FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > tory manifesto and the ivory trade
tory manifesto and the ivory trade
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
"Theresa May has bowed to lobbyists from the up market antiques trade, and removed the long proposed ban on the ivory trade from the current manifesto...this was promised by David Cameron, after the ban was instituted in China, the US and four other major ivory trading nations,scheduled to be in effect by the end of 2017. Great scheme to siphon the money via the UK..but morally reprehensible...hopefully this disgusting move will get more publicity than it has so far.. and in an odd coincidence..the president of the British Antiques Dealers Association is one Lady Victoria Borwick..a Tory MP and close friend of Theresa May..not sure how Tory voters can explain that one away as ethical..." thats all they do is bow down to lobbyists. they really dont give a fuck apart from their rich mates | |||
"Theresa May has bowed to lobbyists from the up market antiques trade, and removed the long proposed ban on the ivory trade from the current manifesto...this was promised by David Cameron, after the ban was instituted in China, the US and four other major ivory trading nations,scheduled to be in effect by the end of 2017. Great scheme to siphon the money via the UK..but morally reprehensible...hopefully this disgusting move will get more publicity than it has so far.. and in an odd coincidence..the president of the British Antiques Dealers Association is one Lady Victoria Borwick..a Tory MP and close friend of Theresa May..not sure how Tory voters can explain that one away as ethical... thats all they do is bow down to lobbyists. they really dont give a fuck apart from their rich mates" it's obscene..be interesting to see how Tories plan on explaining to their kids where all the elephants went in a decade or so..so blatantly money grubbing and immoral.. | |||
| |||
| |||
"It is not an issue that effects how people vote,there are many more important issues to be concerned about. These statements about just pleasing there rich mates is so stupid and childish because if they had only gone out to please them there would not have been a tory government since world war 2. 90% of people are not rich and you could get into government with 10% of the vote" is it very definitely an issue that people care about..maybe not you, but undoubtedly many people care about money being made from wiping out a species. | |||
"It is very definitely an issue that people care about..maybe not you, but undoubtedly many people care about money being made from wiping out a species." Absolutely agree with you there. Just because there are many issues we should be concerned about, doesn't mean we shouldn't care about this one. Never understand people who don't care about this planet as a whole... saddens me deeply. | |||
"It is not an issue that effects how people vote,there are many more important issues to be concerned about. These statements about just pleasing there rich mates is so stupid and childish because if they had only gone out to please them there would not have been a tory government since world war 2. 90% of people are not rich and you could get into government with 10% of the vote is it very definitely an issue that people care about..maybe not you, but undoubtedly many people care about money being made from wiping out a species." Have you looked into this properly? | |||
"It is very definitely an issue that people care about..maybe not you, but undoubtedly many people care about money being made from wiping out a species. Absolutely agree with you there. Just because there are many issues we should be concerned about, doesn't mean we shouldn't care about this one. Never understand people who don't care about this planet as a whole... saddens me deeply. "  | |||
"It is not an issue that effects how people vote,there are many more important issues to be concerned about. These statements about just pleasing there rich mates is so stupid and childish because if they had only gone out to please them there would not have been a tory government since world war 2. 90% of people are not rich and you could get into government with 10% of the vote is it very definitely an issue that people care about..maybe not you, but undoubtedly many people care about money being made from wiping out a species. Have you looked into this properly?" in what respect? it is fact that david cameron had this due to banned by the end of this year, and it has now been removed due to lobbying. Luckily it is gaining a bit of publicity now. | |||
| |||
"Have you actually read the manifesto? If so...instead of spouting nonsense...will you please quote the page and paragraph where there is any mention of ivory.... I've read it. Can't find a thing! Fake news or what?" that is what i meant, it has been left out.. it is not fake news. There is an article from yesterday in the guardian, as well as on a couple of environmental websites..london is the centre of the ivory trade now,which given that even china has banned it, is pretty embarrassing. you can read plenty of articles about it if you bother to look at sites such as the WWF...it's not some secret...the torys are just hoping no one will notice! | |||
"It is not an issue that effects how people vote,there are many more important issues to be concerned about. These statements about just pleasing there rich mates is so stupid and childish because if they had only gone out to please them there would not have been a tory government since world war 2. 90% of people are not rich and you could get into government with 10% of the vote is it very definitely an issue that people care about..maybe not you, but undoubtedly many people care about money being made from wiping out a species. Have you looked into this properly? in what respect? it is fact that david cameron had this due to banned by the end of this year, and it has now been removed due to lobbying. Luckily it is gaining a bit of publicity now." I've not looked into it fully but a ban on the legal ivory trade will make the illegal trade more lucrative for the poachers and worse for the elephants. Not everything is as simple or straight forwarard as it first seems and Cameron has been wrong on a lot of things. And this is nothing to do with politics, I read the argument against the ban in the left wing rag that is the Guardian | |||
| |||
"It is not an issue that effects how people vote,there are many more important issues to be concerned about. These statements about just pleasing there rich mates is so stupid and childish because if they had only gone out to please them there would not have been a tory government since world war 2. 90% of people are not rich and you could get into government with 10% of the vote is it very definitely an issue that people care about..maybe not you, but undoubtedly many people care about money being made from wiping out a species. Have you looked into this properly? in what respect? it is fact that david cameron had this due to banned by the end of this year, and it has now been removed due to lobbying. Luckily it is gaining a bit of publicity now. I've not looked into it fully but a ban on the legal ivory trade will make the illegal trade more lucrative for the poachers and worse for the elephants. Not everything is as simple or straight forwarard as it first seems and Cameron has been wrong on a lot of things. And this is nothing to do with politics, I read the argument against the ban in the left wing rag that is the Guardian" strangely i cant find a single environmentalist group saying a ban will endanger elephants more...at the moment a huge amount of the trade is done through london, because it is banned elsewhere..so banning it here will make a huge dent in the ability of dealers to sell on ivory. It's a pretty simple concept...if a dealer cannot sell it on, they will be reluctant to buy it in the first place.  | |||
"It is not an issue that effects how people vote,there are many more important issues to be concerned about. These statements about just pleasing there rich mates is so stupid and childish because if they had only gone out to please them there would not have been a tory government since world war 2. 90% of people are not rich and you could get into government with 10% of the vote is it very definitely an issue that people care about..maybe not you, but undoubtedly many people care about money being made from wiping out a species. Have you looked into this properly? in what respect? it is fact that david cameron had this due to banned by the end of this year, and it has now been removed due to lobbying. Luckily it is gaining a bit of publicity now. I've not looked into it fully but a ban on the legal ivory trade will make the illegal trade more lucrative for the poachers and worse for the elephants. Not everything is as simple or straight forwarard as it first seems and Cameron has been wrong on a lot of things. And this is nothing to do with politics, I read the argument against the ban in the left wing rag that is the Guardian strangely i cant find a single environmentalist group saying a ban will endanger elephants more...at the moment a huge amount of the trade is done through london, because it is banned elsewhere..so banning it here will make a huge dent in the ability of dealers to sell on ivory. It's a pretty simple concept...if a dealer cannot sell it on, they will be reluctant to buy it in the first place. "Like drugs you mean? | |||
"It is not an issue that effects how people vote,there are many more important issues to be concerned about. These statements about just pleasing there rich mates is so stupid and childish because if they had only gone out to please them there would not have been a tory government since world war 2. 90% of people are not rich and you could get into government with 10% of the vote is it very definitely an issue that people care about..maybe not you, but undoubtedly many people care about money being made from wiping out a species. Have you looked into this properly? in what respect? it is fact that david cameron had this due to banned by the end of this year, and it has now been removed due to lobbying. Luckily it is gaining a bit of publicity now. I've not looked into it fully but a ban on the legal ivory trade will make the illegal trade more lucrative for the poachers and worse for the elephants. Not everything is as simple or straight forwarard as it first seems and Cameron has been wrong on a lot of things. And this is nothing to do with politics, I read the argument against the ban in the left wing rag that is the Guardian strangely i cant find a single environmentalist group saying a ban will endanger elephants more...at the moment a huge amount of the trade is done through london, because it is banned elsewhere..so banning it here will make a huge dent in the ability of dealers to sell on ivory. It's a pretty simple concept...if a dealer cannot sell it on, they will be reluctant to buy it in the first place.
Like drugs you mean?"not really no...most shops round me, antique or otherwise, don't usually sell drugs..the antiques trade can quite legally sell ivory at the moment,within certain limits...banning the import of it into the country will make it less desirable...as has been the case in the US and in China, the biggest buyers..the social pressure not to own or display it has changed massively there since it was banned. | |||
"It is not an issue that effects how people vote,there are many more important issues to be concerned about. These statements about just pleasing there rich mates is so stupid and childish because if they had only gone out to please them there would not have been a tory government since world war 2. 90% of people are not rich and you could get into government with 10% of the vote is it very definitely an issue that people care about..maybe not you, but undoubtedly many people care about money being made from wiping out a species. Have you looked into this properly? in what respect? it is fact that david cameron had this due to banned by the end of this year, and it has now been removed due to lobbying. Luckily it is gaining a bit of publicity now. I've not looked into it fully but a ban on the legal ivory trade will make the illegal trade more lucrative for the poachers and worse for the elephants. Not everything is as simple or straight forwarard as it first seems and Cameron has been wrong on a lot of things. And this is nothing to do with politics, I read the argument against the ban in the left wing rag that is the Guardian strangely i cant find a single environmentalist group saying a ban will endanger elephants more...at the moment a huge amount of the trade is done through london, because it is banned elsewhere..so banning it here will make a huge dent in the ability of dealers to sell on ivory. It's a pretty simple concept...if a dealer cannot sell it on, they will be reluctant to buy it in the first place.
Like drugs you mean?
not really no...most shops round me, antique or otherwise, don't usually sell drugs..the antiques trade can quite legally sell ivory at the moment,within certain limits...banning the import of it into the country will make it less desirable...as has been the case in the US and in China, the biggest buyers..the social pressure not to own or display it has changed massively there since it was banned."Just playing devils advocate but banning imports into a country would make it more valuable and desirable. But like I say, I've not looked into it properly but I'm sure the government has a good reason to do whatever it is they are doing and don't imagine for a minute that its about money or that they have something against elephants | |||
 | |||
"The Tories no longer want to abolish child poverty. It was in previous Tory manifestos, but I guess they no longer want to eliminate it. "It's not in the Tory manifesto to increase child poverty either though is it, just like there is nothing in the Tory manifesto about the ivory trade. | |||
"The Tories no longer want to abolish child poverty. It was in previous Tory manifestos, but I guess they no longer want to eliminate it.
