Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Forum Ivory v. Plastic Questions

BDB,

I have talked to art historians about this potential problem. While they are sweating the ability to receive donated decorative art that contains bits of ivory, they aren't too worried about the actual consequences of the identity of ivory black in a painting because very few people are really aware of this and they don't think that anyone today is actually using ivory black pigment. But that is a great example of reading the regulation as stated.

The real issue you brought forward is what can be argued about this AFTER enforcement. The problem is that if everyone waits until AFTER the rules are announced and regulation begins to be enforced, it will take what is called a "rule challenge" to change it. And that would be very expensive. I'm not even sure what group would have the money to do it.

The groups affected are so disparate that I can't see how they would all come together. As a whole, the antique dealers are probably the most affected because their wares cross all kinds of boundaries. But a tiny ring of ivory on a teapot handle called an insulator ring could make a solid sterling silver teapot unsaleable.

The fingernail sized sliver on the tip of a violin bow also renders it unsaleable unless the ivory is removed, possibly ruining the balance of an expensive bow. I spent a morning with Yung Chin, the premier bow maker in New York a couple of weeks ago listening to his detailed explanations of the issue. Like pianos no modern bows use ivory.

This issue for violinists is really frustrating because not only will this make their instruments and bows unsaleable it will mean that future musicians might not be able to experience the feel of an authentic 18th or 19th century bow if the provenance is not available. The latitude afforded orchestral musicians right now is only useful for their international travel to perform and will do nothing to preserve antique bows for posterity. So in their terminology the terms import and export do not mean for sale - it means the ability to travel with a bow they already own.

I believe that any contemporary poacher should be dispatched to his maker. I understand that my 1960's piano has ivory keys, but I don't think that they are superior to modern materials. They should ramp up retribution on illegal elephant hunting!

Gee-whiz, you’d think that some of our congressmen/women, and senators would own an older grand piano, upright, or some other musical instrument with old ivory somewhere on it… most of them are million/billionaires anyway. Do they know about this proposed new regulation? I guess that is why we need to contact them...

Maybe Sally’s diligent and painstaking work on this issue will pay off…

Anyway, thank you, Sally, for all you do for the piano industry, and Piano World! I hope Cornelius and the horses are doing well.

Rick

I would love to see the relevant parts of this particular thread cut-and-pasted, and perhaps merged with the other content about this issue, and made into a "sticky" at the top of this page (and possibly the other forums)

It's something of importance to retailers, technicians, and piano sellers and purchasers alike…and it's an evolving situation that requires updates and possibly action on the part of those concerned. Consolidating this into a "sticky" will also save time and effort on the part of forum members who have contributed lengthy bits of discussion, questions, facts, and opinions already.

Just a thought.

Sounds like a good idea to me, terminaldegree; thing is, Frank Baxter likes to approve the sticky threads... I'll PM him and ask for his permission.

Rick

New Hampshire teens have bagpipes confiscated because of ivory.

http://www.pressherald.com/2014/08/06/teens-ivory-bagpipes-confiscated-at-border/

In this situation, the bagpipes were clearly documented as being old instruments but they were taken through a non designated port.

This highlights the problems with these regulations. The average person just does not have any idea that traveling with their own instruments is a problem.

Sally, this is an important issue, and more of a practical one than a political one, in my view.

I haven't heard from Frank yet on the "sticky" thread permission, but I'm sure it will be soon.

Rick

Hi Rick! Hope you are doing well!

Why don't we do something a bit more active with this? I mean, a letter-writing campaign is not out of the question, is it?

Lgreg,

Right NOW. Write your congressman. See my update for the bills

http://www.pianobuyer.com/articles/ivory2.html

When the rules are announced later this summer you can write US Fish and Wildlife. Until the comment period begins any letters or emails they receive won't be used.

I still haven't heard from Frank B yet... so, I'll take the liberty of making this thread a "sticky" for now... He may decide differently, and if so, we can un-do the sticky and no harm done.

Rick

There is some confusion about the NJ bill passed. The Governor actually signed another bill. We will get that to you asap.

Here is the bill actually signed by Gov. Christie.

There is no provision for pre ban ivory.

http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2014/Bills/S2500/2012_R1.HTM

No ivory pianos will be able to be sold in the state of New Jersey. The dealers and owners will have 6 months to dispose of the ivory. No exceptions for old pre ban ivory. No exceptions for musical instruments.

