Eagle feather thread

[Piper]

My understanding of the law (which is extremely limited) is that possession of any part of a raptor is strictly prohibited, with exceptions made for Native Religious purposes. Various vendors carry museum quality resin skulls and talons, and there a fake feathers to be had. Several years back, a friend of mine on the Rendezvous circuit produced reproduction hawk and eagle feathers through careful use of scissors and an airbrush. He got what I at the time considered an insane price for them.

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

My understanding of the law (which is extremely limited) is that possession of any part of a raptor is strictly prohibited, with exceptions made for Native Religious purposes. Various vendors carry museum quality resin skulls and talons, and there a fake feathers to be had. Several years back, a friend of mine on the Rendezvous circuit produced reproduction hawk and eagle feathers through careful use of scissors and an airbrush. He got what I at the time considered an insane price for them.

For some of us the concept of wearing "fake feathers" would be analogous to taking Kool-Aide at Communion.

[The Guy in the Kilt at UC]

For some of us the concept of wearing "fake feathers" would be analogous to taking Kool-Aide at Communion.

I was actually at a church service that served grape kool-aide during communion.

[gilmore]

For some of us the concept of wearing "fake feathers" would be analogous to taking Kool-Aide at Communion.

O, ye of little faith.

What's the difference between fake feathers and silver feathers that are part of a silver crest worn on a bonnet? Neither would mislead some one into thinking that the wearer had climbed a stony crag, fought off an eagle, robbed its nest, was therefore a brave leader of men, and needed to be seen by his followers in battle.

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

O, ye of little faith.

What's the difference between fake feathers and silver feathers that are part of a silver crest worn on a bonnet? Neither would mislead some one into thinking that the wearer had climbed a stony crag, fought off an eagle, robbed its nest, was therefore a brave leader of men, and needed to be seen by his followers in battle.

Oh, but we still do all of that.

The only reason for silver feathers is that big feathers are quite often awkward to wear. Although I didn't touch on this previously, clan folk usually expect their chief to be "feathered" and can be rather disappointed if he isn't. Big feathers also lead to sometimes seemingly endless confrontations with "feather experts" and "feather posers" banging endlessly on about who is-- or isn't-- or shouldn't-- or should be-- entitled to feathers. A wee badge with wee feathers eliminates about 90% of the aggro.

Of course, wearing a Panama hat eliminates 100% of the aggro, and keeps one's beak from being fried in the hot American sun-- although they are apt to be snatched off one's head when approaching a nest full of eaglets.

[gilmore]

Oh, but we still do all of that. ...

I am so glad that I did not have a mouth full of liquid when I read that. Thanks for the chuckle.

[Deirachel]

To understand the exception of the Native Americans and the various laws in the US, one must take into consideration on exactly what, legally, the tribes (and thus their members) are in relation to the United States.

The Tribes are, formally, independent nations which are under the protection of the US government. The members of the tribes all hold dual citizenship as part of the US and part of the Tribal nation. The relationship of the Tribe and the US government is defined by Treaty. Tribes have the right to have their own money, passports, et al. where racial or socio-economic groups do not have the same rights.

The aforementioned treaties actually define and stipulate the United States can not outlaw the use of anything if it has a traditional value to it from the history of the tribe. Thus, why registered Native Americans can have eagle feathers, use Peyote (a Schedule I controlled substance, same schedule as Heroin), and the previously mentioned use of land for hunting, or the hunting of specific animals, in ways otherwise banned for other US citizens. They also designate specific territory (the Res) to each tribal nation as independent, extraterritorial property, much in the same vein as an Embassy is actually, by law, part of another country.

Now, to consider the use of Eagle feathers by the hierarchy of the Clans inside the US, one must look not only to US Code, but to international treaty. The prevailing treaty is the Geneva Convention on International Relations. This document states visiting citizens to a host country is required to follow the local law, unless the visiting citizen is officially recognized by both the home and host country as a diplomat. In the case of a diplomat, the home country's law apply, although the host country has the authority to demand the diplomat remove themselves within a specifically stated time frame.

So, the long and short of this ramble....

If a Scottish Chief, Chieftan, or Armiger is traveling into the US, unless they are designated as a Diplomat of Scotland or the UK, they would be wise to not bring their real eagle feathers with them. US Customs would be required, if they identified said feathers as eagle, to confiscate said items, unless said person shows legal permits for the ownership thereof (and unless said chief is a part of a a traveling conservation education group, the likelihood of getting such is almost nil). If a Chief, Chieftan, or Armiger is from the US (yes, I know...), then, by law, they are NOT allowed to have eagle feathers.

[macwilkin]

Speaking of tribal governments, here is an interesting, but relatively unkown part of WWII history:

http://www.combat.ws/S3/BAKISSUE/CMBT04N4/IROQUOIS.HTM

http://www.history.army.mil/html/top...atam-wwii.html

Regards,

Todd

[ForresterModern]

Thank you Deirachel for making that topic pretty much clear as can be, from the legal standpoint. That was the endpoint of the dialogue I was trying to achieve by reviving this thread, the facts of the situation, and you laid those out very succinctly.

jeff

[The Guy in the Kilt at UC]

To understand the exception...

Yes, the law makes a lot more sense now. Thank you, Deirachel.