It's not in the Tory manifesto to increase child poverty either though is it, just like there is nothing in the Tory manifesto about the ivory trade. "which if you bothered to read it,was the point of the post...it has been removed. | |||
| |||
"Has it been removed from the 2017 manifesto since it's release, or from the old 2015 manifesto?" The tories used to believe in it, now they dont. | |||
"Has it been removed from the 2017 manifesto since it's release, or from the old 2015 manifesto?" it hasn't been removed since release,it has been left out after extensive lobbying by the antiques trade. | |||
"Has it been removed from the 2017 manifesto since it's release, or from the old 2015 manifesto? it hasn't been removed since release,it has been left out after extensive lobbying by the antiques trade." Do you think that the antiques trade want to see more elephants killed or less? | |||
"Has it been removed from the 2017 manifesto since it's release, or from the old 2015 manifesto? it hasn't been removed since release,it has been left out after extensive lobbying by the antiques trade. Do you think that the antiques trade want to see more elephants killed or less?" One would assume less  | |||
"Has it been removed from the 2017 manifesto since it's release, or from the old 2015 manifesto? it hasn't been removed since release,it has been left out after extensive lobbying by the antiques trade. Do you think that the antiques trade want to see more elephants killed or less?" given that they have lobbied to keep the trade in ivory alive and well,i think the answer is quite clear. | |||
"It is not an issue that effects how people vote,there are many more important issues to be concerned about. These statements about just pleasing there rich mates is so stupid and childish because if they had only gone out to please them there would not have been a tory government since world war 2. 90% of people are not rich and you could get into government with 10% of the vote is it very definitely an issue that people care about..maybe not you, but undoubtedly many people care about money being made from wiping out a species." You missed my point,it may well concern people and it does concern me but Brexit,defence and the economy etc concern me more and most other people you are pretty lucky to be able to have this as priority. | |||
"The Tories no longer want to abolish child poverty. It was in previous Tory manifestos, but I guess they no longer want to eliminate it.
It's not in the Tory manifesto to increase child poverty either though is it, just like there is nothing in the Tory manifesto about the ivory trade. "but the thing about the child poverty issue is that in that the wording in the 2015 manifesto was to "completely eradicate child poverty"...... now in the 2017 manifesto its target is to "lower child poverty" and doesn't give a target to lower it by/to..... you think they are giving themselves leaway? | |||
"It is not an issue that effects how people vote,there are many more important issues to be concerned about. These statements about just pleasing there rich mates is so stupid and childish because if they had only gone out to please them there would not have been a tory government since world war 2. 90% of people are not rich and you could get into government with 10% of the vote is it very definitely an issue that people care about..maybe not you, but undoubtedly many people care about money being made from wiping out a species. Have you looked into this properly? in what respect? it is fact that david cameron had this due to banned by the end of this year, and it has now been removed due to lobbying. Luckily it is gaining a bit of publicity now. I've not looked into it fully but a ban on the legal ivory trade will make the illegal trade more lucrative for the poachers and worse for the elephants. Not everything is as simple or straight forwarard as it first seems and Cameron has been wrong on a lot of things. And this is nothing to do with politics, I read the argument against the ban in the left wing rag that is the Guardian strangely i cant find a single environmentalist group saying a ban will endanger elephants more...at the moment a huge amount of the trade is done through london, because it is banned elsewhere..so banning it here will make a huge dent in the ability of dealers to sell on ivory. It's a pretty simple concept...if a dealer cannot sell it on, they will be reluctant to buy it in the first place.
Like drugs you mean?
not really no...most shops round me, antique or otherwise, don't usually sell drugs..the antiques trade can quite legally sell ivory at the moment,within certain limits...banning the import of it into the country will make it less desirable...as has been the case in the US and in China, the biggest buyers..the social pressure not to own or display it has changed massively there since it was banned.
Just playing devils advocate but banning imports into a country would make it more valuable and desirable. But like I say, I've not looked into it properly but I'm sure the government has a good reason to do whatever it is they are doing and don't imagine for a minute that its about money or that they have something against elephants"so you're saying if the UK were to make cocaine legal ..there would be less cocaine in the UK? ....do you think about what you say? | |||
"Has it been removed from the 2017 manifesto since it's release, or from the old 2015 manifesto? it hasn't been removed since release,it has been left out after extensive lobbying by the antiques trade. Do you think that the antiques trade want to see more elephants killed or less? given that they have lobbied to keep the trade in ivory alive and well,i think the answer is quite clear." But new ivory isn't antique is it? | |||
"Has it been removed from the 2017 manifesto since it's release, or from the old 2015 manifesto? it hasn't been removed since release,it has been left out after extensive lobbying by the antiques trade. Do you think that the antiques trade want to see more elephants killed or less? given that they have lobbied to keep the trade in ivory alive and well,i think the answer is quite clear. But new ivory isn't antique is it?" the criteria for 'antique' is easily by passed in this country which doesn't require the proof of provenance that it does in other countries, which is why London has become the major venue for dealing in it. Also a huge amount is artificially aged for export. | |||
"Has it been removed from the 2017 manifesto since it's release, or from the old 2015 manifesto? it hasn't been removed since release,it has been left out after extensive lobbying by the antiques trade. Do you think that the antiques trade want to see more elephants killed or less? given that they have lobbied to keep the trade in ivory alive and well,i think the answer is quite clear. But new ivory isn't antique is it?" How do you repair a damaged or missing piece of ivory from a larger piece? With new ivory perhaps? | |||
"Has it been removed from the 2017 manifesto since it's release, or from the old 2015 manifesto? it hasn't been removed since release,it has been left out after extensive lobbying by the antiques trade. Do you think that the antiques trade want to see more elephants killed or less? given that they have lobbied to keep the trade in ivory alive and well,i think the answer is quite clear. But new ivory isn't antique is it? How do you repair a damaged or missing piece of ivory from a larger piece? With new ivory perhaps? "What and sellotape it on? | |||
"Has it been removed from the 2017 manifesto since it's release, or from the old 2015 manifesto? it hasn't been removed since release,it has been left out after extensive lobbying by the antiques trade. Do you think that the antiques trade want to see more elephants killed or less? given that they have lobbied to keep the trade in ivory alive and well,i think the answer is quite clear. But new ivory isn't antique is it? the criteria for 'antique' is easily by passed in this country which doesn't require the proof of provenance that it does in other countries, which is why London has become the major venue for dealing in it. Also a huge amount is artificially aged for export." I honestly don't know what the answer is but there are people who say a total ban will only create a black market and encourage poaching whereas some legal controlled trading and harvesting of ivory from dead elephants will help to preserve them | |||
"Has it been removed from the 2017 manifesto since it's release, or from the old 2015 manifesto? it hasn't been removed since release,it has been left out after extensive lobbying by the antiques trade. Do you think that the antiques trade want to see more elephants killed or less? given that they have lobbied to keep the trade in ivory alive and well,i think the answer is quite clear. But new ivory isn't antique is it? How do you repair a damaged or missing piece of ivory from a larger piece? With new ivory perhaps?
What and sellotape it on?"Your knowledge or antiques is obviously on par with your knowledge of politics. | |||
"Has it been removed from the 2017 manifesto since it's release, or from the old 2015 manifesto? it hasn't been removed since release,it has been left out after extensive lobbying by the antiques trade. Do you think that the antiques trade want to see more elephants killed or less? given that they have lobbied to keep the trade in ivory alive and well,i think the answer is quite clear. But new ivory isn't antique is it? How do you repair a damaged or missing piece of ivory from a larger piece? With new ivory perhaps?
What and sellotape it on?
Your knowledge or antiques is obviously on par with your knowledge of politics. "I know fuck all about antiques, do you? But what I do know about politics is that I'm usually on the winning side, are you? | |||
"Have you actually read the manifesto? If so...instead of spouting nonsense...will you please quote the page and paragraph where there is any mention of ivory.... I've read it. Can't find a thing! Fake news or what? that is what i meant, it has been left out.. it is not fake news. There is an article from yesterday in the guardian, as well as on a couple of environmental websites..london is the centre of the ivory trade now,which given that even china has banned it, is pretty embarrassing. you can read plenty of articles about it if you bother to look at sites such as the WWF...it's not some secret...the torys are just hoping no one will notice! " If it isn't in...then no change to initial plans. There isn't anything in the labour manifesto about bringing back slavery, or anything in the green manifesto about reversing votes for women.....it doesn't mean you can read anything into it. Something NOT in a manifesto doesn't mean anything! | |||
"Have you actually read the manifesto? If so...instead of spouting nonsense...will you please quote the page and paragraph where there is any mention of ivory.... I've read it. Can't find a thing! Fake news or what? that is what i meant, it has been left out.. it is not fake news. There is an article from yesterday in the guardian, as well as on a couple of environmental websites..london is the centre of the ivory trade now,which given that even china has banned it, is pretty embarrassing. you can read plenty of articles about it if you bother to look at sites such as the WWF...it's not some secret...the torys are just hoping no one will notice! If it isn't in...then no change to initial plans. There isn't anything in the labour manifesto about bringing back slavery, or anything in the green manifesto about reversing votes for women.....it doesn't mean you can read anything into it. Something NOT in a manifesto doesn't mean anything!" Exactly! I think this thread is really highlighting the desperation Labour and the other parties are resorting to. | |||
| |||
"Has it been removed from the 2017 manifesto since it's release, or from the old 2015 manifesto? it hasn't been removed since release,it has been left out after extensive lobbying by the antiques trade. Do you think that the antiques trade want to see more elephants killed or less? given that they have lobbied to keep the trade in ivory alive and well,i think the answer is quite clear. But new ivory isn't antique is it? How do you repair a damaged or missing piece of ivory from a larger piece? With new ivory perhaps?
What and sellotape it on?
Your knowledge or antiques is obviously on par with your knowledge of politics.
I know fuck all about antiques, do you? But what I do know about politics is that I'm usually on the winning side, are you?"Of the ivory trade? | |||
"Exactly..... they (fill in any party) didn't say they are not going to quadruple fuel prices. Therefore....they are going to! Talk about warped logic!" I think you are missing the point. Its about them previously having said something such as abolishing child poverty, limiting care costs to £73,000, or stopping the ivory trade, and now they have removed that promise. That is not the same as never having said something in the past is it. | |||
"Has it been removed from the 2017 manifesto since it's release, or from the old 2015 manifesto? it hasn't been removed since release,it has been left out after extensive lobbying by the antiques trade. Do you think that the antiques trade want to see more elephants killed or less? given that they have lobbied to keep the trade in ivory alive and well,i think the answer is quite clear." Really ! I find this thread fascinating ! Not the politics side of it , but rather the discussion round legal/illegal ivory trade ! Correct me ,if I am wrong , but it seems to me that most of the posters either pro or against , have never seen or been closer to an elephant then the zoo ! So all are discussing based on personal views , with no actual knowledge of elephant populations habitats and conservation ! Dont get me wrong, not trying to call anyone ignorant , or seem clever , but for the record I used to live in Africa and am well acquainted with the animals their habitat , conservation , poaching, and hunting ! There, elephants were a natural resource, and nothing went to waste... including the ivory ! Its not as simple as it seems , and FYI ivory is only one cause for the demise of herds ...in fact its not even the main cause !  | |||
| |||
"The trade in ivory is more complex than some imagine. Any ivory post 1947 is subject to a worldwide ban under the CITES agreement. The trade in pre 1947 ivory is still legal in various countries, with the EU being the largest centre. Only France has banned all ivory sales, with the UK being responsible for 52% of sales. The problem is that new ivory is being treated and given forged paperwork to get around the ban. That antiquity may be not as old as it seems! It would be in the UK's interests to impose a total ban, especially in light of the good work done by Prince William and Harry. Why it isn't in the Conservative manifesto is a mystery, and I will ask Nick Boles who is my local Conservative candidate, why it isn't. " Guess what......it isn't in the Labour, Lib-Dem, UKIP, SNP, Greens or any other manifesto! They must be all in it together if we follow the logic of the argument..... | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"just find it a bit shaming that the UK would be one of the very very few nations, and certainly the only first world nation, left ,that was still endorsing the ivory trade.." The EU currently has no ban on the Ivory Trade, outside of CITES. | |||
"just find it a bit shaming that the UK would be one of the very very few nations, and certainly the only first world nation, left ,that was still endorsing the ivory trade.." That is an easy statement to through out...but ... Why is it shaming ? 
