Collecting Ethics And Science?

[Frank Menser]

It is unethical for an uninvited anybody to pick through my unique orchid collection to study (if I had one). Or to take core samples from the chesnut tree in my yard (if I had one of those). I don't think the field deserves a "right" to obtaining fossil finds from either collectors or, an extension of this idea, landowners on whose property fossils are found. The communication issue, mentioned above, is vital for finding good working relationships between collector, landowner and scientist/researcher. With the communication and hopefully subsequent permission to borrow or collect, there must be integrity at the site, whether it be a museum, university lab or the collection site itself. The swagger needs to go. The university paleontology dept. is not at the top of the food, no, um, fossil chain. Hats off to all who have both the good communication and the integrity to live out the agreements.

BRAVO...

[tracer]

"Yep, that is the truth from where I see it. Nothing like a government - enforced monopoly.......to kick the black market in the ! Marijuana is still illegal in a lot of places in the US. That is why a dried weed is more valuable than its weight in gold - the US federal government's attempt to overturn the law of supply and demand. You ban surface collecting of fossils save by government sanctioned 'professionals' and you encourage large - scale criminal prospecting for same and the development of a black market to sell them."

sooo...if we banned government and put the anarchists in charge then there would be no dope problems and we could all collect fossils anywhere we want? and the paleontologists and the amateurs will do lunch together daily?

actually, i guess that if there were no laws, then there could by definition be no criminals...

[Terry Dactyll]

I think were all putting our slant on things here and going off at tangents in some cases to discuss the issues surrounding this topic that we feel most strongly about.... Initially I was thinking about my big ammonites, but what I forgot to add was that i have donated a large quantity of material to a University Museum..... I was fortunate to live close to an opencast coal exposure and went every night of the week, accruing quite an amount of fossils....I decided along with a collecting friend to donate a lot of plants, crabs fish scales etc, to the museum, so they could be handled and used and studied by the students.... some students sectioned cones and polished them, taking images for 3 dimensional plant reconstruction etc..... so they were getting used... They also took my best 3D tree trunk which they planned to site in the entrance hall to the museum, as a fossil children could touch when they arrived to view the exhibits.... When i enquired a year or so later, it hadnt been sited there, as modern health and safety laws meant it had to be securly fixed down.... Its another reason I like to hang onto my stuff.... they can have the lot at somepoint, but I will enjoy them in the meantime....

[JohnJ]

I think the science of paleontology and other fields, for that matter, progress faster with a "symbiotic" relationship between the "professionals" ("P") and "non-professionals" ("NP"). Productive examples of that relationship are numerous (e.g. - Dallasaurus). Both groups benefit from each other. It's when either group fails to realize this value that the "science" suffers. I think that "value" is at the core of paleontology's future.

If I own something of value to you, we may be able to "do business". If you use force, in any form, to take it from me, that's theft.

Sometimes, I think the requirement to trade fairly in a business transaction is missing. "NP"s regularly pay, in some form, for the knowledge of the "P"s, and the "P"s should pay, in some form, for the resulting efforts of the "NP"s. Clear, mutually agreed on transactions have the least downside for the future relationship of these two groups. Professionals will not be successful outlawing fossil collecting. It's like squishing jello - it will "ooze" up in another form - which is not the intended outcome. Non-professionals decrying all professionals because of the actions of some just drives a wedge deeper between the two groups. Facilitating ways to mutually tap into the potential of both groups is the most productive.

So, if professionals want to pay, in some form, for that which they want to study, then great. They will not get what they want, if they try to use force to get it. If non-professionals want something for their fossils, they should make sure their "agreement" is sound. In the meantime, I'll try to document my finds the best I can and deal with those that understand their value.

<the cardboard box I'm on is free - take it for what it's worth>

[Harry Pristis]

<snip>

Not all ProPals are as evil as Harry may have led you to believe, that is a broad generalization (stereotype) that makes professionals look bad and non professionals look bad.

I think you have mis-represented what I wrote. I think you'll find that I accused the ProPals of being human, driven by multiple motivations. I didn't condemn any of those motives; I simply observed their existence.

