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

The new Larenim keytops from Otto Huess, which are mineral keytops, are the best I've seen. Like Ivory, they are easy to play on when sweat is an issue, and they have a natural grain that encourages the finger to stay put rather than slide. While Kluge builds a simlar product, I still prefer Larenim.

That's the first time I've ever heard anyone give a practical reason why they preferred ivory

Sally,
Your article also appeared in the August issue of The American Organist magazine and was very informative. I feel it is totally over reach by the govt and should be stopped. I could say more but don't want to start a political flame war. Thanks for bringing it to our attention.
I personally like the feel of ivory or a high quality plastic as my hands do sweat. I play on a Wurlitzer Theater pipe organ that was restored with high quality synthetic key tops and it is great. I also play a tracker pipe organ that has rosewood naturals and pear wood sharps. It is great to have that absorption of moisture. I have played so many cheap plastic keys on low end pianos and organs that it is a treat to have quality under the finger tips.

Sally,

Would you please recap the issues in the new law?

I'm something of a crank as many of you know, and I would be very, very happy to write to our congressional representatives in support of, well, whatever you say needs to be supported. Just give us some pro forma language, and I'll get to work.

Thanks!

Sally, Perhaps you could post a form type letter we could copy to our local reps. A simple flood of emails can get the point across.


Thanks for your work on this issue.

In February in response to Director's Order 210, U.S. Fish and Wildlife announced plans to ban not only the import/export of ivory but also interstate sales. Several states followed up with their own legislation.

The short version is that the purpose of this order is to prevent the illegal importation of NEW ivory that is subsequently being passed off as old ivory.

The reasoning behind this is that if all sales of ivory are banned then it will devalue any ivory and the result is that the importers of illegal ivory will have no market for their wares. Sadly no one thought about the huge number of pianos made with ivory before the invention of plastic. Because of the broad sweep of this regulation, pianos with ivory fall under this proposed ban. Many other antique articles with ivory are also affected. See the article above that I posted about the problem that violinists are having with their bows.

http://www.fws.gov/international/travel-and-trade/ivory-ban-questions-and-answers.html

Note in the far right column the proposed regulation. When the rules are announced later this summer there will be a comment period when we can all voice our thoughts about this.

I'm copying directly from my Piano Buyer blog. Here is my original article:
http://www.pianobuyer.com/articles/ivory.html about the U.S. Fish and Wildlife proposed ivory ban.

Here is the update on bills introduced in congress to prohibit Fish and Wildlife from implementing the proposed ban. If you go to the blog update the links to the bills are there.

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

Here are the bills:
Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN) introduced bill S.2587.
Rep. Steve Daines (R-MT-At Large) introduced bill H.R.5052.

It is important to contact your representatives now to let them know the impact of this proposed ban.
The points that need to be made are:

• No piano-manufacturing company is lobbying for the use of ivory.
• No piano companies currently use ivory.
• No piano importers have been found to be attempting to disguise new ivory as old ivory.
• Since the piano industry is not currently involved in any way in the use of new ivory, prohibiting the movement of old pianos with ivory will do nothing to save elephants.
• Use of government funds to discover interstate shipments of old pianos with ivory will unfairly target owners of old pianos and reduce the resources available to stop illegal ivory trafficking.

Here is what you can do:

#1 RIGHT NOW LETTERS (CAN BE EMAILS) NEED TO GO TO YOUR CONGRESSIONAL REPRESENTATIVES TO HIGHLIGHT THE ISSUES WITH OLD IVORY

#2 DURING THE COMMENT PERIOD (HAS NOT YET BEGUN) LETTERS (NOT EMAILS) NEED TO GO TO FISH AND WILDLIFE. I WILL COME HERE TO ANNOUNCE WHEN THE COMMENT PERIOD BEGINS, I WILL POST THE ADDRESS.

The sad thing about all this is that the real market for ivory that is causing all the poaching is the market for art and religious pieces in Asia. At least it is according to an article I read in The Economist about a year ago.
The sale of used pianos across state lines here in the United States is completely inconsequential to elephants.

Kurt
Typing from Nicaragua

What kind of volume are we talking about - I mean how many of these 1950's pianos with ivory keys changing hands are we talking about? Is it really worth potentially opening up a loophole for ivory importers?

At the moment, I'm not seeing this as a reason to write to my Congress person - I'd rather inconvenience a couple people with ivory keyed pianos than to potentially open up a loophole.