Care to explain .... | |||
"Anyone care to guess how long the retraction on the claims it wasn't in the other parties manifestos will take. I'll guess on it never occurs... lol" I'm sure they'll be along to apologise any minute now ... any minute.... | |||
"just find it a bit shaming that the UK would be one of the very very few nations, and certainly the only first world nation, left ,that was still endorsing the ivory trade.. The EU currently has no ban on the Ivory Trade, outside of CITES." it is CITES i'm talking about, but the majority of countries that signed that pledge have all gone ahead with moves to outlaw domestic trade. My point was the Tories have reneged on the promise by Cameron in the last election due to pressure from the antiques trade. If you cannot see that the trade in ivory is inherently wrong,then, obviously..my post is completely irrelevant to you. | |||
"just find it a bit shaming that the UK would be one of the very very few nations, and certainly the only first world nation, left ,that was still endorsing the ivory trade.. That is an easy statement to through out...but ... Why is it shaming ?
Care to explain .... "yes i can explain quite clearly. I find it shameful that anyone in the civilised world thinks the ivory trade is necessary,wanted or acceptable. | |||
"just find it a bit shaming that the UK would be one of the very very few nations, and certainly the only first world nation, left ,that was still endorsing the ivory trade.. That is an easy statement to through out...but ... Why is it shaming ?
Care to explain ....
yes i can explain quite clearly. I find it shameful that anyone in the civilised world thinks the ivory trade is necessary,wanted or acceptable. "So let me ask you ! Is it your view All the ivory from legitimate sources , should be destroyed, and not used as the valuable resource it is ! | |||
"just find it a bit shaming that the UK would be one of the very very few nations, and certainly the only first world nation, left ,that was still endorsing the ivory trade.. That is an easy statement to through out...but ... Why is it shaming ?
Care to explain ....
yes i can explain quite clearly. I find it shameful that anyone in the civilised world thinks the ivory trade is necessary,wanted or acceptable.
So let me ask you !
Is it your view All the ivory from legitimate sources , should be destroyed, and not used as the valuable resource it is ! "yes, it is. There are increasingly less 'legitimate' sources..and the point of getting rid of the trade is that ivory will no longer be regarded as a valuable resource....which incidentally is what is already happening, you clearly don't agree which is your perogative, we can agree to disagree. There is nothing you can say to alter my opinion,in which i am clearly not alone, that it is a disgusting trade, orchestrated by the greedy, for the greedy. | |||
"just find it a bit shaming that the UK would be one of the very very few nations, and certainly the only first world nation, left ,that was still endorsing the ivory trade.. That is an easy statement to through out...but ... Why is it shaming ?
Care to explain ....
yes i can explain quite clearly. I find it shameful that anyone in the civilised world thinks the ivory trade is necessary,wanted or acceptable.
So let me ask you !
Is it your view All the ivory from legitimate sources , should be destroyed, and not used as the valuable resource it is !
yes, it is. There are increasingly less 'legitimate' sources..and the point of getting rid of the trade is that ivory will no longer be regarded as a valuable resource....which incidentally is what is already happening, you clearly don't agree which is your perogative, we can agree to disagree. There is nothing you can say to alter my opinion,in which i am clearly not alone, that it is a disgusting trade, orchestrated by the greedy, for the greedy."Its obvious you are not alone ,but I hope you realise that while entitled to your opinion , it stems from a closed mind ! An urban mentality very common in western affluent societies that know nothing about issues like cultural traditions, conservation and wild animal, their habitats , and last but but not least , have materialistic consumer society views that waste resources !
| |||
"just find it a bit shaming that the UK would be one of the very very few nations, and certainly the only first world nation, left ,that was still endorsing the ivory trade.. That is an easy statement to through out...but ... Why is it shaming ?
Care to explain ....
yes i can explain quite clearly. I find it shameful that anyone in the civilised world thinks the ivory trade is necessary,wanted or acceptable.
So let me ask you !
Is it your view All the ivory from legitimate sources , should be destroyed, and not used as the valuable resource it is !
yes, it is. There are increasingly less 'legitimate' sources..and the point of getting rid of the trade is that ivory will no longer be regarded as a valuable resource....which incidentally is what is already happening, you clearly don't agree which is your perogative, we can agree to disagree. There is nothing you can say to alter my opinion,in which i am clearly not alone, that it is a disgusting trade, orchestrated by the greedy, for the greedy.
Its obvious you are not alone ,but I hope you realise that while entitled to your opinion , it stems from a closed mind !
An urban mentality very common in western affluent societies that know nothing about issues like cultural traditions, conservation and wild animal, their habitats , and last but but not least , have materialistic consumer society views that waste resources !
"well thats predictably patronising...you obviously know far far better than every conservation group on the planet, so i will bow to your superior knowledge and also bow out of this pointless exchange and hope you are able to advise them all of the error of their policies...though if you could point me in the direction of one that considers the ivory trade beneficial to conservation, i would be interested to know. | |||
"just find it a bit shaming that the UK would be one of the very very few nations, and certainly the only first world nation, left ,that was still endorsing the ivory trade.. That is an easy statement to through out...but ... Why is it shaming ?
Care to explain ....
yes i can explain quite clearly. I find it shameful that anyone in the civilised world thinks the ivory trade is necessary,wanted or acceptable.
So let me ask you !
Is it your view All the ivory from legitimate sources , should be destroyed, and not used as the valuable resource it is !
yes, it is. There are increasingly less 'legitimate' sources..and the point of getting rid of the trade is that ivory will no longer be regarded as a valuable resource....which incidentally is what is already happening, you clearly don't agree which is your perogative, we can agree to disagree. There is nothing you can say to alter my opinion,in which i am clearly not alone, that it is a disgusting trade, orchestrated by the greedy, for the greedy.
Its obvious you are not alone ,but I hope you realise that while entitled to your opinion , it stems from a closed mind !
An urban mentality very common in western affluent societies that know nothing about issues like cultural traditions, conservation and wild animal, their habitats , and last but but not least , have materialistic consumer society views that waste resources !
well thats predictably patronising...you obviously know far far better than every conservation group on the planet, so i will bow to your superior knowledge and also bow out of this pointless exchange and hope you are able to advise them all of the error of their policies...though if you could point me in the direction of one that considers the ivory trade beneficial to conservation, i would be interested to know."and while you want to get personal and accuse me of having a closed mind, i might add that my father was a biologist so i was brought up very aware of conservation issues.. and i have 2 siblings who have both lived and worked in Africa over the last 30 odd years..one as a journalist, and one for an NGO, neither of whom think the ivory trade is acceptable... so i may not be as stupid and ignorant as you seem to think. | |||
"just find it a bit shaming that the UK would be one of the very very few nations, and certainly the only first world nation, left ,that was still endorsing the ivory trade.. That is an easy statement to through out...but ... Why is it shaming ?
Care to explain ....
yes i can explain quite clearly. I find it shameful that anyone in the civilised world thinks the ivory trade is necessary,wanted or acceptable.
So let me ask you !
Is it your view All the ivory from legitimate sources , should be destroyed, and not used as the valuable resource it is !
yes, it is. There are increasingly less 'legitimate' sources..and the point of getting rid of the trade is that ivory will no longer be regarded as a valuable resource....which incidentally is what is already happening, you clearly don't agree which is your perogative, we can agree to disagree. There is nothing you can say to alter my opinion,in which i am clearly not alone, that it is a disgusting trade, orchestrated by the greedy, for the greedy.
Its obvious you are not alone ,but I hope you realise that while entitled to your opinion , it stems from a closed mind !
An urban mentality very common in western affluent societies that know nothing about issues like cultural traditions, conservation and wild animal, their habitats , and last but but not least , have materialistic consumer society views that waste resources !
well thats predictably patronising...you obviously know far far better than every conservation group on the planet, so i will bow to your superior knowledge and also bow out of this pointless exchange and hope you are able to advise them all of the error of their policies...though if you could point me in the direction of one that considers the ivory trade beneficial to conservation, i would be interested to know."Patronising ? No just dont like people confusing opinions and facts or treating a serious matter as if it was black or white ! Elephants are not the only source of ivory , but its the one I am more familiar with , having grown up in Mozambique and South Africa ! So lets tackle a few "simple" issues ! The biggest problem with the demise of elephants is habitat loss , not poaching or legal hunting ! Combating poaching and securing habitats takes money ...lots of it that most governments in Africa don't have , so any renewable resources that can contribute to that, should be used ! The saddest thing one can witness is a majestic animal like that dying from hunger ! Banning legal trade has only made poaching and illegal trade bigger ! Care to comment ? | |||
"just find it a bit shaming that the UK would be one of the very very few nations, and certainly the only first world nation, left ,that was still endorsing the ivory trade.. That is an easy statement to through out...but ... Why is it shaming ?
Care to explain ....
yes i can explain quite clearly. I find it shameful that anyone in the civilised world thinks the ivory trade is necessary,wanted or acceptable.
So let me ask you !
Is it your view All the ivory from legitimate sources , should be destroyed, and not used as the valuable resource it is !
yes, it is. There are increasingly less 'legitimate' sources..and the point of getting rid of the trade is that ivory will no longer be regarded as a valuable resource....which incidentally is what is already happening, you clearly don't agree which is your perogative, we can agree to disagree. There is nothing you can say to alter my opinion,in which i am clearly not alone, that it is a disgusting trade, orchestrated by the greedy, for the greedy.
Its obvious you are not alone ,but I hope you realise that while entitled to your opinion , it stems from a closed mind !
An urban mentality very common in western affluent societies that know nothing about issues like cultural traditions, conservation and wild animal, their habitats , and last but but not least , have materialistic consumer society views that waste resources !
well thats predictably patronising...you obviously know far far better than every conservation group on the planet, so i will bow to your superior knowledge and also bow out of this pointless exchange and hope you are able to advise them all of the error of their policies...though if you could point me in the direction of one that considers the ivory trade beneficial to conservation, i would be interested to know.
Patronising ? No just dont like people confusing opinions and facts or treating a serious matter as if it was black or white !
Elephants are not the only source of ivory , but its the one I am more familiar with , having grown up in Mozambique and South Africa !
So lets tackle a few "simple" issues !
The biggest problem with the demise of elephants is habitat loss , not poaching or legal hunting !
Combating poaching and securing habitats takes money ...lots of it that most governments in Africa don't have , so any renewable resources that can contribute to that, should be used !
The saddest thing one can witness is a majestic animal like that dying from hunger !
Banning legal trade has only made poaching and illegal trade bigger !
