Welcome Home...THANK YOU FOR BEING A PART OF OUR COMMUNITY

iKnife Collector

The online community of knife collectors, A Knife Family Forged in Steel

Ivory Ban Update: Report on Advisory Council on Wildlife Trafficking Meeting

Robert Mitchell, an attorney from Pennsylvania, attended the Advisory Council on Wildlife Trafficking meeting held yesterday, March 20, 2014. Rob delivered Knife Rights's statement (Click to read) to the Council. He reports below on the meeting's low and high points. For an opening salvo, to make a statement and get opposition to the ivory ban on the record, this showing was a success. However, it was just that, an opening salvo. We are in for a long, hard fight, but opposition to these draconion and uunlawful actions is growing and getting organized. Your support is opposing this ban will be key to getting Congress on board against these draconion measures that only penalize honest Americans and do nothing to save elephants.

Before I hit the road, I want to share with you what happened yesterday at the subject meeting. I'll provide more details when I get back, but here are the high points:

The Bad News

Special interest groups are already lobbying Congress to rush changes to the law that will create SEVERE penalties for anyone involved with wildlife trafficking, which will include Domestic Ivory Trade under current proposals. They want to make trading ivory punishable under RICO, Federal Money Laundering statutes, and the Travel Act. These statutes would make violations of the law easier for federal authorities to prove, and the Advisory Council is arguing for increasing penalties to felonies with 5 year prison sentences. They are also pursuing new restitution laws that will allow the government to "disgorge profits from ivory traders" and "return the money to the state or country of origin." Where no state or country can be identified, they want to create a new slush fund to use to enhance enforcement and conservation efforts.
They are working hard to build Congressional support to push these changes through. Sen Diane Feinstein is leading the charge in the Senate. They are looking for a member of the House to lead the effort. When talking to Congressional members, they are focusing on capturing Chinese kingpins in the poached ivory trade, so members of Congress have no idea that these laws could be used against US citizens who currently and have always abided by the law working with pre-ban ivory.
Although they say their focus is on "5 or 7 Kingpins in China", they repeatedly said the United States needs to lead the way with enforcement of a Domestic Ivory Ban to be a model for the rest of the world to emulate. They know the real problems with illicit trade in poached ivory are in Asia, but they are frustrated by their inability to do much about it in foreign countries. They expressed dismay over what they characterized in the United States as the lowest number of prosecutions in wildlife trafficking in the world, and concern that typical US prison sentences were only 2 months of incarceration. The enforcement advocates clearly want more money and manpower to prosecute many more people in the US to drive up their statistics to "impress other countries." Since there is no poaching taking place in the US and USFWS has been effective at keeping poached ivory out of our country, who do you think they will go after?
The Advisory Council is advocating for measures to reduce demand for ivory worldwide and "change people's behavior" through advertising campaigns and enlisting Hollywood celebrities. They compared what is currently legal ivory trade to smoking and illegal drug trades (repeatedly).
The Advisory Council is also advocating for public/private partnerships with corporations and non-governmental organizations to help inform them what can be done to fight wildlife trafficking, which would include domestic ivory trade if they get their way. They talked about eBay, Coke, Pepsi and other companies that they'd like to see help them. AT NO TIME DID THEY TALK ABOUT PARTNERING WITH ANYONE WHO DEALS WITH LEGAL IVORY IN THE US, AND IT IS CLEAR THEY HAVE MADE NO EFFORT TO REACH OUT TO LEGAL USERS OF IVORY TO SOLICIT THEIR INPUT.

