Professor Julian Paton's heirloom 19th piano, before the removal of the ivory tops of the keys. Photo / supplied
Professor Julian Paton's heirloom 19th piano, before the removal of the ivory tops of the keys. Photo / supplied
An English immigrant is stunned that his antique piano was impounded because it breached ivory importation laws.
Professor Julian Paton moved to New Zealand last November with his wife and two children - among their possessions, an upright piano with 50 ivory keys.
But on Thursday the ivory was removedat a storage facility near Auckland airport on the orders of the Department of Conservation (DoC).
The ivory was removed because New Zealand is a signatory to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (Cites). It implements the convention through the Trade in Endangered Species (Ties) Act.
Objects made before 1914 are usually exempt, providing the owner gets a certificate to say so.
But Paton didn't apply for specific exemption before leaving the UK so the piano was deemed to have been exported illegally, seized when it reached New Zealand and forfeited to the Crown.
Paton said he backed any moves to crack down on the ivory trade but believed the saga could have been avoided if he had been told about the Cites treaty by the shipping company who relocated the family's possessions to New Zealand.
Professor Julian Paton's heirloom 19th piano, before the removal of the ivory tops of the keys. Photo / supplied
"We followed all the rules that we were told to follow," Paton told the Weekend Herald.
The piano was made in 1895 and Paton said he declared it featured ivory in paperwork on the family's possessions submitted to New Zealand authorities before leaving the UK.
The piano had been proudly owned by the family for more than 30 years.
Paton - who researches heart disease at the University of Auckland – has been backed by his local Epsom MP, David Seymour. The ACT leader took up the case and lobbied DoC and Minister of Conservation Eugenie Sage.
In a letter to Seymour in February, Sage said she had no powers to intervene. It was up to DoC.
In May, DoC Director-General Lou Sanson wrote to Seymour outlining the options which included sending the piano back to the UK, the Crown keeping it for scientific, educational, enforcement or identification purposes, dumping it entirely or removing the ivory and releasing the rest to Paton.
Eight days ago Paton and Seymour had a phone conference with Sanson and other DoC staff; which again ended in no positive outcome for Paton or the piano.
A DoC statement signed off by Sanson said Cites specimens are regularly confiscated at the New Zealand border.
"Approximately 180 people a week have items confiscated at the airport. Around 35-53 items are confiscated each fortnight at Auckland wharf and mail centre."
Sanson's statement also pointed out the need for Doc staff to administer the Ties consistently: "The Ombudsman recently affirmed the reasonableness of DoC decision-making under the Ties Act in a similar circumstance."
Sage backed DoC's efforts to uphold Cites and laws to discourage the illegal trade in ivory and other goods made from the tusks and horns of endangered animals.
"New Zealand needs to play its part. I sympathise with Professor Paton about his piano but support the Department's decision."
The ivory - technically the tops of the keys, a few millimetres deep - was removed by a piano tuner under DoC supervision and will be disposed of. Paton says he was told it would be buried. He's been told to pay the cost of removing the ivory and collecting the piano. He plans to fight this.
He will then have to fit replacement synthetic tops, a process which will cost several hundred dollars.
Seymour described the saga as "outrageous" and removing the ivory was "vandalism".
"I'm embarrassed as a New Zealander and as a local MP that this is how we welcome people, by confiscating their family heirlooms so their kids can't play piano," he said.
"I think that the Department of Conservation have been incredibly lazy. Basically they don't want to use their discretion because then they'd have to make hard decisions sometimes.
"So they've taken this lazy approach of saying no to everyone, regardless of the impact, in order to make their own job easier and I think that's disgracefully disappointing."
The shipping company involved in the Paton's move to New Zealand did not respond at press time.