Care to comment ? "as i said you clearly know far better than all the conservationist and environmentalist groups who say loss of habitat has not been the cause of the demise of the population for many many years, and that removing the market for ivory is the only way to preserve the species. i suggest you get in touch with them and re-educate them. goodnight. | |||
| |||
"Anyone care to guess how long the retraction on the claims it wasn't in the other parties manifestos will take. I'll guess on it never occurs... lol I'm sure they'll be along to apologise any minute now ... any minute.... "They all talk about stopping the illegal trade. Not the (currently) legal trade in "antique" ivory which is allowed under current rules. No change. But the logic is still...because something ISNT in a manifesto then the opposite must be in. My point was the warped, negative logic being used here. | |||
"Anyone care to guess how long the retraction on the claims it wasn't in the other parties manifestos will take. I'll guess on it never occurs... lol I'm sure they'll be along to apologise any minute now ... any minute....
They all talk about stopping the illegal trade. Not the (currently) legal trade in "antique" ivory which is allowed under current rules. No change.
But the logic is still...because something ISNT in a manifesto then the opposite must be in.
My point was the warped, negative logic being used here."you have still failed to grasp the very very simple original post...my point was that it has been left out, removed from the manifesto, the moves underway to ban it have been halted, stopped..no longer going ahead..it's not something that was never considered , it is something that has been suddenly reneged on due to lobbying. It was due to happen by the end of this year. Now lobbying by wealthy antiques businesses has succeeded in getting it taken off the agenda. London will be the only major trading place for ivory in the world. That is not something to be proud of, or ignored. | |||
"just find it a bit shaming that the UK would be one of the very very few nations, and certainly the only first world nation, left ,that was still endorsing the ivory trade.. That is an easy statement to through out...but ... Why is it shaming ?
Care to explain ....
yes i can explain quite clearly. I find it shameful that anyone in the civilised world thinks the ivory trade is necessary,wanted or acceptable.
So let me ask you !
Is it your view All the ivory from legitimate sources , should be destroyed, and not used as the valuable resource it is !
yes, it is. There are increasingly less 'legitimate' sources..and the point of getting rid of the trade is that ivory will no longer be regarded as a valuable resource....which incidentally is what is already happening, you clearly don't agree which is your perogative, we can agree to disagree. There is nothing you can say to alter my opinion,in which i am clearly not alone, that it is a disgusting trade, orchestrated by the greedy, for the greedy.
Its obvious you are not alone ,but I hope you realise that while entitled to your opinion , it stems from a closed mind !
An urban mentality very common in western affluent societies that know nothing about issues like cultural traditions, conservation and wild animal, their habitats , and last but but not least , have materialistic consumer society views that waste resources !
well thats predictably patronising...you obviously know far far better than every conservation group on the planet, so i will bow to your superior knowledge and also bow out of this pointless exchange and hope you are able to advise them all of the error of their policies...though if you could point me in the direction of one that considers the ivory trade beneficial to conservation, i would be interested to know.
Patronising ? No just dont like people confusing opinions and facts or treating a serious matter as if it was black or white !
Elephants are not the only source of ivory , but its the one I am more familiar with , having grown up in Mozambique and South Africa !
So lets tackle a few "simple" issues !
The biggest problem with the demise of elephants is habitat loss , not poaching or legal hunting !
Combating poaching and securing habitats takes money ...lots of it that most governments in Africa don't have , so any renewable resources that can contribute to that, should be used !
The saddest thing one can witness is a majestic animal like that dying from hunger !
Banning legal trade has only made poaching and illegal trade bigger !
Care to comment ?
as i said you clearly know far better than all the conservationist and environmentalist groups who say loss of habitat has not been the cause of the demise of the population for many many years, and that removing the market for ivory is the only way to preserve the species. i suggest you get in touch with them and re-educate them. goodnight."Your response is typical ! Its easy to hide behind what "experts" and certain conservation groups ... My knowledge comes from living in a country (S. Africa),and personally knowing rangers that actually deal hands on as part of their daily routine with these issues ! Not what I read somewhere ! But I am curious ... would the WWF or the others on the following links count as a credible sources ? http://wwf.panda.org/what_we_do/endangered_species/elephants/african_elephants/afelephants_threats/ http://wwf.panda.org/what_we_do/endangered_species/elephants/asian_elephants/asianeleph_threats/ http://www.savetheelephants.org/about-elephants-2-3/threats-to-elephants/ https://www.worldwildlife.org/press-releases/habitat-loss-drives-sumatran-elephants-closer-to-extinction https://www.elephantvoices.org/support-now/7-elephantvoices/support-now/52-main-threats-to-elephants.html http://www.defenders.org/elephant/basic-facts mmm...... | |||
"The flaw in the concept that a legal ivory trade would help conservation. Is obvious,corruption in africa is rife .Wages are low.Criminal networks are wealthy. Once illegal ivory has entered the legal trade, it's difficult or impossible for enforcement officers to know what's legal and illegal." Its not a flaw Bob ! If Elephants have to be culled , does it not make sense to use the resulting "products" meat ,skin , bones, and ivory , to invest back into nature and conservation efforts? I would have thought it goes against your ecologic sense of sustainable living !
Here are a couple of links on the subject:
http://www.krugerpark.co.za/krugerpark-times-23-elephant-numbers-18006.html
The Kruger Park was my "back yard"
I had a class mate whose farm bordered the park....fond memories ... siting quietly on his lawn watching elephants play a mere 50 yards across the river!
http://www.stuartonnature.com/our-blog/to-cull-or-not-to-cull%E2%80%A6-
| |||
"The flaw in the concept that a legal ivory trade would help conservation. Is obvious,corruption in africa is rife .Wages are low.Criminal networks are wealthy. Once illegal ivory has entered the legal trade, it's difficult or impossible for enforcement officers to know what's legal and illegal. Its not a flaw Bob ! If Elephants have to be culled , does it not make sense to use the resulting "products" meat ,skin , bones, and ivory , to invest back into nature and conservation efforts? I would have thought it goes against your ecologic sense of sustainable living !
"I used to think culling was the only answer. However now I think we should be relocating rather. We cannot afford to lose elephants due to culling, hunting or poaching. The numbers are just too low. | |||
"The flaw in the concept that a legal ivory trade would help conservation. Is obvious,corruption in africa is rife .Wages are low.Criminal networks are wealthy. Once illegal ivory has entered the legal trade, it's difficult or impossible for enforcement officers to know what's legal and illegal. Its not a flaw Bob ! If Elephants have to be culled , does it not make sense to use the resulting "products" meat ,skin , bones, and ivory , to invest back into nature and conservation efforts? I would have thought it goes against your ecologic sense of sustainable living !
I used to think culling was the only answer. However now I think we should be relocating rather. We cannot afford to lose elephants due to culling, hunting or poaching. The numbers are just too low."I , or anyone with appreciation of the issue would agree ! The problem is ... Where ? Easier said then done ! Unfortunately ! | |||
"Anyone care to guess how long the retraction on the claims it wasn't in the other parties manifestos will take. I'll guess on it never occurs... lol I'm sure they'll be along to apologise any minute now ... any minute....
They all talk about stopping the illegal trade. Not the (currently) legal trade in "antique" ivory which is allowed under current rules. No change.
But the logic is still...because something ISNT in a manifesto then the opposite must be in.
My point was the warped, negative logic being used here."Green party: "The import of other animal products such as ivory, reptile skins and whale oil, will be prohibited." Labour Party: "enforce a total ban on ivory trading" Neither of those talk about stopping the illegal trade. If something is already illegal they cant make it anymore illegal can they? | |||
"just find it a bit shaming that the UK would be one of the very very few nations, and certainly the only first world nation, left ,that was still endorsing the ivory trade.. That is an easy statement to through out...but ... Why is it shaming ?
Care to explain ....
yes i can explain quite clearly. I find it shameful that anyone in the civilised world thinks the ivory trade is necessary,wanted or acceptable.
So let me ask you !
Is it your view All the ivory from legitimate sources , should be destroyed, and not used as the valuable resource it is !
yes, it is. There are increasingly less 'legitimate' sources..and the point of getting rid of the trade is that ivory will no longer be regarded as a valuable resource....which incidentally is what is already happening, you clearly don't agree which is your perogative, we can agree to disagree. There is nothing you can say to alter my opinion,in which i am clearly not alone, that it is a disgusting trade, orchestrated by the greedy, for the greedy.
Its obvious you are not alone ,but I hope you realise that while entitled to your opinion , it stems from a closed mind !
An urban mentality very common in western affluent societies that know nothing about issues like cultural traditions, conservation and wild animal, their habitats , and last but but not least , have materialistic consumer society views that waste resources !
well thats predictably patronising...you obviously know far far better than every conservation group on the planet, so i will bow to your superior knowledge and also bow out of this pointless exchange and hope you are able to advise them all of the error of their policies...though if you could point me in the direction of one that considers the ivory trade beneficial to conservation, i would be interested to know.
Patronising ? No just dont like people confusing opinions and facts or treating a serious matter as if it was black or white !
Elephants are not the only source of ivory , but its the one I am more familiar with , having grown up in Mozambique and South Africa !
So lets tackle a few "simple" issues !
The biggest problem with the demise of elephants is habitat loss , not poaching or legal hunting !
Combating poaching and securing habitats takes money ...lots of it that most governments in Africa don't have , so any renewable resources that can contribute to that, should be used !
The saddest thing one can witness is a majestic animal like that dying from hunger !
Banning legal trade has only made poaching and illegal trade bigger !
Care to comment ?
as i said you clearly know far better than all the conservationist and environmentalist groups who say loss of habitat has not been the cause of the demise of the population for many many years, and that removing the market for ivory is the only way to preserve the species. i suggest you get in touch with them and re-educate them. goodnight.
Your response is typical ! Its easy to hide behind what "experts" and certain conservation groups ...
My knowledge comes from living in a country (S. Africa),and personally knowing rangers that actually deal hands on as part of their daily routine with these issues ! Not what I read somewhere !
But I am curious ... would the WWF or the others on the following links count as a credible sources ?
http://wwf.panda.org/what_we_do/endangered_species/elephants/african_elephants/afelephants_threats/
http://wwf.panda.org/what_we_do/endangered_species/elephants/asian_elephants/asianeleph_threats/
http://www.savetheelephants.org/about-elephants-2-3/threats-to-elephants/
https://www.worldwildlife.org/press-releases/habitat-loss-drives-sumatran-elephants-closer-to-extinction
https://www.elephantvoices.org/support-now/7-elephantvoices/support-now/52-main-threats-to-elephants.html
http://www.defenders.org/elephant/basic-facts
mmm...... "All of those links you posted say thay the ivory trade is one of the top reasons for the decline in elephant numbers. I don't really understand why would would support the trade. | |||
"just find it a bit shaming that the UK would be one of the very very few nations, and certainly the only first world nation, left ,that was still endorsing the ivory trade.. That is an easy statement to through out...but ... Why is it shaming ?
Care to explain ....
yes i can explain quite clearly. I find it shameful that anyone in the civilised world thinks the ivory trade is necessary,wanted or acceptable.
So let me ask you !