The Good News

The Advisory Council was largely ignorant about the legal use of domestic ivory, and they expressed surprise and concern about the number of people who wrote in expressing concern leading up to this meeting. Clearly, they see serious potential political problems if the legal ivory trade organizes to oppose this ban. I challenged them directly on their failure to include people who deal with legal ivory in their deliberations and proposals
There were about 25 people who came out to comment about the Ivory Ban, and about half spoke eloquently about reasons to oppose or soften the ban. Representatives of musical instrument dealers, orchestras, auctioneers, antique collectors, knife dealers and scrimshaw artists stood up and told the Council the Draconian impact that the ban would have on their lives without saving a single African elephant. The Council was clearly attentive and concerned about their comments. There were also animal rights activists who made comments, some of which were quite extreme (i.e. elephants are "more evolved than humans" and "all ivory comes from poached elephants"). The Activist's comments spoke for themselves and added nothing new to the discussion.
Scrimshaw Artist Sandra Brady's comments stood out from the others. Sandra captured how the current legal system has failed to prevent poaching and the futility of a domestic ban on that objective. She also did a great job personalizing the devastating impact on small businesses and the lives of artists, artisans and collectors who have always complied with the law and who share the goal of ending the slaughter of poached elephants.

Bottom Line - we haven't stopped the Domestic Ivory Ban freight train, but we may have slowed it down. By the end of the meeting, Advisory Council members acknowledged that the Domestic Ivory Ban posed genuine problems and political challenges. They noted that everyone agreed on measures they want to take to stop illegal poaching (prosecuting poachers and traffickers of poached ivory), and but for the Domestic Ivory Ban their proposals would not be controversial.

The timing of new rules is not yet clear. There will be something published in the next few weeks addressing CITES that possibly could include revocation of an existing special rule under the Environmental Species Act. This could set up a legal framework prohibiting interstate trade of ivory. They said to expect a 30 day comment period on that rule.

The "final rule" should come out in June, after which there will be a comment period. We specifically asked that these rules not be issued as "interim final rules" which would go into effect immediately, and instead asked that any rules published be subject to comment before they can be enforced. I think we have a good chance of getting this because of the wide ranging concerns raised, but nothing is guaranteed.

-- Robert Mitchell

Help Stop the Ivory Ban and Prevent an Expansion of Poaching

Call or Write Today! Now is the time to start making your views heard.

Call your Congressman and Senators TODAY!

Activist groups are already lobbying Congressmen heavily, and they are totally misrepresenting what the regulations and legal changes will do to you. You need to inform them about what the proposed changes in the law will do to you, your collections, your businesses, and your families. The message is simple - We all want to stop elephant poaching, but these laws punish innocent Americans, not elephant poachers or illegal traders in Asia. CALL COGRESS at 1-202-224-3121 and ask them to oppose the Ivory Ban. Locate your Congressman at: http://www.house.gov/representatives/find/

Email and Call the White House at 1-202-456-1111 and Email and Call the Fish and Wildlife Service at 1-800-344-9453, to let them know you oppose this ban on sale and trade of legally owned ivory.

Call your trade organizations and make sure they are representing your interest in this matter. Groups like the NRA, AARP, collectors associations, professional associations, knife clubs, gun clubs, industry lobbying groups - all of them need to hear from you and be educated about the severity of this threat. These calls have a multiplier effect when they lead back to law makers, and they are starting to get people's attention!

Spread the word on social media. Use Facebook, Twitter, e-mail lists, internet forums, and all the ways you communicate people to spread the word about what the government is doing and why the Domestic Ivory Ban is a very bad idea.

When you all or write, PLEASE BE POLITE. The more personalized it is, the more impact it has. Just copying the points below is better than nothing, but it is far better to put it into your own words and emphasize your own situation, how it effects you, and your personal point of view.

The points to emphasize:

While you strongly support conservation efforts, this will likely result in an increase in elephant poaching, opposite what is intended. This will only lead to more slaughter of elephants!
"Takes" hundreds of millions of dollars of Americans' investments in ivory in violation of the 5th Amendment.
Presumes guilt, making all ivory owners criminals, no need for the government to factually establish illicit activity, which is both un-American and irrational.
No practical way for most Americans to establish their ivory is legal. Establishing exceptions based on evidence virtually nobody can provide is patently abusive.
The current system and rules have proven effective at restricting U.S. trade in illegal ivory, no need to fix what's not broken. The problem is not the U.S. and this outrageous ban in the U.S will not affect the huge market for illegal black market ivory in China and elsewhere. In its September 2012 Fact Sheet, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) stated, "we do not believe that there is a significant illegal ivory trade into this country," clear proof by the agency enforcing this ban that this is not a problem in the U.S.

