolutely certain I do)? You will be hard pressed to find anybody more in favor of free market principles than myself but unfortunately that isn't going to save the elephant in this case. Cattle and sheep happen to be relatively easy and cost effective to farm. Elephants are not. Besides, you conveniently fail to mention all the other animals that are now extinct that we didn't turn into a farm animal like a cow or a sheep. What makes you think that we can and would save the elephant by farming it? It sure hasn't happened yet and they are in their last numbers. The reason is that elephants would be far too difficult and costly to farm.
Just wondering which choice you'd make. Since the plight of the elephant has been ongoing for at least the last 10-15 years, the sale of your Judd 6 point ivory cue last year on AZ must have been real gut wrenching for you.
And you are entitled to that opinion. Some people value the wild elephant more, and some people value the ability to trade in ivory more. The problem is with people who delude themselves into thinking you can have both, because you can't. Pick one. Have wild elephants and give up the ability to buy and sell (and possibly possess) any ivory (which is going to require immediate and drastic support and activism and action from the public and governments world wide), or have wild elephants go extinct and you can buy and sell and possess ivory. You aren't going to have both though.
I don't know all the penalties for elephant poaching. I do know that at least in some areas government forces are heavily patrolling for poachers and shoot to kill on sight. You can't have much more of a deterrent than that now can you. It still doesn't stop the poaching though. The problem is that there are millions of acres the elephants and poachers roam in and there is just no way to monitor it very well. The poachers are near impossible to catch.
It is worth the risk for poachers anyway, even at the risk of death. Ivory is just worth too much and they feel they have too little other opportunity. These are largely men with little morals and little value for life, even their own.
Again, as crappy as it may be, as long as ivory has any real value, it will be poached until the very last wild elephant on earth is killed, and it isn't going to take all that terribly long at the rate it has been going. It sucks but the absolute only way they will survive in the wild is if ivory becomes near worthless, and the only way that would ever happen is if it universally and globally became illegal to buy or sell (and possibly ven possess although this remains to be seen).
I agree that the asian market has the biggest share of the responsibility for the poaching of and the decline of elephants (as well as many other species including tigers and bears etc), although the US share is still pretty significant. But if you leave any major market intact, nothing will change. People will just look to smuggle it from whatever market is legal into whatever market isn't. As long as ivory has any significant value and market anywhere, the poachers will always be able to find a buyer and therefore will continue to poach.
Poolplayr.......your approach presumes guilt before innocence........."that they are only using legal ivory" which implies......not a reader inference either.......that some of the ivory the USA cue-maker uses wasn't......Come On......It's Innocent Until Proven Guilty........that's how the Courts are supposed to work.
As long as a cue-maker purchased pre-ban ivory and has documentation backing it up, then all of the ivory in the pool cues that cue-maker builds is presumed to be legal pre-ban until you can prove otherwise. Under your theory, the burden of proof shifts to proving that all of the ivory in a cue wasn't illegal ivory which is absurd when the cue-maker has documentation exists that it was legal ivory. Oh, I know, it could be faked.......Jeez, okay then, take a core sample form the cue-maker's inventory of ivory or else more strictly regulate the distributors of pre-ban ivory. You can regulate their activities and periodically random sample their ivory inventory....all of this will result in a better marketplace and better control over pre-ban ivory that's allowed in other states besides Oregon & California.
If you have doubts the cue-maker has only used pre-ban ivory, it's because you are on a witch hunt. Pre-ban ivory simply needs to be better regulated on its specific allowable usage and the method of distribution of pre-ban ivory ban........it should not be presumed that some of the ivory in a cue might be illegal when the cue-maker has obeyed the regulation.........JMO.
As long as a cue-maker purchased pre-ban ivory and has documentation backing it up, then all of the ivory in the pool cues that cue-maker builds is presumed to be legal pre-ban until you can prove otherwise. Under your theory, the burden of proof shifts to proving that all of the ivory in a cue wasn't illegal ivory which is absurd when the cue-maker has documentation exists that it was legal ivory. Oh, I know, it could be faked.......Jeez, okay then, take a core sample form the cue-maker's inventory of ivory or else more strictly regulate the distributors of pre-ban ivory. You can regulate their activities and periodically random sample their ivory inventory....all of this will result in a better marketplace and better control over pre-ban ivory that's allowed in other states besides Oregon & California.
If you have doubts the cue-maker has only used pre-ban ivory, it's because you are on a witch hunt. Pre-ban ivory simply needs to be better regulated on its specific allowable usage and the method of distribution of pre-ban ivory ban........it should not be presumed that some of the ivory in a cue might be illegal when the cue-maker has obeyed the regulation.........JMO.
Last edited:
As I said previously, I think both options suck--badly. Unfortunately the reality is that those are the only two options. I hadn't fully realized that at the time I acquired that Judd. To answer your question, I find that the lesser of the two evils is to have elephants and not be able to buy or sell ivory (or even possess ivory if that is what it ultimately has to come to).
I did struggle with the sale of the Judd cue, a lot. You probably won't believe me but I came very close to burning it instead of selling it. Right or wrong, I decided I would try to sell it and if it couldn't bring at least X amount then I would burn it and post it on youtube. I think I even mentioned that to one or two of the people that made really low ball offers but fortunately or unfortunately (depending on perspective I guess) I managed to sell it exactly at my line in the sand. I am not saying I did the right thing in this case (still struggle with deciding what was right or wrong in this case), nor can I promise to be absolutely perfect in the future. I can say that I do not intend to buy anything else with ivory in it in the future, and truth be told, there is no reason to ever need to. We can get all the quality or good looks we want with other materials (contrary to what some will try to argue).