Is it your view All the ivory from legitimate sources , should be destroyed, and not used as the valuable resource it is !
yes, it is. There are increasingly less 'legitimate' sources..and the point of getting rid of the trade is that ivory will no longer be regarded as a valuable resource....which incidentally is what is already happening, you clearly don't agree which is your perogative, we can agree to disagree. There is nothing you can say to alter my opinion,in which i am clearly not alone, that it is a disgusting trade, orchestrated by the greedy, for the greedy.
Its obvious you are not alone ,but I hope you realise that while entitled to your opinion , it stems from a closed mind !
An urban mentality very common in western affluent societies that know nothing about issues like cultural traditions, conservation and wild animal, their habitats , and last but but not least , have materialistic consumer society views that waste resources !
well thats predictably patronising...you obviously know far far better than every conservation group on the planet, so i will bow to your superior knowledge and also bow out of this pointless exchange and hope you are able to advise them all of the error of their policies...though if you could point me in the direction of one that considers the ivory trade beneficial to conservation, i would be interested to know.
Patronising ? No just dont like people confusing opinions and facts or treating a serious matter as if it was black or white !
Elephants are not the only source of ivory , but its the one I am more familiar with , having grown up in Mozambique and South Africa !
So lets tackle a few "simple" issues !
The biggest problem with the demise of elephants is habitat loss , not poaching or legal hunting !
Combating poaching and securing habitats takes money ...lots of it that most governments in Africa don't have , so any renewable resources that can contribute to that, should be used !
The saddest thing one can witness is a majestic animal like that dying from hunger !
Banning legal trade has only made poaching and illegal trade bigger !
Care to comment ?
as i said you clearly know far better than all the conservationist and environmentalist groups who say loss of habitat has not been the cause of the demise of the population for many many years, and that removing the market for ivory is the only way to preserve the species. i suggest you get in touch with them and re-educate them. goodnight.
Your response is typical ! Its easy to hide behind what "experts" and certain conservation groups ...
My knowledge comes from living in a country (S. Africa),and personally knowing rangers that actually deal hands on as part of their daily routine with these issues ! Not what I read somewhere !
But I am curious ... would the WWF or the others on the following links count as a credible sources ?
http://wwf.panda.org/what_we_do/endangered_species/elephants/african_elephants/afelephants_threats/
http://wwf.panda.org/what_we_do/endangered_species/elephants/asian_elephants/asianeleph_threats/
http://www.savetheelephants.org/about-elephants-2-3/threats-to-elephants/
https://www.worldwildlife.org/press-releases/habitat-loss-drives-sumatran-elephants-closer-to-extinction
https://www.elephantvoices.org/support-now/7-elephantvoices/support-now/52-main-threats-to-elephants.html
http://www.defenders.org/elephant/basic-facts
mmm......
All of those links you posted say thay the ivory trade is one of the top reasons for the decline in elephant numbers. I don't really understand why would would support the trade. "Wrong! Ivory trade is one reason , not the main reason ! The main reason is loss of habitat ! I have explained on previous posts why I support legal ivory trade ! I suggest you read those posts ! I understand you and others feel strongly about this issue but I also noted that most , if not all posting here have never been, or seen an elephant in the wild ! That would explain pots based on emotions ... not facts ! | |||
"just find it a bit shaming that the UK would be one of the very very few nations, and certainly the only first world nation, left ,that was still endorsing the ivory trade.. That is an easy statement to through out...but ... Why is it shaming ?
Care to explain ....
yes i can explain quite clearly. I find it shameful that anyone in the civilised world thinks the ivory trade is necessary,wanted or acceptable.
So let me ask you !
Is it your view All the ivory from legitimate sources , should be destroyed, and not used as the valuable resource it is !
yes, it is. There are increasingly less 'legitimate' sources..and the point of getting rid of the trade is that ivory will no longer be regarded as a valuable resource....which incidentally is what is already happening, you clearly don't agree which is your perogative, we can agree to disagree. There is nothing you can say to alter my opinion,in which i am clearly not alone, that it is a disgusting trade, orchestrated by the greedy, for the greedy.
Its obvious you are not alone ,but I hope you realise that while entitled to your opinion , it stems from a closed mind !
An urban mentality very common in western affluent societies that know nothing about issues like cultural traditions, conservation and wild animal, their habitats , and last but but not least , have materialistic consumer society views that waste resources !
well thats predictably patronising...you obviously know far far better than every conservation group on the planet, so i will bow to your superior knowledge and also bow out of this pointless exchange and hope you are able to advise them all of the error of their policies...though if you could point me in the direction of one that considers the ivory trade beneficial to conservation, i would be interested to know.
Patronising ? No just dont like people confusing opinions and facts or treating a serious matter as if it was black or white !
Elephants are not the only source of ivory , but its the one I am more familiar with , having grown up in Mozambique and South Africa !
So lets tackle a few "simple" issues !
The biggest problem with the demise of elephants is habitat loss , not poaching or legal hunting !
Combating poaching and securing habitats takes money ...lots of it that most governments in Africa don't have , so any renewable resources that can contribute to that, should be used !
The saddest thing one can witness is a majestic animal like that dying from hunger !
Banning legal trade has only made poaching and illegal trade bigger !
Care to comment ?
as i said you clearly know far better than all the conservationist and environmentalist groups who say loss of habitat has not been the cause of the demise of the population for many many years, and that removing the market for ivory is the only way to preserve the species. i suggest you get in touch with them and re-educate them. goodnight.
Your response is typical ! Its easy to hide behind what "experts" and certain conservation groups ...
My knowledge comes from living in a country (S. Africa),and personally knowing rangers that actually deal hands on as part of their daily routine with these issues ! Not what I read somewhere !
But I am curious ... would the WWF or the others on the following links count as a credible sources ?
http://wwf.panda.org/what_we_do/endangered_species/elephants/african_elephants/afelephants_threats/
http://wwf.panda.org/what_we_do/endangered_species/elephants/asian_elephants/asianeleph_threats/
http://www.savetheelephants.org/about-elephants-2-3/threats-to-elephants/
https://www.worldwildlife.org/press-releases/habitat-loss-drives-sumatran-elephants-closer-to-extinction
https://www.elephantvoices.org/support-now/7-elephantvoices/support-now/52-main-threats-to-elephants.html
http://www.defenders.org/elephant/basic-facts
mmm......
All of those links you posted say thay the ivory trade is one of the top reasons for the decline in elephant numbers. I don't really understand why would would support the trade.
Wrong!
Ivory trade is one reason , not the main reason !
The main reason is loss of habitat !
I have explained on previous posts why I support legal ivory trade !
I suggest you read those posts !
I understand you and others feel strongly about this issue but I also noted that most , if not all posting here have never been, or seen an elephant in the wild !
That would explain pots based on emotions ... not facts ! "I said it's one of the top reasons, I never said it was the main reason. I don't expect you to apologise. All of the links you provided said that the ivory trade kills elephants. None of the links you provided say that the ivory trade is a good idea, or that it is beneficial. I just want to be 100% clear from you, that you are aware that the ivory trade causes elephants to be killed, and even with that knowledge, you still fully support the ivory trade. | |||
"just find it a bit shaming that the UK would be one of the very very few nations, and certainly the only first world nation, left ,that was still endorsing the ivory trade.. That is an easy statement to through out...but ... Why is it shaming ?
Care to explain ....
yes i can explain quite clearly. I find it shameful that anyone in the civilised world thinks the ivory trade is necessary,wanted or acceptable.
So let me ask you !
Is it your view All the ivory from legitimate sources , should be destroyed, and not used as the valuable resource it is !
yes, it is. There are increasingly less 'legitimate' sources..and the point of getting rid of the trade is that ivory will no longer be regarded as a valuable resource....which incidentally is what is already happening, you clearly don't agree which is your perogative, we can agree to disagree. There is nothing you can say to alter my opinion,in which i am clearly not alone, that it is a disgusting trade, orchestrated by the greedy, for the greedy.
Its obvious you are not alone ,but I hope you realise that while entitled to your opinion , it stems from a closed mind !
An urban mentality very common in western affluent societies that know nothing about issues like cultural traditions, conservation and wild animal, their habitats , and last but but not least , have materialistic consumer society views that waste resources !
well thats predictably patronising...you obviously know far far better than every conservation group on the planet, so i will bow to your superior knowledge and also bow out of this pointless exchange and hope you are able to advise them all of the error of their policies...though if you could point me in the direction of one that considers the ivory trade beneficial to conservation, i would be interested to know.
Patronising ? No just dont like people confusing opinions and facts or treating a serious matter as if it was black or white !
Elephants are not the only source of ivory , but its the one I am more familiar with , having grown up in Mozambique and South Africa !
So lets tackle a few "simple" issues !
The biggest problem with the demise of elephants is habitat loss , not poaching or legal hunting !
Combating poaching and securing habitats takes money ...lots of it that most governments in Africa don't have , so any renewable resources that can contribute to that, should be used !
The saddest thing one can witness is a majestic animal like that dying from hunger !
Banning legal trade has only made poaching and illegal trade bigger !
Care to comment ?
as i said you clearly know far better than all the conservationist and environmentalist groups who say loss of habitat has not been the cause of the demise of the population for many many years, and that removing the market for ivory is the only way to preserve the species. i suggest you get in touch with them and re-educate them. goodnight.
Your response is typical ! Its easy to hide behind what "experts" and certain conservation groups ...
My knowledge comes from living in a country (S. Africa),and personally knowing rangers that actually deal hands on as part of their daily routine with these issues ! Not what I read somewhere !
But I am curious ... would the WWF or the others on the following links count as a credible sources ?
http://wwf.panda.org/what_we_do/endangered_species/elephants/african_elephants/afelephants_threats/
http://wwf.panda.org/what_we_do/endangered_species/elephants/asian_elephants/asianeleph_threats/
http://www.savetheelephants.org/about-elephants-2-3/threats-to-elephants/
https://www.worldwildlife.org/press-releases/habitat-loss-drives-sumatran-elephants-closer-to-extinction
https://www.elephantvoices.org/support-now/7-elephantvoices/support-now/52-main-threats-to-elephants.html
http://www.defenders.org/elephant/basic-facts
mmm......
All of those links you posted say thay the ivory trade is one of the top reasons for the decline in elephant numbers. I don't really understand why would would support the trade.
Wrong!
Ivory trade is one reason , not the main reason !
The main reason is loss of habitat !
I have explained on previous posts why I support legal ivory trade !
I suggest you read those posts !
I understand you and others feel strongly about this issue but I also noted that most , if not all posting here have never been, or seen an elephant in the wild !
That would explain pots based on emotions ... not facts !
I said it's one of the top reasons, I never said it was the main reason. I don't expect you to apologise.
All of the links you provided said that the ivory trade kills elephants. None of the links you provided say that the ivory trade is a good idea, or that it is beneficial.
I just want to be 100% clear from you, that you are aware that the ivory trade causes elephants to be killed, and even with that knowledge, you still fully support the ivory trade.""I said it's one of the top reasons, I never said it was the main reason. I don't expect you to apologise. " I never said you did ! But the way you wrote infers that! I pointed out that it was the main reason , because that is what the article says ! Of course elephants die ! The issue is why and how !
Elephants die mainly from :
1- Old age .
2- Disease. (not common)
3- Starvation.
4- Hunting .(legal)
5- Poaching.