Opposing this outrageous ivory ban is not going to be easy. Please donate today to help us protect your rights and interests.

Donate to the Knife Rights Second Front Fund TODAY!
Call Toll-Free: 1-866-889-6268

All Donations over $20 will be applied to the 2014 Ultimate Steel Drawing once it launches in a couple weeks.

Tags: BAN, CAN, DO?, IVORY, WHAT, YOU

2 members like this

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Jan Carter on March 21, 2014 at 13:45

and more! This is from the NY Times. NOW IS THE TIME TO BE CONCERNED. WISHING AFTERWARD THAT YOU HAD SPOKEN ABOUT ABOUT YOUR RIGHTS WILL NOT HELP!!!!!!!!!!!

Limits on Ivory Sales, Meant to Protect Elephants, Set Off WideConcerns

Ivory chess pieces depicting the Trojan War, from the collection of Floyd and Bernice Sarisohn.

BRYAN THOMAS FOR THE NEW YORK TIMES

By TOM MASHBERG

March 20, 2014

New federal rules aimed at blocking the sale of ivory to protect endangered elephants are causing an uproar among musicians, antiques dealers, gun collectors and thousands of others whose ability to sell, repair or travel with legally acquired ivory objects will soon be prohibited.
Vince Gill, the guitarist and Grammy Award winner, who owns some 40 classic Martin guitars featuring ivory pegs and bridges, said he is worried now about taking his instruments overseas.
Floyd Sarisohn, a lawyer from Commack, N.Y., said he will be blocked from auctioning any of the hundreds of chess sets with antique ivory pieces he has spent decades collecting.
Mike Clark, owner of Collectors Firearms in Houston, said he fears he might have to “gouge the ivory inlay” from scores of commemorative handguns and rifles that long predate the ban, if he wants to sell them.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2014/03/21/arts/21ivory1/21ivor..."/>

A new law could keep Bernice Sarisohn and her husband, Floyd, from auctioning any of their antique ivory chess pieces.

