Where To Collect Cambrian Fossils

[siteseer]

I don't see a manpower problem. I assume some of the tourists making the hike are paleontologists specializing in early invertebrates. If even only one or two visit the site every year, a ranger could take just them up and oversee their collection of whatever is loose on the surface (no hammering). The paleontologists and the ranger could pack the stuff back to the ranger station/closest museum. I'm sure any paleontologist visiting the site would be happy to do that and if two backpacks worth of stuff is all that gets saved every year, well, something is better than nothing.

If that's too complicated, at least put some of the loose specimens in some kind of enclosure (clear plastic case like they do at Agate Fossil Beds, Sioux County, Nebraska) or coat them with a suitable preservative.

Rescuing weathered-out specimens without 'hastening the weathering' would work if there there were folks willing to do this, and oversight to prevent abuse of the site.

<cough cough Swatara Gap cough cough>

Edited July 22, 2014 by siteseer

[siteseer]

Don,

In the 90's I visited Agate Fossil Beds not expecting to see fossils in situ. The visitor center isn't huge but I checked that out too. There seemed to be a decent crowd the two times I've been there - maybe not as remote as Yoho but not exactly an urban center either. When I visit a fossil site/museum, I'm happy if all I take home is a souvenir booklet and some postcards.

Jess

I agree it's frustrating to think of (or see) such specimens left to the elements to eventually be destroyed. However, you should consider how long the site would last, and what condition it would be left in, if collecting were allowed. Also, as Auspex noted, the existence of a legal source of these specimens would create an irresistible attraction to those who would abuse the resource. How successful have we been at protecting elephants and rhinos, even within national parks, given the market (even the illegal market) for ivory and rhino horn?

How many people make the hike to the Burgess Shale quarry every year? How many would make the trip if there were no fossils to actually be seen there, or if there was only a museum exhibit like you could see at the ROM?

I suppose the park could generate some revenue by selling some specimens from the talus. However in that case the market value would be greater than the majority of us could hope to afford anyway. Plus that opens an interesting can of worms: if one can justify selling fossils from a national park (a commodity with a relatively tiny market), why not sell logging rights? Trees will at least grow back, eventually. Or sell any other marketable resource? You can still see the bighorn sheep, you just have to look in between the oil derricks.

I'm actually more concerned about some parks, such as Strathcona on Vancouver Island, that don't even allow researchers to collect specimens of undescribed species. In that case the loss is to science, not just to our somewhat selfish desire as collectors to own a specimen.

Don

Edited July 22, 2014 by siteseer

[Wrangellian]

I strongly suspect it is a money and manpower issue, both for salvaging and for policing under relaxed rules.

Not really sure how it's actually better (for the public) that they disappear into a private collection, though. And once some come to market 'legitimately' (which they certainly would), then a black market trade has a screen from behind which to operate. I cite the Argentine fossil pine cone market; do you really think that all the ones for sale are pre-ban? How 'bout Chilean shark's teeth? The slope gets slipperier than snake snot when there is money to be made.

It does pain me that these remarkable fossils are 'going to waste', but the risk for loss of the the site and its treasures is great, unless they take extraordinary and unaffordable measures to regulate the takings.

If they 'disappear' into a private collection, they do reappear at some time later, as you point out. Not so the ones that disintegrate. I just might donate mine to one of the smaller museums here on the Island when I'm done with them.

In any case, if they don't want to allow private collection/ownership, that still leaves all those colleges and other smaller museums that don't have any Burgess specimens like the ROM does. The least they could do is allow college and smaller museum tours up there and let them go home with some of the loose ones for their collections.

There are already specimens (like mine) in private collections that were taken out legally years ago, Do you suppose these already form a smoke screen?

How hard can it be to police a site that is the length of an average suburban yard? I suspect there is some inertia and buck-passing combined with that expense problem you point out. Most of the authorities aren't fossil nuts like we are so it doesn't matter to them. I suspect they aren't as motivated to pull strings to make this happen. I guess this won't be answered until one of us gets to talk to the people involved, however.

[Auspex]

...if they don't want to allow private collection/ownership, that still leaves all those colleges and other smaller museums that don't have any Burgess specimens like the ROM does. The least they could do is allow college and smaller museum tours up there and let them go home with some of the loose ones for their collections...