6- Killed by farmers.
7- Culling.
Mind... as I said before I am better acquainted with African, but it should be similar for other types!
On a lighter note elephants have also died as a result of getting d*unk ! | |||
So we are all clear now, that the ivory trade causes the death of elephants, and you support it. | |||
"You said that my post was wrong when I was summarising the links that you posted.
So we are all clear now, that the ivory trade causes the death of elephants, and you support it. "Let me spell it out for you ! What I said was wrong was you inferring that the ivory trade was the main cause behind the demise of elephants! so lets see: "All of those links you posted say thay the ivory trade is one of the top reasons for the decline in elephant numbers. I don't really understand why would would support the trade. " To which I replied : "Wrong! Ivory trade is one reason , not the main reason ! The main reason is loss of habitat !" Now to your question ! "So we are all clear now, that the ivory trade causes the death of elephants, and you support it. " NO, we are not all clear ! That is a "loaded" statement because it states, or infers that the ivory trade at large causes elephant deaths or is the cause! Ans it makes it seem like I support any form of killing elephants! That is not true ! Also, this is not a yes/no question! Also you are simplifying something that isn't simple , and you apparently don't know much about ! There is a difference between legal trade and illegal trade ! As for what I support, I have already posted that very clearly on previous posts , all you have to do is go back and read them ! If after that, you want a more detailed reply then get back to me ! | |||
 | |||
"You said that my post was wrong when I was summarising the links that you posted.
So we are all clear now, that the ivory trade causes the death of elephants, and you support it.
Let me spell it out for you !
What I said was wrong was you inferring that the ivory trade was the main cause behind the demise of elephants! so lets see:
"All of those links you posted say thay the ivory trade is one of the top reasons for the decline in elephant numbers. I don't really understand why would would support the trade. "
To which I replied :
"Wrong!
Ivory trade is one reason , not the main reason !
The main reason is loss of habitat !"
Now to your question !
"So we are all clear now, that the ivory trade causes the death of elephants, and you support it. "
NO, we are not all clear !
That is a "loaded" statement because it states, or infers that the ivory trade at large causes elephant deaths or is the cause! Ans it makes it seem like I support any form of killing elephants!
That is not true !
Also, this is not a yes/no question!
Also you are simplifying something that isn't simple , and you apparently don't know much about !
There is a difference between legal trade and illegal trade ! As for what I support, I have already posted that very clearly on previous posts , all you have to do is go back and read them !
If after that, you want a more detailed reply then get back to me !"I didn't say that it was the main reason, I said it was one of the main reasons. That was what the links you provided said. The links you provided said that the ivory trade results in the death of elephants. Do you agree? | |||
"Tony have you hunted elephants or big game in africa.?I am not going to judge you on it.Just curious where youre comming from. "No, would never hunt elephants! 
I have hunted , smaller game like Impala warthog , wild pigs, !
Have also seen/witnessed hunts of different types ! relocations or culling in certain situations!
some of my school mates fathers were/are game wardens in the KNP !
Dont forget that South Africa has always been on the forefront of wildlife protection and conservation in Africa!
The KNP is the second oldest national park in the world , second only to Yellowstone in the US ! | |||
"You said that my post was wrong when I was summarising the links that you posted.
So we are all clear now, that the ivory trade causes the death of elephants, and you support it.
Let me spell it out for you !
What I said was wrong was you inferring that the ivory trade was the main cause behind the demise of elephants! so lets see:
"All of those links you posted say thay the ivory trade is one of the top reasons for the decline in elephant numbers. I don't really understand why would would support the trade. "
To which I replied :
"Wrong!
Ivory trade is one reason , not the main reason !
The main reason is loss of habitat !"
Now to your question !
"So we are all clear now, that the ivory trade causes the death of elephants, and you support it. "
NO, we are not all clear !
That is a "loaded" statement because it states, or infers that the ivory trade at large causes elephant deaths or is the cause! Ans it makes it seem like I support any form of killing elephants!
That is not true !
Also, this is not a yes/no question!
Also you are simplifying something that isn't simple , and you apparently don't know much about !
There is a difference between legal trade and illegal trade ! As for what I support, I have already posted that very clearly on previous posts , all you have to do is go back and read them !
If after that, you want a more detailed reply then get back to me !
I didn't say that it was the main reason, I said it was one of the main reasons. That was what the links you provided said.
The links you provided said that the ivory trade results in the death of elephants. Do you agree? "No I don't ! Its a blanket statement that serves the purpose of defending a view ! I understand that the idea is to appeal to emotional responses for support of certain causes....buts its not accurate ! To give you an idea that disproves that blanket statement , think about this : Some countries and national parks have resorted to cutting off elephant tusks ! 
How ? They tranquillise them (put them to sleep ) then saw of most of the tusk !
By the way ... the same has been common practice with Rhino as well for quite some time !
The result is the elephant wakes up drowsy and with short tusks !
That does affect the animals life a bit, but it also make it less appealing to Poachers , and thus gives him a better chance of survival !
So... result is a LIVE animal and... ivory tusks !
So... what should the authorities do with those tusks collected that way ? | |||
"You said that my post was wrong when I was summarising the links that you posted.
So we are all clear now, that the ivory trade causes the death of elephants, and you support it.
Let me spell it out for you !
What I said was wrong was you inferring that the ivory trade was the main cause behind the demise of elephants! so lets see:
"All of those links you posted say thay the ivory trade is one of the top reasons for the decline in elephant numbers. I don't really understand why would would support the trade. "
To which I replied :
"Wrong!
Ivory trade is one reason , not the main reason !
The main reason is loss of habitat !"
Now to your question !
"So we are all clear now, that the ivory trade causes the death of elephants, and you support it. "
NO, we are not all clear !
That is a "loaded" statement because it states, or infers that the ivory trade at large causes elephant deaths or is the cause! Ans it makes it seem like I support any form of killing elephants!
That is not true !
Also, this is not a yes/no question!
Also you are simplifying something that isn't simple , and you apparently don't know much about !
There is a difference between legal trade and illegal trade ! As for what I support, I have already posted that very clearly on previous posts , all you have to do is go back and read them !
If after that, you want a more detailed reply then get back to me !
I didn't say that it was the main reason, I said it was one of the main reasons. That was what the links you provided said.
The links you provided said that the ivory trade results in the death of elephants. Do you agree?
No I don't !
Its a blanket statement that serves the purpose of defending a view !
I understand that the idea is to appeal to emotional responses for support of certain causes....buts its not accurate !
To give you an idea that disproves that blanket statement , think about this :
Some countries and national parks have resorted to cutting off elephant tusks !
How ? They tranquillise them (put them to sleep ) then saw of most of the tusk !
By the way ... the same has been common practice with Rhino as well for quite some time !
The result is the elephant wakes up drowsy and with short tusks !
That does affect the animals life a bit, but it also make it less appealing to Poachers , and thus gives him a better chance of survival !
So... result is a LIVE animal and... ivory tusks !
So... what should the authorities do with those tusks collected that way ? "So you disagree with the links that you provided? | |||
"You said that my post was wrong when I was summarising the links that you posted.
So we are all clear now, that the ivory trade causes the death of elephants, and you support it.
Let me spell it out for you !
What I said was wrong was you inferring that the ivory trade was the main cause behind the demise of elephants! so lets see:
"All of those links you posted say thay the ivory trade is one of the top reasons for the decline in elephant numbers. I don't really understand why would would support the trade. "
To which I replied :
"Wrong!
Ivory trade is one reason , not the main reason !
The main reason is loss of habitat !"
Now to your question !
"So we are all clear now, that the ivory trade causes the death of elephants, and you support it. "
NO, we are not all clear !
That is a "loaded" statement because it states, or infers that the ivory trade at large causes elephant deaths or is the cause! Ans it makes it seem like I support any form of killing elephants!
That is not true !
Also, this is not a yes/no question!
Also you are simplifying something that isn't simple , and you apparently don't know much about !
There is a difference between legal trade and illegal trade ! As for what I support, I have already posted that very clearly on previous posts , all you have to do is go back and read them !
If after that, you want a more detailed reply then get back to me !
I didn't say that it was the main reason, I said it was one of the main reasons. That was what the links you provided said.
The links you provided said that the ivory trade results in the death of elephants. Do you agree?
No I don't !
Its a blanket statement that serves the purpose of defending a view !
I understand that the idea is to appeal to emotional responses for support of certain causes....buts its not accurate !
To give you an idea that disproves that blanket statement , think about this :
Some countries and national parks have resorted to cutting off elephant tusks !
How ? They tranquillise them (put them to sleep ) then saw of most of the tusk !
By the way ... the same has been common practice with Rhino as well for quite some time !
The result is the elephant wakes up drowsy and with short tusks !
That does affect the animals life a bit, but it also make it less appealing to Poachers , and thus gives him a better chance of survival !
So... result is a LIVE animal and... ivory tusks !
So... what should the authorities do with those tusks collected that way ?
So you disagree with the links that you provided? "Why are you asking something I just explained ?
Cant you read ? | |||
"You said that my post was wrong when I was summarising the links that you posted.
So we are all clear now, that the ivory trade causes the death of elephants, and you support it.
Let me spell it out for you !
What I said was wrong was you inferring that the ivory trade was the main cause behind the demise of elephants! so lets see:
"All of those links you posted say thay the ivory trade is one of the top reasons for the decline in elephant numbers. I don't really understand why would would support the trade. "
To which I replied :
"Wrong!
Ivory trade is one reason , not the main reason !
The main reason is loss of habitat !"
Now to your question !
"So we are all clear now, that the ivory trade causes the death of elephants, and you support it. "
NO, we are not all clear !
That is a "loaded" statement because it states, or infers that the ivory trade at large causes elephant deaths or is the cause! Ans it makes it seem like I support any form of killing elephants!
That is not true !
Also, this is not a yes/no question!
Also you are simplifying something that isn't simple , and you apparently don't know much about !
There is a difference between legal trade and illegal trade ! As for what I support, I have already posted that very clearly on previous posts , all you have to do is go back and read them !
If after that, you want a more detailed reply then get back to me !
I didn't say that it was the main reason, I said it was one of the main reasons. That was what the links you provided said.
The links you provided said that the ivory trade results in the death of elephants. Do you agree?
No I don't !
Its a blanket statement that serves the purpose of defending a view !
I understand that the idea is to appeal to emotional responses for support of certain causes....buts its not accurate !
To give you an idea that disproves that blanket statement , think about this :
Some countries and national parks have resorted to cutting off elephant tusks !
How ? They tranquillise them (put them to sleep ) then saw of most of the tusk !
By the way ... the same has been common practice with Rhino as well for quite some time !
The result is the elephant wakes up drowsy and with short tusks !
That does affect the animals life a bit, but it also make it less appealing to Poachers , and thus gives him a better chance of survival !
So... result is a LIVE animal and... ivory tusks !
So... what should the authorities do with those tusks collected that way ?
So you disagree with the links that you provided?
Why are you asking something I just explained ?
Cant you read ? "It just seems strange that before you were quoting them as experts, and now you are disagreeing with them. | |||
"You said that my post was wrong when I was summarising the links that you posted.
So we are all clear now, that the ivory trade causes the death of elephants, and you support it.
