No detailed data exist that provide reliable insights into either the precise nature or magnitude of trade in cultural property. As one expert points out. "It is easy to understand why we have little information. Much about the art trade simply is not knowable." Bator. An Essay on the International Trade in Art 34 Stan. L. Rev. 275, 291 (1982). Professor Bator suggests that this is because of the vast number of undiscovered or unidentified objects; the lack of resources among many nations to develop their cultural resources; and the secret nature of much of the trade. Nevertheless, the testimony to the committee on S. 1723 confirmed the evidence given in various Congressional fora in recent years and in many learned articles: the demand for cultural artifacts has resulted in the irremedial destruction of archaeological sites and articles, depriving the situs countries of their cultural patrimony and the world of important knowledge of its past. Further, because the United States is a principal market for articles of archaeological or ethnological interests and of art objects, the discovery here of stolen or illegally exported artifacts in some cases severely strains our relations with the countries of origin, which often include close allies. As stated by the Department of State in commenting on S. 1723:  

The legislation is important to our foreign relations, including our international cultural relations. The expanding worldwide trade in objects of archaeological and ethnological interest has led to wholesale depredations in some countries, resulting in the mutilation of ceremonial centers and archaeological complexes of ancient civilizations and the removal of stone sculptures and reliefs. In addition, art objects have been stolen in increasing quantities from museums, churches, and collections. The governments which have been victimized have been disturbed at the outflow of these objects to foreign lands, and the appearance in the United States of objects has often given rise to outcries and urgent requests for return by other countries. The United States considers that on grounds of principle, good foreign relations, and concern for the preservation of the cultural heritage of mankind, it should render assistance in these situations.