If this is possible under the World Heritage designation, and the specimens were professionally curated, it would certainly ease my mind about an otherwise wasted educational resource. How many institutions have the wherewithal? Maintaining a collection is pretty expensive, and the commitment is permanent. Maybe some grass-roots "friends of the museum" groups could make it possible (assuming that it can be made legal under the designation)?

[Wrangellian]

Anything would be better than nothing. I just don't know what good a World Heritage designation even is if it causes any number of rare fossils to be wasted. Like Siteseer said - declare it a world treasure then condemn the lesser parts of that world treasure to oblivion? I wonder what future generations will think, after the site is exhausted, looking back on our inability or unwillingness (as I suspect it is at least partly the latter) to manage it more carefully.

I see no problem with museums or colleges accepting such an acquisition, if they have fossil collections at all - whether they have the funds of not, I think they would find them! Worry about the acquisitions when they present themselves, and worry what to do with them later.. this is how the few museums I have seen handle things. I know the college I went to here on the Island has a small fossil collection.

Do colleges and uni's never arrange tours up there? All it would take is getting the students to pick up some pieces and haul them back! Could be part of their credits.

[Auspex]

There is expense in getting there, being there, and getting back. If done under the auspices of an institution, there is internal organizational costs, not the least of which is insurance. These specimens are not really free for the taking!

[fossilcrazy]

I find this thread has some interesting takes on how talus bound fossils should be handled. There are those in Parks Canada who believe that the quarries are an ugly scar on the face of Fossil Ridge and should never have been permitted. In distant pictures of Fossil Ridge, the three quarries can be picked out, but still minuscule to the grand picture. Charles Walcott and teams over the years made the first "scars" before there was a Park and before UNESCO existed. Personally, I find the winter avalanches wiping out swaths of trees makes for an ugly view. Parks Canada should ban all snow avalanches. Regarding the weathering of fossils in the talus, the Stephen formation Shale is as close to any Slate that I've seen and breaks down very slow even with frost action. Recent fossils found in the talus have been matched up to counterparts at the Smithsonian taken from the site over 80 years earlier by Walcott and team. A big reason the recent fossils end up in the talus is the permits for the research digs, spell out in the permit, the maximum number of specimens that can be taken in a given year (permit). High grading scientifically important fossils; meant lesser specimens went over the edge so as not to be the fossils covered in the permit count. There are times when Parks Canada allowed common Marellas to be gathered in big numbers for distribution to Canadian schools as hands on specimens. Those fossils are still owned by Parks Canada as are the fossils in the Royal Ontario Museum's repository. Technically they are on lifetime loan.

What I feel about continued public collecting of Burgess Shale fossils means nothing; but I'll give my feelings anyway. In the USA Trilobite Wildness areas, some of the BLM land has allowed the public to collect Trilobites. There have been explicit limits set requiring: hand tools use only, a limit of two specimens, those specimens cannot be sold, traded or bartered. It sounded like a good way to handle a public benefit of individual collecting. In reality collectors do not adhere to the rules. Power tools get used, the maximum numbers collected per individual are exceeded and specimens appear in fossil sales and trades. When BLM can't enforce their regulations, the sites get closed to collecting and any collecting activity is then illegal. It is unlikely using a similar protocol would help in Canada. I cannot see a good blend of stewardship and collecting without an absolute ability to enforce rules 100% of the time. Human nature is what it is. We all have different reasons to collect or not collect. We all have different virtues and vices. When it comes to fossil collecting, often greed rears it's ugly head. We all would like a free hand at collecting where ever we wish for as much as we want. That is my take on the subject without any good solution developed.

Edited July 23, 2014 by fossilcrazy

[FossilDAWG]

Perhaps "no good solution developed", but wise words nonetheless. I didn't know the research permits limited the number of specimens that could be removed, that does do a lot to explain the material that gets left behind. Setting such a limit seems like it could conflict with valid research needs. At the least it requires field identification and high-grading, but I (for one) often notice specimens when I am cleaning slabs at home, things I missed, or misidentified in the field. Still it is what it is, I suppose we're fortunate any research is allowed at all, given the mindset of some park managers (such as the Strathcona matter I mentioned earlier).

