What Are The Parameters Of Your Collecting?

[Wrangellian]

Parameters? Hmmmm... novel concept, that might allow me to prevent clutter in my home..

I am reluctant to limit myself in any way but I do tend to prefer the inverts (maybe because that is what has been most available to me starting out), and am most interested in the earlier stuff (Paleozoic etc), but practicality limits me to the local Cretaceous mainly and, in terms of buying, what I can afford. (If I could find it all myself I would but there is little Paleozoic and no Precambrian here). Maybe I should limit myself to Vancouver Island collecting, anyway.. I could still end up with an interesting and varied collection incl. Pennsylvanian/Permian and up.

Edited February 26, 2013 by Wrangellian

[Caleb]

I collect trilobites, more specifically Ordovician trilobites, more more specifically Middle-Late Ordovician trilobites, more more more specifically North American Middle-Late Ordovician trilobites, more more more more specifically Upper Mississippi River Valley North American Middle-Late Ordovician trilobites. It's a narrow field, but it keeps me sane...ish. I will pick up other stuff if it's nice/rare, but I don't hold the same attachment to it.

[fossilcrazy]

I have a fossil collector friend in West Virginia who collects Brachiopods and Plants. I asked him why he doesn't collect other fossils and he claims that they are just a "distraction" from what he tries to study. Fortunate for me he turns me on to "other" fossils he has run into, but not bothered collecting. His method has yielded serious articles he co-authored in peer review journals. Personally, I do what I call making "survey" collections of well known or special fossil sites. What I mean is, I know I can't find everything known from a collecting site, but I can find nice representative specimens of probably the common ones. Once in a while it is common to stumble on some of the rare or very rare species. Yes, those go in my survey collection too (with a big smile), unless of course they are of scientific importance. Most definitely they belong with a scientist or institution that tells me they will use it as a type fossil for description. (That doesn't happen very often) What I find is not always spectacular, but my survey holdings have many specimens from sites that are no longer collectible (let me state that I'm not responsible for that fact). Exploratory collecting trips are the last form of collecting I do; as the benefit to effort ratio is pretty low. I recall my earlier collecting years were lots of time, but so few places to go. Now days my collecting is a full plate with little time to do what I want. The old phrase: "Youth is wasted on the young" comes to mind.

[Uncle Siphuncle]

if it swam, flew, ran, hid, slithered, belly crawled, or basked in the sun, and still looks cool, i'll pick it up.

i consider myself more of an adventurer than a "serious" paleontologist. my focus is variety of fauna, exposures, and formation, and my ongoing mission is to actively seek productive virgin sites. my hit rate is about 25%, and many sites are only good for one hunt every year or

so.

i view quality collecting to be a diminishing prospect in the years to come due to competition

and site closures, so my focus du jour is

spending as much time afield as possible. i let

little get in the way of field time. i research only enough to maximize productivity afield. i figure i

can spend more time learning about my finds in later years when health and collecting maybe arent quite as good.

avocational paleo is fun because you as an individual define what makes it rewarding for you.

Edited February 26, 2013 by danwoehr

[trilobiteruss]

After many years of collecting when I focused first on al kinds of items, then once in professional field narrowed down to echinoderms, trilobites and dinosaurs I have in past 3 years narrowed my collecting further to just trilobites. I have a few of my crinoids, cystoids and such that go with a particular trilobite fauna (ordovician, silurian, devonian) but now I exclusively go for trilobites. And in particular I have a lot of Ordovicain, some Silurian specimens, fair amount of Devonian also and a good 3 shelves of good Moroccan material. In particular I have probably leaned to getting as many of the Permo-Carboniferous bugs as I can since they are mostly smaller, take lots less space and that is area (Carboniferous Stratigraphy and Coal geology) I did my career in. And of late I also have greatly expanded my collecting of good and rare western US Lower to Middle Cambrian material. And of course my smattering now of Chinese lower and middle carboniferous bugs.

Russ

[Wrangellian]

My thinking currently is similar to you two, fossilcrazy and dan... Maybe when I'm older and have far too many specimens I'll see what I have and start narrowing it down to some scheme and getting rid of what 'doesn't fit'. Right now I feel like the sites that I have available to collect are strokes of luck and won't last.

[Jurassic Jim]

Well by location, the most numerous fossils I have are Mississippian marine fossils. I would agree with others in that regardless of the size, type, etc finding a new species for my collection is always exciting. I have spent many, many hours over the last 2 winters cataloguing and researching the finds from each locale collected. I plan to begin building galleries eventually on here to both provide resource and seek help, as there are many fossils that I have no identification on to date.

Having said this I to will gladly look for any fossils, any age,and anywhere possible. Looking in new locations and ages is always fun because nearly every discovery is a new thrill.

I also got absolutely hooked looking for vertebrate material in the Hell Creek in 2009 and now go out every year for 1-2 weeks. Both the microfossils that can be found and the large dino bones are amazing. The first bone I found was an unfused sacral vertebra of a young triceratops---the rest is history, I now can't wait to get out there each year.

[Keeper]

I collect any thing that doesn't walk on dry land.

I collect anything that doesn't walk away.

[Plax]

I prefer to collect locality assemblages as I like viewing the entire fauna or flora together. What I enjoy most though is having a mission to collect something or show someone an exposure.

[tracefossilnut]

Mostly limited to poorly preserved marine invertebrates and well preserved marine trace fossls here in n.w. Arkansas.

When I lived in s.e. Missouri, I collected only marine invertebrates. My best collection (most species and most well

preserved) is a Middle Ordovician Plattin site collection in Cape Girardeau County, Mo. located just 6 miles from

my house. Living here in Arkansas, I am limmited to what I can find localy, but I must say I am now hooked on trace

fossils. They are so intersting, and there are so many different kinds.

[daa906]

I collect any fossil I can get my hands on. My favorite probably being my 22 Inch Notogoneus and 16 Inch Diplomystus from the green river formation. I picked both of them up for $150 off craigslist because the guy thought they were too heavy and wanted to get rid of them I was more than happy to oblige.