Because of the upcoming impact of the Federal regulations in addition to the New Jersey law, NJ residents won't be able to ship them out of state to sell either.

This means no ivory repairs as well.

This is disgraceful on many levels. Not only is it a criminal waste of materials already in existence - ie. very anti-green to require destruction of something old to be replaced with new plastic parts. But the bloody-mindedness of all this is actually rewriting history. It's like when precious books are burned by totalitarian governments. The history of ivory is being erased from existence in the US. This is not the intent of animal protection. Censoring the past so to feel good about the future is a very immature way of handling this. Everything historic and valuable should be kept to preserve the historical record and make sure that lessons are not forgotten and just to preserve the beauty of the objects themselves. Just shameful what's happening to old instruments, collectables and furniture now.

I have a newer NY Steinway with nice Kluge plastic keys. I grew up playing nothing but keyboards and digitals, so to me ivory looks unnatural and ugly, feels weird, and to me it's a liability for these upcoming trade restrictions. Having a classic instrument one day becoming contraband is enough to scare me off. I disagree with the draconian policies and I think the developed world has more than acknowledged the unsustainability and cruelty of the past ivory trade. Current owners and collectors of antiques and musical instruments need not be punished for Victorian ecological crimes, IMHO.

My Kawai digital, with real wood action, has this matte plastic that feels a lot like some ivory keytops I have played, and Roland has been doing something similar for years. It's my understanding that these wear and weather as you play, like someone mentioned above.

Hi All,

Well, I had a very good hour this morning talking with the staffs of all my representatives in congress. Both the house and senate bills are in committee for review. Since they are in recess, nothing will happen on them in congress for at least a month.

I am putting together a letter that I will send to all the representatives on the committee as well as the ones from my state. The staffs of all the offices were very receptive and voiced the same concerns without any prompting from me.

Sally, my state reps asked me if I would digest your information from this discussion thread. Is that OK by you? If not, can we discuss this further and get something together? Also, where can I find information about how this affects other instrumentalists? Is there some here on this thread?

Thanks!

The orchestral musicians have had a very hard time with this:

http://www.thestrad.com/latest/debate/the-us-ivory-ban-risks-criminalising-hard-working-musicians

http://americanorchestras.org/advoc...rial/ivory-ban-impact-on-orchestras.html

Many musicians have had problems with this because the general public thinks that ivory on a musical instrument is superfluous. Most people think that ivory is used strictly for decorative purposes. They don't understand that when these instruments were made that ivory was used because of the dimensional stability and long wear. At the time ivory was used there was no other material that did what ivory could do. I also keep reminding them that the piano industry abandoned ivory 20 years before the first ivory ban.

I will be glad to help in any way. Make sure they start with my article in Piano Buyer. That gives a good overview. I put it at the bottom of my sig line.

Why not contact someone at the NYTimes or Washington Post to do an editorial. That might be effective in getting congresses' attention.

I was going to suggest David Pogue at the NY Times who did a write up about the Yamaha AvantGrand, but it looks like he mostly writes about iPhones, technology, etc.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/05/t...-yamaha-even-van-cliburn-could-love.html

I did see this exception in the New Jersey law:

1[c. A person complying with the rules and regulations adopted by the Department of Environmental Protection pursuant to section 5 of this act may sell, offer for sale, purchase, barter, or possess:
(1) Asian elephant ivory, or an Asian elephant ivory product made wholly or in part of Asian elephant ivory, that was legally obtained prior to 1975;
(2) African elephant ivory, or an African elephant ivory product made wholly or in part of African elephant ivory, that was legally obtained prior to 1990;
(3) ivory from, or an ivory product made wholly or in part of, hippopotamus, mammoth, narwhal, walrus, or whale ivory that was legally obtained prior to the effective date of this act; or
(4) rhinoceros horn or rhinoceros horn product that was legally obtained prior to the effective date of this act.]

BDB.

That is what we thought was going to be the law but that portion was redacted in the final signed version.

Here is the actual version that was signed with no antique exceptions:

http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2014/Bills/A3500/3128_I1.PDF

If you look carefully at this page you will see the revisions with the areas that were taken out. If you go down to the bottom line and click on the PDF of the line that says reprint, it will take you to the above version. We have had this verified.

http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/bills/BillsByNumber.asp
click on the bill 2012 and you will see the progress of the bill