BRYAN THOMAS FOR THE NEW YORK TIMES

“I’m blindsided, as are all of us, by this regulatory change,” said Lark Mason, a New York auctioneer who has specialized in antique ivory for three decades. “We all want to save elephants,” he said, but he questioned how “denying the sale of an 18th-century snuff bottle,” among millions of other decorative antiques, will accomplish that end.
In simple terms, the new regulations ban Americans from importing and, with narrow exceptions, exporting any item that contains even a sliver of ivory. The rules do not ban private ownership, but they outlaw interstate sales of ivory items, unless they meet what sellers describe as impossible criteria.
Officials with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, which plans to have the new regulations in place in June, said drastic measures are needed to help curb the slaughter of African elephants. The animals now number a scant half-million, and conservationists say as many as 35,000 are dying annually to feed the global black-market in tusks.
“The U.S. market is contributing to the crisis now threatening the African elephant,” the Fish and Wildlife Service director, Daniel M. Ashe, told Congress last month. Wildlife officials say only China has a larger legal market for ivory. As for the black market, over the past 25 years, federal agents say, they have seized six tons of ivory smuggled into in the United States.
Still, Craig Hoover, chief of the Wildlife Trade and Conservation branch at the Fish and Wildlife Service, said officials are reviewing adjustments to the regulations. They sought input Thursday at a meeting in Washington, where the give and take was impassioned.
Kimball M. Sterling of Johnson City, Tenn., who deals in antique ivory walking sticks, said some of his biggest clients “are in their closets crying” because the multimillion-dollar collections they had hoped to bequeath to their heirs are on the verge of becoming worthless.
In an interview before the hearing, Mr. Hoover said, “I am not in any way trying to diminish the fact that this is going to have an impact on many different industries.” During the session, Bryan Arroyo, assistant for international affairs at the wildlife service, said, “I regret that the ban is creating a lot of anger in some quarters.”
Even when sales are still allowed, the new regulations would bring tremendous change to the legal market for ivory, which currently allows for regulated sales of items that are at least 100 years old. For example, those looking to acquire ivory from past legal stockpiles to restore antiques, make pistol grips, or otherwise refurbish items will no longer be able to do so.
An unusual assortment of trade groups opposes the regulations, including the National Association of Music Makers, the Art and Antiques Dealers League of America and the National Rifle Association. The critics say the rules are confusing, unfair and should be rewritten to account for ivory that came into the country long ago.
To illustrate the confusion ahead, experts gave the example of what would happen under the new regulations if someone attempted the interstate sale of a 100-year-old Steinway piano with ivory keys. Such a sale has long been permissible, because the piano qualified as an antique that contained ivory imported long before the mid-1970s, when officials began proscribing the material.
But the new regulations would prohibit such a sale unless the owner could prove the ivory in the keys had entered the country through one of 13 American ports authorized to sanction ivory goods.
Given that none of those entry points had such legal power until 1982, the regulations would make it virtually impossible to legitimize the piano’s ivory, the experts said. That predicament would apply to virtually all the antique ivory in the country, barring millions of Americans from ever selling items as innocuous as teacups, dice or fountain pens.
Some ability to sell ivory within a state will remain. But most owners will now have to document that the item has been in the United States for at least 100 years. Experts say few sellers of ivory heirlooms are likely to produce that level of certification. In addition, lawmakers in some states,including New York, are considering banning the in-state sale of ivory, effectively closing the trade completely.
Mr. Hoover said the eight-member advisory panel that formulated the new restrictions is aware they impose insurmountable hurdles. But he said the efforts by some smugglers to disguise recently poached ivory as antique material have made the additional restrictions necessary.
The new rules will also apply to rhino horn, whale teeth, walrus tusks, tortoise shell and certain woods that are also regulated under the 1973 Endangered Species Act.
Mary Luehrsen, director of public affairs for the music makers association, said many performers like Mr. Gill moved away from ivory in the 1970s in response to the elephant crisis. But hundreds of thousands of guitars, violin bows, woodwinds and other vintage instruments, many worth tens of thousands of dollars, will now be banned from resale.
“It seems like a very strident policy for the artistic industry,” she said.
Ivory is favored by string players and other musicians for its tonal qualities. Small amounts, for example, are often used at the top, or head, of a violin bow to keep the lengths of horsehair in place. Yung Chin, a bow maker in New York, said the regulations would make tens of thousands of such bows, and other instruments, unmarketable unless the ivory were replaced with a legal material, such as mammoth ivory, at great expense.
Mr. Hoover said his agency would allow musicians to travel with ivory instruments if they gather paperwork to prove the items are legal and predate 1976, when the earliest ivory curbs began.
The forthcoming restrictions are already having an effect, according to Mr. Mason, the New York dealer. He pulled $500,000 worth of objects containing ivory from an auction scheduled for April, he said, because he feared they would be shunned by buy buyers given the cloud over their resale value.
Some museums are also concerned about the regulations, which will eliminate charitable tax deduction for all donated ivory works, regardless of their age. Harold Holzer, a spokesman for the Metropolitan Museum of Art, said museums worry that the rule will “chill” donations. He said the broader policy will mean that museums like the Met, which import ivory items as part of loan shows, “will have to tread their way carefully” to make sure they do not run afoul of the more restrictive policies.
At the hearing, some critics questioned whether criminalizing the civilian ivory market would be as effective as helping African countries protect elephants and punish poachers. But federal officials said the reduction in demand will invariably put a dent in poaching efforts.
Eve M. Kahn contributed reporting.