Let me spell it out for you !
What I said was wrong was you inferring that the ivory trade was the main cause behind the demise of elephants! so lets see:
"All of those links you posted say thay the ivory trade is one of the top reasons for the decline in elephant numbers. I don't really understand why would would support the trade. "
To which I replied :
"Wrong!
Ivory trade is one reason , not the main reason !
The main reason is loss of habitat !"
Now to your question !
"So we are all clear now, that the ivory trade causes the death of elephants, and you support it. "
NO, we are not all clear !
That is a "loaded" statement because it states, or infers that the ivory trade at large causes elephant deaths or is the cause! Ans it makes it seem like I support any form of killing elephants!
That is not true !
Also, this is not a yes/no question!
Also you are simplifying something that isn't simple , and you apparently don't know much about !
There is a difference between legal trade and illegal trade ! As for what I support, I have already posted that very clearly on previous posts , all you have to do is go back and read them !
If after that, you want a more detailed reply then get back to me !
I didn't say that it was the main reason, I said it was one of the main reasons. That was what the links you provided said.
The links you provided said that the ivory trade results in the death of elephants. Do you agree?
No I don't !
Its a blanket statement that serves the purpose of defending a view !
I understand that the idea is to appeal to emotional responses for support of certain causes....buts its not accurate !
To give you an idea that disproves that blanket statement , think about this :
Some countries and national parks have resorted to cutting off elephant tusks !
How ? They tranquillise them (put them to sleep ) then saw of most of the tusk !
By the way ... the same has been common practice with Rhino as well for quite some time !
The result is the elephant wakes up drowsy and with short tusks !
That does affect the animals life a bit, but it also make it less appealing to Poachers , and thus gives him a better chance of survival !
So... result is a LIVE animal and... ivory tusks !
So... what should the authorities do with those tusks collected that way ?
So you disagree with the links that you provided?
Why are you asking something I just explained ?
Cant you read ?
It just seems strange that before you were quoting them as experts, and now you are disagreeing with them. "Stop distorting facts ! If.... you go back and read the posts , and if... you understand what you read you will realise I put those links there as response to a poster that said all the conservationists were saying that poaching was the main cause for the elephants demise ! Those posts merely disprove that ! But it doesnt mean I agree with everything contained in them ! But you are still avoiding the question I put to you , so lets recap : " Some countries and national parks have resorted to cutting off elephant tusks !
How ? They tranquillise them (put them to sleep ) then saw of most of the tusk !
By the way ... the same has been common practice with Rhino as well for quite some time !
The result is the elephant wakes up drowsy and with short tusks !
That does affect the animals life a bit, but it also make it less appealing to Poachers , and thus gives him a better chance of survival !
So... result is a LIVE animal and... ivory tusks !
So... what should the authorities do with those tusks collected that way ? "
| |||
"You said that my post was wrong when I was summarising the links that you posted.
So we are all clear now, that the ivory trade causes the death of elephants, and you support it.
Let me spell it out for you !
What I said was wrong was you inferring that the ivory trade was the main cause behind the demise of elephants! so lets see:
"All of those links you posted say thay the ivory trade is one of the top reasons for the decline in elephant numbers. I don't really understand why would would support the trade. "
To which I replied :
"Wrong!
Ivory trade is one reason , not the main reason !
The main reason is loss of habitat !"
Now to your question !
"So we are all clear now, that the ivory trade causes the death of elephants, and you support it. "
NO, we are not all clear !
That is a "loaded" statement because it states, or infers that the ivory trade at large causes elephant deaths or is the cause! Ans it makes it seem like I support any form of killing elephants!
That is not true !
Also, this is not a yes/no question!
Also you are simplifying something that isn't simple , and you apparently don't know much about !
There is a difference between legal trade and illegal trade ! As for what I support, I have already posted that very clearly on previous posts , all you have to do is go back and read them !
If after that, you want a more detailed reply then get back to me !
I didn't say that it was the main reason, I said it was one of the main reasons. That was what the links you provided said.
The links you provided said that the ivory trade results in the death of elephants. Do you agree?
No I don't !
Its a blanket statement that serves the purpose of defending a view !
I understand that the idea is to appeal to emotional responses for support of certain causes....buts its not accurate !
To give you an idea that disproves that blanket statement , think about this :
Some countries and national parks have resorted to cutting off elephant tusks !
How ? They tranquillise them (put them to sleep ) then saw of most of the tusk !
By the way ... the same has been common practice with Rhino as well for quite some time !
The result is the elephant wakes up drowsy and with short tusks !
That does affect the animals life a bit, but it also make it less appealing to Poachers , and thus gives him a better chance of survival !
So... result is a LIVE animal and... ivory tusks !
So... what should the authorities do with those tusks collected that way ?
So you disagree with the links that you provided?
Why are you asking something I just explained ?
Cant you read ?
It just seems strange that before you were quoting them as experts, and now you are disagreeing with them.
Stop distorting facts !
If.... you go back and read the posts , and if... you understand what you read you will realise I put those links there as response to a poster that said all the conservationists were saying that poaching was the main cause for the elephants demise !
Those posts merely disprove that ! But it doesnt mean I agree with everything contained in them !
But you are still avoiding the question I put to you , so lets recap :
" Some countries and national parks have resorted to cutting off elephant tusks !
How ? They tranquillise them (put them to sleep ) then saw of most of the tusk !
By the way ... the same has been common practice with Rhino as well for quite some time !
The result is the elephant wakes up drowsy and with short tusks !
That does affect the animals life a bit, but it also make it less appealing to Poachers , and thus gives him a better chance of survival !
So... result is a LIVE animal and... ivory tusks !
So... what should the authorities do with those tusks collected that way ? "
"Do you think that you know more about elephant conservation than the groups that you posted links to? The tusks should be destroyed, as the ivory trade is harmful to elephants, as proved by the organisations you mentioned above. I know you will say that they could make money from the tusks, but if they found cannabis growing in the park/reserve, should they harvest that and sell it to make money too? | |||
"You said that my post was wrong when I was summarising the links that you posted.
So we are all clear now, that the ivory trade causes the death of elephants, and you support it.
Let me spell it out for you !
What I said was wrong was you inferring that the ivory trade was the main cause behind the demise of elephants! so lets see:
"All of those links you posted say thay the ivory trade is one of the top reasons for the decline in elephant numbers. I don't really understand why would would support the trade. "
To which I replied :
"Wrong!
Ivory trade is one reason , not the main reason !
The main reason is loss of habitat !"
Now to your question !
"So we are all clear now, that the ivory trade causes the death of elephants, and you support it. "
NO, we are not all clear !
That is a "loaded" statement because it states, or infers that the ivory trade at large causes elephant deaths or is the cause! Ans it makes it seem like I support any form of killing elephants!
That is not true !
Also, this is not a yes/no question!
Also you are simplifying something that isn't simple , and you apparently don't know much about !
There is a difference between legal trade and illegal trade ! As for what I support, I have already posted that very clearly on previous posts , all you have to do is go back and read them !
If after that, you want a more detailed reply then get back to me !
I didn't say that it was the main reason, I said it was one of the main reasons. That was what the links you provided said.
The links you provided said that the ivory trade results in the death of elephants. Do you agree?
No I don't !
Its a blanket statement that serves the purpose of defending a view !
I understand that the idea is to appeal to emotional responses for support of certain causes....buts its not accurate !
To give you an idea that disproves that blanket statement , think about this :
Some countries and national parks have resorted to cutting off elephant tusks !
How ? They tranquillise them (put them to sleep ) then saw of most of the tusk !
By the way ... the same has been common practice with Rhino as well for quite some time !
The result is the elephant wakes up drowsy and with short tusks !
That does affect the animals life a bit, but it also make it less appealing to Poachers , and thus gives him a better chance of survival !
So... result is a LIVE animal and... ivory tusks !
So... what should the authorities do with those tusks collected that way ?
So you disagree with the links that you provided?
Why are you asking something I just explained ?
Cant you read ?
It just seems strange that before you were quoting them as experts, and now you are disagreeing with them.
Stop distorting facts !
If.... you go back and read the posts , and if... you understand what you read you will realise I put those links there as response to a poster that said all the conservationists were saying that poaching was the main cause for the elephants demise !
Those posts merely disprove that ! But it doesnt mean I agree with everything contained in them !
But you are still avoiding the question I put to you , so lets recap :
" Some countries and national parks have resorted to cutting off elephant tusks !
How ? They tranquillise them (put them to sleep ) then saw of most of the tusk !
By the way ... the same has been common practice with Rhino as well for quite some time !
The result is the elephant wakes up drowsy and with short tusks !
That does affect the animals life a bit, but it also make it less appealing to Poachers , and thus gives him a better chance of survival !
So... result is a LIVE animal and... ivory tusks !
So... what should the authorities do with those tusks collected that way ? "
Do you think that you know more about elephant conservation than the groups that you posted links to?
The tusks should be destroyed, as the ivory trade is harmful to elephants, as proved by the organisations you mentioned above.
I know you will say that they could make money from the tusks, but if they found cannabis growing in the park/reserve, should they harvest that and sell it to make money too? "Lol.... bad comparison with cannabis , its not legal in the UK ! if it was yes they should ! Not saying I know more , but there are different takes on the subject ! And you are ignoring other takes on the subject ! http://www.krugerpark.co.za/krugerpark-times-23-elephant-numbers-18006.htm http://www.stuartonnature.com/our-blog/to-cull-or-not-to-cull%E2%80%A6- The Kruger Park was my "back yard" I had a class mate whose farm bordered the park....fond memories ... siting quietly on his lawn watching elephants play a mere 50 yards across the river! I have personally seen it lived it ! Not going to repeat what I said already about the reasons behind the points on those links ! Its sad that you think its all about money from the tusks ! When elephants are culled , or/were commercially or traditionally hunted ,nothing went to waste ! | |||
"You said that my post was wrong when I was summarising the links that you posted.
So we are all clear now, that the ivory trade causes the death of elephants, and you support it.
Let me spell it out for you !
What I said was wrong was you inferring that the ivory trade was the main cause behind the demise of elephants! so lets see:
"All of those links you posted say thay the ivory trade is one of the top reasons for the decline in elephant numbers. I don't really understand why would would support the trade. "
To which I replied :
"Wrong!
Ivory trade is one reason , not the main reason !
The main reason is loss of habitat !"
Now to your question !
"So we are all clear now, that the ivory trade causes the death of elephants, and you support it. "
NO, we are not all clear !
That is a "loaded" statement because it states, or infers that the ivory trade at large causes elephant deaths or is the cause! Ans it makes it seem like I support any form of killing elephants!
That is not true !
Also, this is not a yes/no question!
Also you are simplifying something that isn't simple , and you apparently don't know much about !
There is a difference between legal trade and illegal trade ! As for what I support, I have already posted that very clearly on previous posts , all you have to do is go back and read them !
If after that, you want a more detailed reply then get back to me !
I didn't say that it was the main reason, I said it was one of the main reasons. That was what the links you provided said.
The links you provided said that the ivory trade results in the death of elephants. Do you agree?
No I don't !
Its a blanket statement that serves the purpose of defending a view !