Don

[fossilcrazy]

I have an amusing anecdote about human nature. While I was a field research assistant at the Burgess Shale, after a hard days work at Walcott's Quarry, the team would head down the slopes to supper at Base camp. It was free time and I would descend and search below the quarry in talus and scree for fossils left or overlooked. Important fossils found would go to the ROM. Occasionally a nice Ollenelus could be found. If there was no soft-bodied preservation, it would not go on the ROM permit. What I did do is bring it to a big rock on the Yoho path that hikers would use to sit and rest on. I would leave it there and on the next evening I would return and find the Trilobite was removed. Amazing that the Park's $5,000 fine did not discourage someone from leaving with it. I did this many times with the same result. Call me an "enabler" or "tempter", I just wanted to see how the hikers would react to the temptation. They passed the human nature test and failed the Park regulations test. Anyone of the Trilobites would have been nice to have. Who ever you are, don't thank me. I didn't in anyway authorize the removal of said fossils. That's all on you. I merely presented a devilish test.

[Auspex]

I honestly do not know for sure I would do in that circumstance.

It ain't easy being human...

[Wrangellian]

You said it!

Whether the fossils take a long time or a short time to degrade, they will degrade eventually if they have to remain up there forever. Walcott collected a specimen that remains unique (Portalia), but is unfortunately 'a bit weathered' according to Briggs et al in 'The Fossils of the Burgess Shale'. Who knows how long it was exposed before he found it? Obviously not so long that it ended up buried again by further erosion/quarrying above it, because it didn't. Slate is durable but the fossils are thin films. I would bet those 'pilfered' Olenellus Olenoides specimens will last longer than those not pilfered, and they will not disappear forever just because they are in private collections. (Again, I'm not advising the breaking of laws, but the tweaking of laws to prevent waste.) People can only own them as long as they are alive, then someone else gets them. I don't care who technically owns them, whether its Parks or the institutions or private collectors that house them, as long as they are housed. Nor do I care how many fossils are taken from parks, for the same reason - the more the better. Rather than arbitrarily deciding that only two (and then zero) fossils can be removed per person, surface collecting should be unlimited because it has so little effect on the environment/scenery which parks are designated to preserve - Quarrying should be limited for the same reason that logging and oil drilling is. It seems to me that policing the use of power tools etc should be easier than policing the surreptitious pocketing of loose Olenoides. I realize open season on fossils in parks is a radical stance that I never expect to see implemented but I mention it to put my more conservative proposals into perspective! ...

Interesting to learn that there is a 'catch limit' imposed on the researchers. That does explain a lot. Now what exactly is that limit and who chose it? Barring open collecting, the least they could do is increase those limits that researchers are permitted to take. If say 1000 fossils per year can be taken and be on permanent loan from Parks Canada, then so could 2000 or 10 000. Or else broaden the definition of 'accredited institutions' to include lesser colleges and uni's.

It is also interesting to hear that so many Marellas were distributed to schools. Maybe I haven't been to enough schools/etc and inspected their collections but I have never seen them outside of the Tyrrell Museum or heard of them elsewhere than the ROM and RBCM (and Smithsonian). Pretty sure my alma mater has none.

Edited July 24, 2014 by Wrangellian

[piranha]

I have an amusing anecdote about human nature. While I was a field research assistant at the Burgess Shale, after a hard days work at Walcott's Quarry, the team would head down the slopes to supper at Base camp. It was free time and I would descend and search below the quarry in talus and scree for fossils left or overlooked. Important fossils found would go to the ROM. Occasionally a nice Ollenelus could be found. If there was no soft-bodied preservation, it would not go on the ROM permit. What I did do is bring it to a big rock on the Yoho path that hikers would use to sit and rest on. I would leave it there and on the next evening I would return and find the Trilobite was removed. Amazing that the Park's $5,000 fine did not discourage someone from leaving with it. I did this many times with the same result. Call me an "enabler" or "tempter", I just wanted to see how the hikers would react to the temptation. They passed the human nature test and failed the Park regulations test. Anyone of the Trilobites would have been nice to have. Who ever you are, don't thank me. I didn't in anyway authorize the removal of said fossils. That's all on you. I merely presented a devilish test.

Olenellus is a lower Cambrian trilobite, the Burgess bugs are Olenoides serratus. Sorry, I don't see the humor, that test strikes me as entrapment!

[Wrangellian]

Olenoides.

