The Issue of Ivory

[David]

Originally Posted by drac2k

...take the tons of seized ivory that has been taken from poachers, and instead of burning it, catalog it, register it, microchip it and legally sell it with an accompanying certificate to the new owner.They could do the same with beached whales that are now towed out to sea and blown up.
You would see many impoverished African governments with limited resources become very active in the enforcement of poachers, knowing that there was an economic benefit from doing so.We next take all of the money from the registered ivory from around the world and send it back to the African and Asian preserves and poacher enforcement, creating more and better safe spaces for elephants and helping the local economies with jobs; elephants and humans living in harmony, side by side.Room for all.

Forgive me Drac, but this makes very little sense to me. How would selling ivory confiscated from poachers encourage African governments to step up their enforcement to stop poaching? If they did and were capable of stopping the killing of elephants for their ivory that would cut off the supply of confiscated ivory that the governments would be selling "legally" in the first place. Without the kill there would be no ivory for the authorities to confiscate. So they would need to allow the killing in order to obtain the confiscated ivory that is funding the program to begin with. Instead all this would do is switch the benefactor of the killing from the poacher to the government. This doesn't help save the elephant.
But yes Drac, the destruction of antique objects of art made of ivory does not, cannot, bring a single elephant back. This is the ONLY issue i see pertinent to us as collectors of antique arms. What we need to be doing here is talking about how we can organize a strong lobby to address these concern with our governments, how we can petition them to understand the absurdity of such ridiculous measures and correct any legislation that would allow for the confiscation and/or destruction of such valuable artist heritage. Destroying this stuff is simply criminal. But so if the continued slaughter of elephants for new ivory.
I could only support commercial "farming" of ivory if it were done so without actually killing the elephant. This would, of course, create many difficulties with wild African elephants. Not that it couldn't be done, but it would be an expensive venture and knowing humans as i do i suspect it would not end with a good outcome for life as an elephant. Yes Alan, i guess in some sense i am one of those "tree huggers" you were talking about. You are undoubtedly correct that as time progresses humans will vie more and more for elephant habitats. We humans are like a cancer on this earth and multiply far beyond our means of sustainable support. Frankly i favor the elephant over us, though surely he is the underdog. The elephant knows how to live within its means (when those means are not constantly removed by man) and live in harmony with nature. We, most obviously, do not.
What is clear to me is that the killing of elephants for ivory (or for habitat for that matter) is morally and criminally abhorrent. The world that was is not the world it is today. The resource of ivory as a material for artistic expression should remain a thing of the past, but at the same time that past must be preserved, not destroyed by government edict. Humans have no more right to kill elephants for the collection of ivory as they do to keep slaves another archaic practice of the past that we know know (hopefully) is morally wrong. As Tim suggests, ivory is simply a material for artistic application. There are other beautiful materials that can be used for future carving. The "addiction" for ivory that drives the continued poaching and trading of the material must be squashed somehow. However i do not believe that the banning and/or destruction of old ivory pieces helps the cause any. What i would rather see is than sustainable ivory farms that set themselves up for all kinds of abuses would be further development and perfection of synthetic ivory materials for present and future carving use. This is well within the reach of science and with further development could supply the market with an endless supply of material for carving.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/scien...ory-180963226/
If we humans do not learn to live sustainably upon the Earth, like the elephant we too will be doomed. If we don't kill ourselves off in nuclear war or the planet doesn't kill off masses of us off in self-defense through pestilence or natural disaster it won't be long before we will simply not have the room or resources to survive. As our population grows to unnecessary proportions our species will continue to destroy itself (there are around 7 billion people now and by 2050 that number will almost reach 10 billion). Then we too will need to commodify ouselves. Soylent Green is people!

[A. G. Maisey]

David, as I was reading your thoughtful post, I thought to myself that rather than get involved in any sort of rambling discussion in respect of our, in some degree, opposing points of view, I would simply post a two word response:- Soylent Green.

You beat me to it.

However, I don't really think it will come to that.

Earth is a living entity:- she looks after herself.

Mankind has only been around for five minutes, but as a group we do have the benefits of logic and reason, something that similar viruses do not possess.

I believe that the passing of time will demonstrate that we are a self-limiting virus. In fact, most viruses are self limiting, in that they either kill the host, or they manage themselves in such a way that the host suffers a persistent, but not life threatening condition.

I rather feel that Mankind will prove to be a member of this second group of viruses, and will persist to use Earth in a way that ensures survival of both Earth and Mankind. But of course this will require vastly different attitudes to the ones that we currently espouse.

The principles that govern all in existence are at their foundations, engineering principles, they are governed by numbers.

The management of any system governed by numbers must employ numbers to ensure effective management of that system.

Earth is both a Living Entity and a System:- She has no tolerance of failure.

Now the question must arise:- do we manage Earth, or is Earth managing us? Perhaps what we are looking towards is a system of integrated management. We do have the tools of Logic and Reason that could accomplish this. However, one thing seems to be certain, for such a system to function, the element of Emotion must be removed from the equation. Emotion is really only a part of Chaos Theory, and as we all know, that depends upon the initial conditions. If we retain that initial condition of Emotion, which links us to the Animal World, then like other animals before us, Mankind will fail.

Our Saviour is Logic, Reason, and Mathematics, all applied by way of a System of Management.

Does Soylent Green have a place in such a system?

Perhaps, but there are other ways, better ways, and if Mankind begins to use a little bit more logic, and considerably less emotion there is a possibility we may be able have our elephants and eat them too:- genetic engineering > mature tuskers in 5 years > pen farmed elephants > ivory in every supermarket > elephant foot umbrella stands on every porch. No different really to the farming of genetically engineered sheep or cattle.

Some people might not like this approach, but as David has so logically demonstrated:- limit Mankind or lose everything --- including our sanity.

So where do we start?

But all this sort of discussion is decidedly Off Topic, so I stop here, except for one parting remark:-
if a smart man sees a steamroller coming down the road, he steps to one side.

[drac2k]

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]

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]

Wow; maybe world peace really is possible.

[A. G. Maisey]

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

Easy.

[David]

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!