I understand that the idea is to appeal to emotional responses for support of certain causes....buts its not accurate !
To give you an idea that disproves that blanket statement , think about this :
Some countries and national parks have resorted to cutting off elephant tusks !
How ? They tranquillise them (put them to sleep ) then saw of most of the tusk !
By the way ... the same has been common practice with Rhino as well for quite some time !
The result is the elephant wakes up drowsy and with short tusks !
That does affect the animals life a bit, but it also make it less appealing to Poachers , and thus gives him a better chance of survival !
So... result is a LIVE animal and... ivory tusks !
So... what should the authorities do with those tusks collected that way ?
So you disagree with the links that you provided?
Why are you asking something I just explained ?
Cant you read ?
It just seems strange that before you were quoting them as experts, and now you are disagreeing with them.
Stop distorting facts !
If.... you go back and read the posts , and if... you understand what you read you will realise I put those links there as response to a poster that said all the conservationists were saying that poaching was the main cause for the elephants demise !
Those posts merely disprove that ! But it doesnt mean I agree with everything contained in them !
But you are still avoiding the question I put to you , so lets recap :
" Some countries and national parks have resorted to cutting off elephant tusks !
How ? They tranquillise them (put them to sleep ) then saw of most of the tusk !
By the way ... the same has been common practice with Rhino as well for quite some time !
The result is the elephant wakes up drowsy and with short tusks !
That does affect the animals life a bit, but it also make it less appealing to Poachers , and thus gives him a better chance of survival !
So... result is a LIVE animal and... ivory tusks !
So... what should the authorities do with those tusks collected that way ? "
Do you think that you know more about elephant conservation than the groups that you posted links to?
The tusks should be destroyed, as the ivory trade is harmful to elephants, as proved by the organisations you mentioned above.
I know you will say that they could make money from the tusks, but if they found cannabis growing in the park/reserve, should they harvest that and sell it to make money too?
Lol.... bad comparison with cannabis , its not legal in the UK ! if it was yes they should !
Not saying I know more , but there are different takes on the subject ! And you are ignoring other takes on the subject !
http://www.krugerpark.co.za/krugerpark-times-23-elephant-numbers-18006.htm
http://www.stuartonnature.com/our-blog/to-cull-or-not-to-cull%E2%80%A6-
The Kruger Park was my "back yard"
I had a class mate whose farm bordered the park....fond memories ... siting quietly on his lawn watching elephants play a mere 50 yards across the river!
I have personally seen it lived it !
Not going to repeat what I said already about the reasons behind the points on those links !
Its sad that you think its all about money from the tusks !
When elephants are culled , or/were commercially or traditionally hunted ,nothing went to waste ! "What difference does it make where you lived? Do you not think that the conservation scientists who have studied elephants their whole lives live near elephants? It is explicitly clear that the ivory trade kills elephants. You support that. There isn't really anything else to say on the matter. | |||
"You said that my post was wrong when I was summarising the links that you posted.
So we are all clear now, that the ivory trade causes the death of elephants, and you support it.
Let me spell it out for you !
What I said was wrong was you inferring that the ivory trade was the main cause behind the demise of elephants! so lets see:
"All of those links you posted say thay the ivory trade is one of the top reasons for the decline in elephant numbers. I don't really understand why would would support the trade. "
To which I replied :
"Wrong!
Ivory trade is one reason , not the main reason !
The main reason is loss of habitat !"
Now to your question !
"So we are all clear now, that the ivory trade causes the death of elephants, and you support it. "
NO, we are not all clear !
That is a "loaded" statement because it states, or infers that the ivory trade at large causes elephant deaths or is the cause! Ans it makes it seem like I support any form of killing elephants!
That is not true !
Also, this is not a yes/no question!
Also you are simplifying something that isn't simple , and you apparently don't know much about !
There is a difference between legal trade and illegal trade ! As for what I support, I have already posted that very clearly on previous posts , all you have to do is go back and read them !
If after that, you want a more detailed reply then get back to me !
I didn't say that it was the main reason, I said it was one of the main reasons. That was what the links you provided said.
The links you provided said that the ivory trade results in the death of elephants. Do you agree?
No I don't !
Its a blanket statement that serves the purpose of defending a view !
I understand that the idea is to appeal to emotional responses for support of certain causes....buts its not accurate !
To give you an idea that disproves that blanket statement , think about this :
Some countries and national parks have resorted to cutting off elephant tusks !
How ? They tranquillise them (put them to sleep ) then saw of most of the tusk !
By the way ... the same has been common practice with Rhino as well for quite some time !
The result is the elephant wakes up drowsy and with short tusks !
That does affect the animals life a bit, but it also make it less appealing to Poachers , and thus gives him a better chance of survival !
So... result is a LIVE animal and... ivory tusks !
So... what should the authorities do with those tusks collected that way ?
So you disagree with the links that you provided?
Why are you asking something I just explained ?
Cant you read ?
It just seems strange that before you were quoting them as experts, and now you are disagreeing with them.
Stop distorting facts !
If.... you go back and read the posts , and if... you understand what you read you will realise I put those links there as response to a poster that said all the conservationists were saying that poaching was the main cause for the elephants demise !
Those posts merely disprove that ! But it doesnt mean I agree with everything contained in them !
But you are still avoiding the question I put to you , so lets recap :
" Some countries and national parks have resorted to cutting off elephant tusks !
How ? They tranquillise them (put them to sleep ) then saw of most of the tusk !
By the way ... the same has been common practice with Rhino as well for quite some time !
The result is the elephant wakes up drowsy and with short tusks !
That does affect the animals life a bit, but it also make it less appealing to Poachers , and thus gives him a better chance of survival !
So... result is a LIVE animal and... ivory tusks !
So... what should the authorities do with those tusks collected that way ? "
Do you think that you know more about elephant conservation than the groups that you posted links to?
The tusks should be destroyed, as the ivory trade is harmful to elephants, as proved by the organisations you mentioned above.
I know you will say that they could make money from the tusks, but if they found cannabis growing in the park/reserve, should they harvest that and sell it to make money too?
Lol.... bad comparison with cannabis , its not legal in the UK ! if it was yes they should !
Not saying I know more , but there are different takes on the subject ! And you are ignoring other takes on the subject !
http://www.krugerpark.co.za/krugerpark-times-23-elephant-numbers-18006.htm
http://www.stuartonnature.com/our-blog/to-cull-or-not-to-cull%E2%80%A6-
The Kruger Park was my "back yard"
I had a class mate whose farm bordered the park....fond memories ... siting quietly on his lawn watching elephants play a mere 50 yards across the river!
I have personally seen it lived it !
Not going to repeat what I said already about the reasons behind the points on those links !
Its sad that you think its all about money from the tusks !
When elephants are culled , or/were commercially or traditionally hunted ,nothing went to waste !
What difference does it make where you lived? Do you not think that the conservation scientists who have studied elephants their whole lives live near elephants?
It is explicitly clear that the ivory trade kills elephants. You support that. There isn't really anything else to say on the matter. "BS ! As I said before, you have probably never seen a elephant outside a zoo ! If you prefer to bury your head in the sand an make stupid blanket statement its your right to do so ! If you choose to ignore opinions like these of people who actually spend their whole lives doing hands on conservation ... fine ! : http://www.krugerpark.co.za/krugerpark-times-23-elephant-numbers-18006.htm http://www.stuartonnature.com/our-blog/to-cull-or-not-to-cull%E2%80%A6- Or... are cherry picking the info in the links posted ? The fact is most of the elephant death or decline are not a result of the Ivory trade , legal or illegal ! What you don't have the right to do , is to pretend to have the moral high ground on a subject you don't know nothing about
Worse ... you refuse to learn from those who have been there !
What I support is putting money from legal ivory trade back into conservation efforts and investment ! And that involves protecting elephants from poaching too !
South Africa has been doing this in respect to conservation in general involving most species ,and it works ?
Why do you think commercial hunting still exists ?
But if you don't get that .... too bad ! | |||
| |||
"Tonys probably right we live in society were trophy hunters of big game are an acceptable part of our civilsation .If you're wealthy enough you can hunt just about anything. Until we evolve beyond this take their money and with it whatever you want . Long term though i doubt there's a future for the large mammals on earth." Conservation costs money, a lot of money and if some hunting and shooting pays for it and thus leads to an increase in total numbers then that has to be a good thing, shoots in this country control predators and corvids that kill huge numbers of " valued" wildlife, they would be devastated without the shoots, the trouble is many so called conservationists havent a clue about the real world of nature, in fact there isnt really such a thing in this country as humans have managed it for centuries | |||
"Tonys probably right we live in society were trophy hunters of big game are an acceptable part of our civilsation .If you're wealthy enough you can hunt just about anything. Until we evolve beyond this take their money and with it whatever you want . Long term though i doubt there's a future for the large mammals on earth." I dont aprove trophy hunting either , and if,and when I hunt something I will eat it and use it all as much as possible ! But since trophy hunting does exist , like it or not , its preferable to put the money made back into the enviroment ! that helps ensure sustainability ! As an example , in South Africa foreign hunters normaly pay a premium to hunt , and when they just want the trophy , the meat and skins are not wasted ! they are either kept and sold by the safari/hunting concession owner, or given to local population !
And while you mention large mammals on earth , what are your thoughts on whale hunting by indigenous people ?
They have ivory too ! | |||
"Tonys probably right we live in society were trophy hunters of big game are an acceptable part of our civilsation .If you're wealthy enough you can hunt just about anything. Until we evolve beyond this take their money and with it whatever you want . Long term though i doubt there's a future for the large mammals on earth. I dont aprove trophy hunting either , and if,and when I hunt something I will eat it and use it all as much as possible ! But since trophy hunting does exist , like it or not , its preferable to put the money made back into the enviroment ! that helps ensure sustainability ! As an example , in South Africa foreign hunters normaly pay a premium to hunt , and when they just want the trophy , the meat and skins are not wasted ! they are either kept and sold by the safari/hunting concession owner, or given to local population !
And while you mention large mammals on earth , what are your thoughts on whale hunting by indigenous people ?
They have ivory too ! "They can hunt what they want.I will be hunting sea bass on my boat this weekend. | |||
"Tonys probably right we live in society were trophy hunters of big game are an acceptable part of our civilsation .If you're wealthy enough you can hunt just about anything. Until we evolve beyond this take their money and with it whatever you want . Long term though i doubt there's a future for the large mammals on earth. I dont aprove trophy hunting either , and if,and when I hunt something I will eat it and use it all as much as possible ! But since trophy hunting does exist , like it or not , its preferable to put the money made back into the enviroment ! that helps ensure sustainability ! As an example , in South Africa foreign hunters normaly pay a premium to hunt , and when they just want the trophy , the meat and skins are not wasted ! they are either kept and sold by the safari/hunting concession owner, or given to local population !
And while you mention large mammals on earth , what are your thoughts on whale hunting by indigenous people ?
They have ivory too ! They can hunt what they want.I will be hunting sea bass on my boat this weekend. "Sounds interesting didn't know you were a fisherman ?
Catch and release ... or lunch ? | |||
| |||
"If its legal size over 43cm then i keep.All mackerel i keep.I only take what me and my family can eat. "
Hope and expect you have a decent freezer too ! | |||