I'm not sure he meant it in humor. Wouldn't that only be entrapment if he notified the rangers at the bottom of the trail that hikers had been taking the bugs?

[piranha]

...I'm not sure he meant it in humor. Wouldn't that only be entrapment if he notified the rangers at the bottom of the trail that hikers had been taking the bugs?

Perhaps not, but the lead sentence refers to an "amusing anecdote".

My comment was not meant to be offered as a technical interpretation of the law.

I'll say it this way instead; random "virtue" testing strikes me as another form of entrapment.

[Wrangellian]

I see, He might have meant that tongue-in-cheek but only he can answer that I guess.

[piranha]

I see, He might have meant that tongue-in-cheek but only he can answer that I guess.

Aside from the issue of what's humorous or not, I'm sure the folks at UNESCO, Parks Canada and the ROM, would not be pleased to hear that story!

[Wrangellian]

Well it is an interesting test... just to see how often things get taken. They might not be pleased to hear it but they might like to hear it anyway.

[fossilcrazy]

Looks like it's time to chime in. Think of my actions as a "see what happens" test. In retrospect, I'm not sure what prompted me to do that. We are talking about the past. That was 1997. UNESCO, Parks Canada or the ROM feelings would probably not have been called pleasure. If anything would have changed; the restricted area boundary would have been enlarged.

Over the years I have enjoyed posting here in the Fossil Forum. Today has taught me not to just automatically post on a whim. I never thought I would alienate people I respect on the messages. If any of my messages are distasteful, out of place or objectionable, I'd be glad to delete my portion.

Edited July 24, 2014 by fossilcrazy

[taj]

I wonder if there wouldn't actually be less incentive to poach if there were fossils legally available.

Good point . I think the Aussie did something like that for their croc species which where protected ,but poached nonetheless. They set up croc farms for commercial purpose , and the illegal poaching decreased tremendously(if my memory serves me well , this was described in some documentary I saw a long time ago).Peharps our Aussie colleagues here have more details ?

[Auspex]

... If any of my messages are distasteful, out of place or objectionable, I'd be glad to delete my portion.

Your post was factual, first-hand, and very germane to the topic. You were not advocating for the practice, only sharing the results.

[piranha]

Your post was factual, first-hand, and very germane to the topic. You were not advocating for the practice, only sharing the results.

I agree the post is germane to the topic but that misses a much more important point. Purposely enticing people to see if they will commit a crime at a World Heritage site violates any code of ethics I can imagine. Whether you're a visitor or a volunteer research assistant, I'm 100% certain that moving fossils from the talus slope (many times) to the hikers path, to see if they would be stolen, would be deemed entirely inappropriate. That act, in and of itself would likely have a severe consequence, at a minimum, expulsion from the park! If Parks Canada wants to discover the theft of Burgess Shale fossils, you can bet your bottom dollar they want to be the ones conducting the investigation. Let me say it this way instead; no one from UNESCO, ROM, or Parks Canada, would ever approve of those actions.

[Auspex]

Your point is valid, and taken.

What was done a long time ago, though, is done, and can still serve as yet another example of human nature vs. rules.

"Let ye among you who is without sin..."

[piranha]

Your point is valid, and taken.

What was done a long time ago, though, is done, and can still serve as yet another example of human nature vs. rules.

"Let ye among you who is without sin..."

The passage of time doesn't excuse the action, especially since all these years later, the episode is boastfully publicized on this forum.

We shouldn't find ways to apologize for bad behavior.

[Auspex]

"Episode"? "Boastfully publicized"?

Man, this really pegged your ethics-meter!

No one is making excuses here, and apologizing for something someone else did on a whim years ago is above my pay grade. What is within my job description is behavior on the Forum, and I do not see anything in abuse of our rules in the post.

[piranha]

"Episode"? "Boastfully publicized"?

Man, this really pegged your ethics-meter!

No one is making excuses here, and apologizing for something someone else did on a whim years ago is above my pay grade. What is within my job description is behavior on the Forum, and I do not see anything in abuse of our rules in the post.

That's how I read it. The privilege of having access to the most important fossil site in the world is no trivial matter. I'm not suggesting for one moment that any rules infraction occurred at TFF, or that anything needs to be addressed by some official edict of TFF. Just calling it as I see it.