Lawmakers in New York State have voted to outlaw the sale of items that are over 100 years old and made with more than 20 percent elephant ivory, mammoth ivory or rhinoceros horn. These rules for antique ivory are stiffer than those of the federal government (see the June 20 New York Times article.) There is great confusion about the new laws. I recently asked a museum curator if he could accept a 112-year-old humidor made of a piece of an elephant tusk mounted with Gorham silver and marked with the date. He didn't know. The federal law says old or new ivory can't be accepted by a museum, and we know many antique pieces have been destroyed in Colorado. Recently, antique musical instruments with ivory inlay were exempted.
Photo credit: New Orleans Auction Galleries
I do understand the ban on new ivory. It is an awful and just horrible thing to do to an animail just for its tusk. That said, old ivory should be exempt from the ban. At the time these items were made, ivory was not illegal. The objects are beautiful and historical in their own right and to destroy them just makes no sense. When they make these laws, does anyone think beyond the original point of saving elephants? Yes, save them, and use the stored ivory to fund additional security to stop poaching and killing of such wonderful animals. However, let us keep our antique items to enjoy, pass down or sell them if financially needed. Do not destroy the art and beauty of ivory pieces. One should not destroy beautiful things just because of what they are made of.
To my way of thinking~ all this is going to do is create a “Black Market” for people who have OLD ivory and love it for the art object it is and have the desire to obtain/sell/trade these pieces of ART.
I have three beautiful pairs of ivory earrings that I acquired. I have no intention of giving them up and I will pass them down. I don’t like being told what to do with my personal things. Sounds like government overreach to me. (I am not a heartless cad, and the slaughter needs to stop, but stay out of my house)
In May 1931 Dad bought Mom a piano for their first anniversary. In 1970 Mom gave me the piano. Now I want to “junk” it. Should I take off the ivory keys? Are they, or will they be worth anything if the new law changes and I or my kids can sell them?
Will stopping the trade of legally produced antique ivory really stop the illegal killing? The illegal ivory is already being sold into the black market. I don’t see how stopping sale of antiques prevents that. I think it would do more good to sell the caches of government confiscated ivory and use the funds to hire more patrols on the preserves.
If, as bcsa stated stated that it might be “illegal” to pass down my tea set to future generations, does this then mean that any antiquities containing ivory would somehow be gathered up, as books were in “Fahreheit 451”, and burned to prevent their continued existence through the ages? I know this sounds rather Orwellian, but short of this, they WOULD continue to exist? I cannot imagine that centuries of artistic culture and artistic heritage would be allowed to be destroyed from private collections. I assume this would also flood over to museum collections as well and for some reason I don’t think American museums of the stature of say, the Metropolitan or the Smithsonian, would go down without a fight. And in the end what would it have proved? That the objects in question are gone, and sadly, the poaching in question is probably still going on.
Societies of 100 years ago would have been known to “do better if they knew better.” There is absolutely no need to destroy art of the past that was incorporated into fine things. But now, an ecological balance needs to be managed. Those of us who are (still) carnivores and wear leather shoes from ubiquitous animals may encounter the same indictments some day.
Lulutubby……..certainly it can be repealed. All you need are some non-knucklehead law makers in New York (good luck on that). Seems to me it defies common sense to target antiques. How in the world will it crimp illegal ivory trading if you’re talking about items that have been around for many decades?
How do we handle the selling of pianos? Lots have ivory keys. Is there a way to tell?
This is what happens when we allow groups like PETA, Green Peace, and other extreme environmentalist tree huggers buy off our liberal and other establishment politicians. Vote for them, live with their payoff decisions. Repeal the damage? Vote them out.
From what I have read, it ‘might’ even be illegal to pass this down to your next generation. Which is another good question that needs to be answered.
An elephant was murdered for you ivory handle and musical instruments. What difference does it make if the elephant died yesterday or 20 years ago or 120 years ago? Some of you folks are all about the dollar signs. Where are your morals and principals? If you truly plan on handing your heirloom down to the next generation, quit bellyaching.
I have a collection of netsukes that I have been collecting since the ’60s. Many are antique but most are from the latter 20th century. They are considered an art form in Japan where they were originally created as a revolt against an edict forbidding the wearing of artistic items unless for the nobility or for utilitarian use. So they devised a “use” for the little gems that made them toggles for hanging useful things from the obi (sash). Clever. I guess the historical importance of these items is not considered, even though their age is. BTW netsukes are, as an art form, not much more than 100 years old. Guess my collection will now just gather dust.
I’m not at all sure that these restrictions will solve the problem. Making the penalty fit the crime (i.e., death sentences for poachers to be carried out immediately,) just might. This might just scare the poachers into new lines of work. Normally I support due process strongly but these poachers are the scum of the earth who laugh at one to five year sentences that they know they can buy their way out of are a joke. Game wardens carrying rifles and carrying out the sentences on the spot would stop a great deal of the elephant poaching. The elephant didn’t get due process… why should the poacher?
A possibility – the reason they are banning the ivory over 100 year also is because many people are dishonest and will try to pass off any ivory as old ivory. The slaughter must end and if this is how it has to happen then so be it. Banning all ivory is the only way to end these heinous crimes against a sentient being.
A tusk-shaped cribbage game, made of ivory I believe, was among the household possessions when we cleaned out the family home. I have no idea what kind of animal tusk, or if it’s even the real thing (although I strongly suspect so). It was our intention to try and determine the authenticity and value and attempt to sell it- do I understand that article correctly that I may be able to do that, as long as I’m not doing so in NY? There is much confusion …
I own an English sterling silver tea set from the late 18th century. It is a family piece and has been passed down to me from previous generations. The tea pot has an ivory handle and a small carved ivory pineapple finial on the lid. With these new restrictions, am I now to assume that this tea set would never be able to be sold? Of course, this question is moot as it will continue to be passed down to future generations and never sold, but the question begs to be asked.
Antiquities that are centuries old are now suddenly taboo and illegal to buy and sell. The ivory in them came from elephants that are long gone. While I do NOT condone the ivory trade, I cannot understand why true antiques and musical instruments containing ivory have been lumped into modern day ivory poaching laws. Can someone explain this to me? Thanks.
I can certainly understand newer ivory restrictions, but this is crazy. The only thing this will do is send the market underground.
😡 It seems to me this will just make it more valuable on the black market, and the state will lose on the sales tax end. We learn by our mistakes, and what was done over 100 yrs ago should not be destroyed. Can this be repealed? 😉