An aside re the "feel" of ivory keys. I've played some older pianos with ivory keys, and generally enjoyed the "feel". BUT - I play several Pipe Organs, including one which was built in 1930, played by many different people. It's OK to play on moderate days, but when both temperature and humidity are high, they're really sticky/slippery. On those occasions, I wipe them down, and the cloth ends up quite dirty. It must be the oils and dirt from 85 yrs of fingers plus dust in the air which did this. The technician cleaned them with something, but they're no better on hot/humid days. The keys have also cupped slightly and worn on the front edges. However - the organ (and building) is heritage listed, so my request to have them re-capped with plastic was refused.

This is an insensitive and ill-informed posting. We are not talking about "1950's pianos," but rather all pianos built up until sometime in the 1950's in the United States. Included in this group are many of the high-end pianos built during the "golden age" of piano building - from the late 1800's through the 1920's. Even pianos from this period over 100 years old may be impacted because of the difficulties others have mentioned regarding documentation.

Many of these pianos have been meticulously restored and many have a sound that is very difficult if not impossible to replicate today. And many of these instruments are family heirlooms or have other historical value.

Far from "inconveniencing a couple of people," the proposed regulations would destroy the economic value of these instruments, and impose extreme restrictions on what their owners can do with property that was legally manufactured and acquired. And, as others have pointed out, these rules would do nothing to stop the trafficking in illegal ivory.

What kind of "loophole" do you think would be created by a broader exemption for pianos? No new pianos being made today are made with illegal ivory. Let me repeat that again. No new pianos today are being made with illegal ivory. So what loopholes were you thinking about?

Removed by me.

There are no loopholes that would be opened up by exempting pianos. No manufacturers would be allowed to import ivory at all. Exempting pianos would just make it allowable to sell an old ivory keyed piano across state lines without the documentation needed and would eliminate scrutiny of piano transport companies who are moving ivory pianos for owners who are not selling them.

If we can get a complete exemption for pianos, that is what is needed here. The only ivory keyed pianos in the US are old pianos that installed the ivory during a period when it was legal. There is no new ivory. Please read my article above.

This will affect dealers who can't take an old ivory piano in trade without removing the ivory from the piano in the person's home. People will not be able to donate an old piano to a church that has ivory and take a tax deduction. Piano movers will be afraid to load your piano onto a truck because they can't tell old plastic from ivory. Rebuilders won't be able to do ivory repairs. You local tech won't be able to repair even one key if they live in a state like New Jersey who jumped the gun on passing this type of law with no antique exemption.

You might not own an ivory piano, but your kid's school or your church or your kid's piano teacher might. Elderly folks who own an old piano won't be able to sell it to a promising young student, especially if the piano in question isn't worth the money to replace all the key tops with plastic.

Let's say you live in Nebraska. You have an old Steinway you inherited and want to sell it. There is no market where you are but you won't be able to put it on the internet. You have no tech in your area who can replace the ivory with plastic. It needs to have the keys taken off and sent out of state. The key recovering specialist needs to have the original ivory on the keys in order to properly recover them with the same dimension of plastic but UPS has had pressure put on them and they won't ship the original ivory keys across state lines for recovering. You go ahead and have your local tech remove the ivory and the keys are sent to the recovering facility and the recovering facility tells you that the ivory was improperly removed so now you have to have a new key set. This will cost thousands of dollars. And to make matters worse the owner of an old piano will not likely find any of this out until the movers show up to move it because the average person will not even consider that they are doing something illegal.

All of the above could happen. And for what? The ivory was 70 years old.

Sally:

Oh dear, oh dear. This just can't be. It's totally crazy and unjust.

Karl Watson,
Staten Island, NY

The really unfortunate thing is that the government is going to spend money trying to restrict the movement and sale of old pianos. This will take money away from finding and prosecuting people who are really smuggling in new, recently harvested ivory. Since there is no one in the piano industry using new ivory all of their searching will be for naught.

Thanks for the info Sally. The potential loophole I was asking about was - what if an ivory importer "says" the piano is an antique but it really isn't. It's like the ability to use old stock ivory - but how can they be sure it's old stock ivory? I'm really asking because I don't know the answer - not making a statement.

Importing a new piano and saying that it is old would be impossible since there are no new pianos with ivory.

