A UK Ivory Ban?

First, thanks for the many positive comments and feedback from my post yesterday.  I would like to apologize to my fellow appraisers at the American Society of Appraisers (ASA). With my dyslexic typing skills, I inadvertently listed them as the Appraisers Society of America.  I of course know better and have updated the original post.

The Antiques Trade Gazette has been reporting on the possibility of a total ban on ivory sales in the UK. Below are two articles from the ATG on the potential for a ban, and a follow-up article on the impact on the antique ivory trade from a dealer's perspective. One of the interesting aspects of the article is the apparent about-face on the UK government's position on antique ivory sales, at first saying they would be exempted, and then stating a total ban is possible.

I think this potential UK action shows, and I believe it is similar here in the U.S., there is an enormous amount of pressure being applied to governments for a ivory total ban. This total ban on ivory, in various U.S. states and now the UK certainly appears to be gaining traction, and that is not good for collectors of antique ivory.  The second ATG article also notes the difficulty one dealer has had in selling ivory in the U.S.

The ATG reports

The Conservative Party Manifesto pledges to “press for a total ban on ivory sales” despite recent assurances from the Government that they would not damage the legitimate antiques trade.

The statement on page 55 of the manifesto contradicts promises given last autumn that while the Government would do all it could to protect endangered species by tackling poaching, it would not seek to put an end to the trade in antique items containing ivory. Under CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species) rules, the trade in worked ivory dating to before 1947 is legal.

However, after ATG approached Conservative Central Office for clarification, a spokesman confirmed that the policy would now be to achieve a total ban.

"In pressing for a total ban on ivory sales we will work with our international partners and interested parties at home to see how best to achieve this and over what time frame," said the spokesman.

"We recognise the importance of the UK art and antiques trade and will be discussing this issue with them in more detail."

Policy U-Turn

British Art Market Federation (BAMF) chairman Anthony Browne declared the manifesto pledge "baffling, having had complete assurance from DEFRA [Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs] that this would not happen".

"We were very surprised to see this manifesto commitment by the Conservatives, which appears to represent an abrupt U-turn from their previous policy," he told ATG.

"Ministers have confirmed to us on many occasions that they recognised and respected the clear distinction between the illicit market for ivory and the legitimate ownership of antique cultural objects and the market for them, and they have always supported the legitimate market."

The impact would be widespread, he said. "While we welcome the Conservative Party's acknowledgment of the importance of the British art and antiques trade, which directly supports over 40,000 jobs, there should be no doubt that an unqualified ban on the trade in all ivory, regardless of its age, would have a profoundly damaging effect on many businesses in the art market.

"Further than that, it would affect anyone who owns an heirloom made from, or containing, ivory - musical instruments, miniature paintings on ivory, furniture with ivory keyholes or inlay, teapots with ivory finials, early carvings. The list is long. These would become unsaleable under such a ban."
"Smacks of Maoism"

Dealer Martin Levy of H Blairman & Son said: "There is universal support for the protection of endangered species, not least the elephant. But demonising works of art that happen to be made of, or contain ivory, is to cut us off from our shared cultural past.

"It is smacks of Maoism for a political party to wish to deprive owners of their freedom in relation to treasured artefacts, often handed down as heirlooms - and this from the Conservative Party.

"The art market is totally behind the NGOs' fight for the elephant. Let these organisations recognise our support, and at the same time express publicly what is obvious: there is no correlation between a 17th century baroque ivory cup, and the illicit trade in poached tusks - none."

Paul McManus, chief executive, Music Industries Association, also expressed his concern to ATG: "The MIA is working closely with the numerous authorities involved to ensure both sensible and pragmatic controls of protected and endangered materials. This includes challenging any legislation that affects reasonable and obvious trade on products that are currently classed as antique and exempt and that existed prior to current rulings."

Museums' Fear

It is not just the trade who are concerned by the proposals.

Referring to the recently tightened regulations governing the trade in endangered species, Dr Marjorie Trusted, senior curator of sculpture at the Victoria and Albert Museum, told ATG: "CITES has proved a highly effective means of preventing the import and sale of poached ivory from Africa in the past few years. A ban like this could stultify the perfectly valid movement of ivory works of art."

And she feared for the future of museum collections as a result.

"A ban on the sales of ivory would mean museums would not be able to acquire and make publicly accessible ivory works of art, for example important gothic or baroque pieces, as they would not be allowed to come on to the market," she said.

"What upsets me is the loss of common sense. We all deplore the criminal poaching of elephants, but a ban of the sale of antique ivory works of art would not in any way prevent this."

Mr Browne backed up this view: "BAMF has repeatedly expressed its wholehearted support for effective measures to stamp out poaching and the illicit market in ivory, but it is hard to see how banning someone from selling their grandmother's piano is in any way relevant to this."

