US Ban in Ivory - Not all bad news

[Runjeet Singh]

I have read the fact sheet that was kindly linked on this forum, and to my eyes, it is NOT a blanket ban on all Ethnographical Arms & Armour containing Ivory.

I have copied the main points from the document below and will tackle them one by one:

* Prohibit Commercial Import of African Elephant Ivory: All commercial imports of African elephant ivory, including antiques, will be prohibited.

Yes, without doubt sad news for those collecting/dealing with African items. This IS a blanket ban for ALL African Ivory.

*Prohibit Commercial Export of Elephant Ivory: All commercial exports will be prohibited, except for bona fide antiques, certain noncommercial items, and in exceptional circumstances permitted under the Endangered Species Act.

The important words here are 'bona fide antiques'. In my opinion the only way a US customs official will be convinced of this, is with a CITES certificate. I now always seek CITES permission for all ivory exports and imports. The lead time is 4 - 6 weeks, but sometimes is quicker.

*Significantly Restrict Domestic Resale of Elephant Ivory: We will finalize a proposed rule that will reaffirm and clarify that sales across state lines are prohibited, except for bona fide antiques, and will prohibit sales within a state unless the seller can demonstrate an item was lawfully imported prior to 1990 for African elephants and 1975 for Asian elephants, or under an exemption document.

Again, the golden words 'bona fide antiques'. I'm not a US citizen, but it sounds like they will try to enforce domestic sales/transfers, do they have the manpower to do that? My advice would be to include documental evidence within the parcel for domestic trade.

*Clarify the Definition of “Antique”: To qualify as an antique, an item must be more than 100 years old and meet other requirements under the Endangered Species Act. The onus will now fall on the importer, exporter, or seller to demonstrate that an item meets these criteria.

We have access to lots of books, even on-line museum collections. A printout from the Met New York, or V&A London, of a similar object to the one you are posting, will be easy and powerful evidence that you can place in the parcel.

Even a printout from a commercial website of a reputable dealer will hold some weight.

*Restore Endangered Species Act Protection for African Elephants: We will revoke a previous Fish and Wildlife Service special rule that had relaxed Endangered Species Act restrictions on African elephant ivory trade.

Support Limited Sport-hunting of African Elephants: We will limit the number of African elephant sport-hunted trophies that an individual can import to two per hunter per year.

The last two points require no further comment from me. In conclusion, it is sad for those of us who collect African arms that make use of Ivory, but we should not jump to the conclusion that this is a blanket ban for all areas of Ethnographical collecting, when it is not, and if the correct rules and common sense is used, it may not affect us drastically.

Regards
Runjeet

[David]

Runjeet, i agree that the new rules are not quite as bleak as some make out, however i do believe that they are a bit more encompassing then you present.
Firstly, African elephant ivory was freely traded throughout the world and can be found on many ethnographic items from areas well beyond Africa, so this does not just effect collectable items from Africa alone.
As you point out, the new ruling prohibits ALL import of African ivory regardless of the age. Where trading in antique items of ivory is permitted "The onus will now fall on the importer, exporter, or seller to demonstrate that an item meets these criteria." AFAIK, this is an expensive process. Since you have sought CITES certificates, perhaps you can tell us how much this process cost you for each item? What does CITES require for proof of antiquity?
Regarding inter or intra-state sales, how many American collectors in this room can easily prove that items they own with African ivory parts were imported before 1990 and with Asian ivory, before 1975? Swords and knives picked up at gun shows, antique malls or eBay rarely, if ever, come with acceptable provenance or documentation of antiquity. The "documental evidence" you speak of is generally nonexistent and impossible to obtain at this point in time.
I agree that the government probably does not have the man power to police in country sales at shows and antique malls, but all it takes is for one person to "drop a dime" on a show and i am pretty sure they will show up to prosecute.

[T. Koch]

Runjeet, that's a solid interpretation - it is not a ban on commercial trade as such - rather a restriction. The overarching goal here is to make sure that no items harvested and worked post-CITES finds commercial use, so only certified (pre-CITES/pre Appendix I listing of Afr. Elephant) can be found on the commercial market.

Personally, I think the restriction on the export of antiques sucks! The only sensible reason I can think of, is that very few CITES M.A.'s (nevermind customs agents) are capable of accurately dating pieces with worked ivory - even though they've often been taught the theory, they simply lack the foundation of reference experiences you accumulate from looking at a lot of old stuff. If the border check is not able to verify that the item in hand is the one on the CITES-export permit, there is a risk that new ivory will be whitewashed this way.

I would wildly speculate that this problem isn't super significant in the overall picture though. They are just speculations, as it's limited how much Elephant goes through our customs here in Denmark. We mostly see marine ivory due to our ex-colonial connection to Greenland.

I guess most of you already know, but I work at the office of the CITES M.A. in Denmark and have a pretty good idea of how the legislation works. If anyone needs any help, contact info for their national CITES-office, etc. feel free to write me and I'll hook you up!


Cheers, Thor

[T. Koch]

Btw, the new U.S. national restrictions don't seem worse than how it's implemented here in the EU through Council Resolution in 1997 - actually you could argue that it's in fact more lenient, as (at least from how I read it) intra-state trade will still be legal without permits. In the EU you need a permit to sell pre-CITES ivory anywhere in the member states. On the other hand, the EU date for the definition of antique - and hence permissible for intra-EU trade without the need for permits cuts at 1947 - so I guess it depends on how you look at it.