There would be no reason to try it and impossible to get the required documentation to get a CITES certificate. Shippers of new pianos are telling me that containers coming into the US will be inspected. No piano manufacturers are going to try to pass off new pianos as old just for the sake of selling a piano with ivory. The fines are very high and legitimate businesses wouldn't take the risk. Leaving pianos out of all this won't leave any room for abuse.

I also don't think anyone will be using old stock ivory in the future. I think the very few key recovering craftsmen who at one time offered this service will no longer do this even though their source for old stock ivory was well documented.

Sally,
I saw your post about restrictions on ivory repairs, especially in New Jersey. I am the tech for Westminster Choir College in NJ, and we do have several pianos with ivory keyboards. Do these restrictions mean that I cannot reglue an ivory keytop if it comes unglued, replace a chipped ivory with old used ivory keytops, or accept a donation of a piano with ivory keys. Are there restrictions on shipping these keys out of state and having the ivory replaced? This is the impression I got from your post, and I want to be sure this is correct.

The New Jersey law was passed.

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

The New Jersey law prohibits sales of ivory old or new. In addition it also prohibits look alike materials like mammoth ivory or bone. There is no antique exemption in the New Jersey law.

My advice is to take this to your school's attorney and have them interpret this but as I read it any "possession with intent to sell" is a crime.

I don't know how they will look on replacing an ivory that has fallen off the same piano but as this reads you would not be able to take one from another old piano and "sell" it as a part of a repair. This will apply to any technician working across state lines in other states as well when and if the federal regulation is put into effect later this summer.

The US law would prohibit donors from donating an ivory piano and taking a tax deduction but they will be able to pass along an ivory piano to their heirs. They will be able to take the ivory off prior to donation and still get a deduction.

During a meeting held on June 9th the President's Advisory Council recommended putting pressure on shipping companies to refuse to ship ivory.

Here is an excerpt from the report of that meeting.

10. The White House Should Lead a High-Level Effort to Enlist the Private Sector to Stop the Killing and Marketing of Illegal Wildlife Parts and Products

The Advisory Council proposes to work with the Task Force and the White House to encourage businesses that have potential connections with wildlife trafficking activities (albeit mostly inadvertently) to adopt voluntary codes of conduct to ensure that they are not assisting in poaching or trafficking, and to alert customers, suppliers and others in the value chain to do the same. Potential businesses that might be called on to participate in this initiative include retailers (including internet sales platforms, auction houses and traditional retailers), search engines, airline and shipping companies, and the tourism industry. To be successful, it will be necessary that the White House and the Task Force’s co-chairs work closely with the Advisory Council and actively and visibly support the initiative.

I listened to this meeting live and during that portion of the meeting they mentioned private shippers such as UPS and Fedex in the reference to steps to be taken to discourage shipment of ivory. During that portion as well there was testimony by Tod Cohen the attorney from Ebay and he mentioned removal of all ivory from Ebay.

Since the US Regulations and subsequent "rules" have not yet been established (they are to be announced later this summer) we won't know how anyone will discover or treat ivory sent through the US mail or commercial shippers but to be safe, I would work with your key recovering source to remove all ivory prior to sending the keys in the mail. Most key recovering folks want to get the keys intact but that may not be possible.

What I discovered during my research is that because there is a huge level of misinformation about ivory piano keys, there persists the notion that a set of keys could be put on another piano or that there is value in remnants of an old set of ivory key tops. Technicians all know this is impossible but this is not obvious to the average person. I do have fears that because many people would see keys in the mail and because of basic security packages are x-rayed routinely, that someone may assume that a shipment of keys could be a "sale" across state lines, which would be illegal if such a possibility of a sale existed.

Only those in the industry would be aware that a set of keys off an old upright couldn't be put on another piano and any tech who has replaced key tops themselves knows that ivory cannot be salvaged in any appreciable amount from a set of old keys because most of them are destroyed in the process of removal. Since Fish and Wildlife has in the past confiscated items that they have determined to be illegal and have sometimes destroyed such items, until we know how they are going to enforce this new regulation there is some risk in shipping intact ivory keys.

Destroying ivory from an already dead (clearly) elephant serves only to keep the prices high.

As I have pointed out before, this law would seem to outlaw the sale or transport of most paintings, since ivory black was a commonly used pigment. If the assumption is that ivory is there unless it can be proven not to be there, and it is impossible, either actually or economically to prove that ivory was not the source of pigment, it follows that paintings can no longer be sold or moved across state lines. In addition, anything that uses carbon black is a look-alike material. If they do not enforce that, then it can be argued that there is selective enforcement of the law.