Dr Trusted believes that the arguments for a total ban simply don't add up.

"In the US the authorities have attempted to justify a total ban by saying that it is impossible to tell the difference between antique worked ivory and newly-worked ivory," she said. "But professionals in the art world would immediately be able to tell the difference, and would be happy to work with the customs authorities or the police on this."

Last year attitudes to ivory and the legislation surrounding it took centre stage in the antiques trade.

Chiswick Auctions banned all sales of ivory after inadvertently falling foul of the law in 2014, while in July last year the BBC's Antiques Roadshow confirmed it had become increasingly cautious about showing items containing ivory on screen.

Source: The Antiques Trade Gazette

The second updated article states

A leading dealer in Japanese works of art says he will go out of business if sales of ivory in the UK are banned.

St James's dealer Max Rutherston made his fears known ahead of the General Election, commenting on the Conservative manifesto pledge to end the ivory trade.

The other major parties are yet to declare their position on the issue.

Mr Rutherston - until last year chairman of the ten-day Asian Art in London festival - specialises in netsuke, many of them carved from ivory. Around half his sales involve ivory.

"The American moratorium has already made my business difficult in recent months," he said. "A UK total ban on ivory sales would almost certainly make it unviable."

Mr Rutherston is calling for politicians and campaigners to "focus on the true criminals here, who are the poachers and those who trade in the fruits of their cruelty".

His comments came as it emerged that the Conservative Party had included a similar pledge to end the ivory trade in their 2010 manifesto. However, then they also promised to destroy existing stockpiles, making it appear that they were really concerned with contraband.

The stockpile clause is missing from the 2015 manifesto and Conservative Central Office's confirmation toATGthat they really did mean a total ban, including antiques, sparked uproar when reported last week.

Chinese Demand

One of the most vocal critics when the news broke on Twitter a week ago was silver dealer Michael Baggott who said: "It's alarming because of what's happened in America. People in the trade have said to me: 'A ban on ivory means the destruction of items which only have ivory as an element in them'. Somebody will work out that there will be a way of removing the ivory to make money. Hundreds of thousands of objects would be ruined to make a few pounds."

Mr Baggott believes that much of the problem has arisen as a result of the growing wealth in China.

"Ivory has such a cultural significance in China these days and now they have the money to pay for it. The law won't stop the poachers if rich Chinese are still prepared to pay for it," he said. "The bizarre thing is that modern ivory is already banned. What it needs is on-the-ground policing to stop the corruption."

He also believes that people are backing a campaign that they don't understand. "There's a fundamental lack of understanding of what antique ivory is. If you showed a member of the public 500 portrait miniatures and said do you want these destroyed, they would be aghast."

It's a point not lost on portrait miniature specialist Emma Rutherford, who also went on Twitter to spread the word.

LAPADA Concern

Rebecca Davies, chief executive of LAPADA, expressed her association's "deep concern" at the manifesto policy.
She said: "Few people realise the breadth of antique items that are crafted from or contain ivory. Enacting a blanket ban will not save the elephants and so much more would be threatened instead.

"Many dealers have already seen a major impact on sales to the US market and this type of legislation would be the final nail in the coffin for many of them whose expertise is focused on items that historically contain ivory."

Mr Rutherston agreed: "The current turmoil in the United States appears to stem from an intellectually feeble reaction to a real problem.

"Responsible supporters of the continuing trade in antique ivory are quick to emphasise that they condemn the poaching of elephants, and I doubt that they would object to an outright universal ban on the trade in unworked or newly worked ivory."
He said that CITES has proved an acceptable and effective way of controlling the legitimate trade and backed V&A curator Dr Marjorie Trusted's view, reported in last week'sATG, that it was not difficult to distinguish between antique and modern works made from ivory.

"If there is room for doubt about whether an object was made before 1947, so be it; decline a licence to the dubious object. In this respect, I think that the system may in part be self-policing," Mr Rutherston added.

Borwick Seeks Clarification

ATGasked the Liberal Democrats and Labour to give their position on the ivory as neither included it in their manifesto, but neither replied before deadline. Nor did the Scottish National Party when asked to clarify its position: it mentions only enforcing the ban on the illegal trade in ivory.

Nonetheless, Kensington and Chelsea Conservative candidate Victoria Borwick, a former fairs director at Olympia and Deputy Mayor for London, was clear that she did not back her own party's manifesto pledge.

She has written to DEFRA parliamentary under secretary of state Lord de Maulay asking for clarification and for him to put dealers' minds at rest. She has told him that the trade would support the ban on modern ivory, but not antiques, and argued that Conservative policy was to back existing CITES rules.

She also toldATGthat if elected on May 7 she would continue to press the matter and stand up for the art and antiques trade regardless of which party came to power.

Source: The Antiques Trade Gazette