[Runjeet Singh]

David, Thor,

Thanks for your responses. David, yes, you are right, I look at this subject with tunnel vision, of course there are our friends on the European forum and others who are also affected by this.

The cost to apply in the UK for an export licence has actually come down from £47 to £37. The difference I believe is that £37 is per item, and £47 was unlimited items on one application.

It's great to hear from Toch who gives an insiders optimistic view!

Regards
Runjeet

[David]

Originally Posted by Akaalarms

The cost to apply in the UK for an export licence has actually come down from £47 to £37. The difference I believe is that £37 is per item, and £47 was unlimited items on one application.

Runjeet, £37 per item for the export license. But how do you prove to them that the item is indeed antique. Is CITES making that appraisal for you for the licensing fee or do you need to have an outside agency assess the ivory as antique first. Perhaps Thor has a better understanding of this having worked for CITES.
And Thor, just to get this straight, that is a complete ban on IMPORT of antique ivory into the United States, not export. That means that no matter what documentation the antique piece receives it can be stopped at the border and confiscated. Frankly i have no issues with banning post-CITES ivory. It is antique weapons that most of us collect so the ivory on them is usually antique as well. Our collecting habits will not be affected much on bans on post-CITES ivory.
Also, i'm not sure you read the ruling on intra-state trade correctly.
"We will finalize a proposed rule that will reaffirm and clarify that sales across state lines are prohibited, except for bona fide antiques, and will prohibit sales within a state unless the seller can demonstrate an item was lawfully imported prior to 1990 for African elephants and 1975 for Asian elephants, or under an exemption document. "
Again, i don't think that most of the collectors here will readily be able to "demonstrate an item was lawfully imported prior to 1990 for African elephants and 1975 for Asian elephants" so that does indeed make intra-state trade difficult if not officially illegal.

[Runjeet Singh]

Hi David,

I have been self certifying for a long time, so my appraisals are acceptable to them (with supporting evidence). But for those who have not applied before I believe independent assessments are required.

Thor may well be able to give more detail on this.

Regards,
Runjeet

[VANDOO]

THE PROBLEM WILL COME FROM THE LEGAL PREMISE THAT EVERY IVORY ITEM IS ILLEGAL UNTIL THE OWNER PROVES IT THRU DOCUMENTATION THAT THE AGENTS CHOOSE TO ACCEPT AT THEIR DESCRETION. THE TRAINING OF AGENTS WILL NO DOUBT STRESS HARSH ENFORCMENT AND GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT AND ALL PROOF SUSPECT OR TO BE IGNORED.
ALL IVORY ITEMS I HAVE ARE LEGAL BUT I AM SURE WHAT I HAVE WRITTEN DOWN ABOUT WHEN, WHERE AND HOW I GOT THEM WOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED AS PROOF BY ANY GOVERNMENT ENFORCMENT PEOPLE. HOW MANY ANTIQUE ITEMS IN OUR COLLECTIONS ARE LEGALLY DOCUMENTED TO BE OVER 100 YEARS OLD. NOT MANY ALTHOUGH I PERSONALLY KNOW THRU EXPERIENCE WHICH ONES ARE I DOUBT I COULD PROVE IT TO THE SATISFACTION OF AN AGENT WHO WOULD NO DOUBT CONSIDER ME A BAD GUY FOR HAVING PROHIBITED IVORY. EVEN ITEMS I HAVE PERSONALLY HAD IN MY POSESSION SINCE PRE BAN TIMES WOULD ONLY HAVE MY WORD AND PERHAPS WRITTEN INFORMATION WHICH WILL BE WORTH NOTHING AS LEGAL PROOF.
I AM FOR THE PROTECTION OF ANIMAL AND PLANT SPECIES AND PROPER MANAGMENT OF THEIR NATURAL HABITATS; I TOO ABHOR WHAT IS DONE BY POACHERS AND FEEL THEY SHOULD BE DELT WITH HARSHLY. BUT OFTEN LAWS SUCH AS THIS ONE DON'T STOP THE POACHERS BUT CAN SINGLE OUT COLLECTORS THE WORLD OVER NOT ENVOLVED IN POACHING AT ALL. TO OWN A ITEM MADE OF IVORY SHOULD NOT MAKE YOU AS GUILTY AS A POACHER OR SMUGGLER.
TO RISK CONFISCATION, A HUGE FINE AND PRISION TRYING TO SELL AN OLD IVORY ITEM TO SOMEONE WHO WOULD APPRECIATE AND CHERISH IT AS I HAVE FOR YEARS OR JUST TO BURN IT LIKE THE MANY TONS OF CONFISCATED IVORY BURNS EACH YEAR TO AVOID THE TROUBLE. NO DOUBT EXAMPLES WILL BE MADE AND LIVES RUINED INNOCENT AS WELL AS GUILTY. AND PERHAPS A VERY SAD ENDING FOR SOME BEAUTIFUL OLD WORKS OF IVORY ART.
GOOD WELL INFORMED MANAGMENT AND USE OF RESOURCES FOCUSED IN THE AREAS WHERE THEY CAN DO THE MOST GOOD IS MUCH MORE EFFECTIVE THAN DESTRUCTION OF VALUABLE RESOURCES AND LAWS SUCH AS THIS VAUGE ALL ENCOMPASSING ONE.

[colin henshaw]

Amazing, alarming - thanks for posting. Does anyone know exactly what cultural artefacts cannot be collected/owned in the USA ? Not restricted to only Native American material, is there a clear definition ?