Primary among human motivations is survival . . . survival as a living organism and survival as a worker in a competitive occupation. I don't think that is an overbroad generalization, do you?

I don't think you'll find judgmental terms like "evil" in my posts. Go back and read them for meaning this time.

[siteseer]

Nicely argued, 'siteseer'; however, you've alluded to a different imaginary tension - this one ostensibly between professional curatorship versus private curatorship. Such tension doesn't have much relevance these days except over type specimens, and ProPals control the options for describing type specimens.

Harry,

There is also the tension of the "ProPal" not liking Average Joe digging fossils at all, not even on his own land. Bob Ernst did a lot of digging and then watched for when some prime Sharktooth Hill Bonebed-bearing property went for up for sale and then bought every possible acre. Then, he did a lot of digging and donated some prime specimens from bone ends to skeletons but some ProPals still didn't like it and insulted him behind his back. Bob heard about it later. He acted like it didn't hurt and continued to donate but to other institutions.

[siteseer]

I believe that good fossils are the key to publication which is the key to career advancement for a ProPal.

Very few of us human beings are motivated for long by lofty idealism ("for the sake of knowledge" or "for science" or "for the children"). A ProPal career is not built on such ideals. It's built on the competition of ideas, and securing grants, and getting the fossils, being first to publish, and building a CV. The tension between ProPals and collectors is just another area of competition for ambitious ProPals.

Harry,

Yes, this is the angle that may not be obvious. The ProPal doesn't go into paleo to get rich. Like many of us here, he was a kid that found his favorite group of animals when he learned about dinosaurs in first grade (though kids learn about them in preschool now). He might have gotten into eurypterids or rhinos later after taking more chemistry and math than I wanted.

The ProPal must find a field-within-a-field that isn't already SRO with browsers and grazers. Hopefully, he finds either some great stuff already sitting in a museum or stumbles upon his own at some remote locality and/or finds a level of widespread acknowledgement reviewing/updating the names within a group that really needed it. Many ProPals seek prestige - the power in science. Prestige means he doesn't have to jump through hoops anymore to get a grant or hope some member of the Old Guard throws him a bone. If he gets lucky, he might even appear on a TV show to say something obvious like there are no dinosaurs living in Loch Ness or western Africa.

Each of us might know a paleontologist who is still primarily interested in the fossils he studies and likes getting out in the field and really doesn't want to play politics. Yeah, he'd like to be respected among his peers but he made some friends among the people he admired and that's fine with him. He doesn't mind private collectors. They often show him interesting specimens because he never treats anyone like dirt.

I'm reading "Greenhouse of the Dinosaurs" by Donald Prothero. He gives an insider's view of the world of the paleontologist, pointing out that scientists are people too using his own experiences as illustration. I'll write and submit a review when I'm done.

[Bear]

Good discussion here.

I would not advise anarchy, as I would not advise government control, as neither extreme is viable over the long term. I use the Marijuana model for its pluses and minuses and a similarity with fossil collecting on public and private lands. The debate seems quite similar in many aspects....'medicinal/research' use, 'licensing/oversight' by 'professionals', a 'mish - mash of haphazard laws that vary from one locale to another', 'proponents versus opponents, amateurs versus professionals' etc.

It appears to me that moderation is the real key here. Outright banning of fossil collecting by any but government certified "experts" is simply not tenable to the public at large while total anarchy (no controls or guidelines at all) would result in the type of undesirable behaviors we here are all too familiar with. The answer, it would seem to me, is some general guidelines and some commonly accepted behaviors.

Outright banning would skyrocket the value of the fossils and pump up the black market along with the prices. Black marketeers don't focus tightly on just one product though. They figure as long as they are in for a dime, they might as well go in for a dollar and carry anything else that comes along that they can sell. If you are taking the chance to covertly sell fossils, why not throw in some decent firearms or illicit drugs along with those? Dropping even more responsibility on our law enforcement doesn't seem overly wise to me either, as they are hard pressed to deal with what they already have on their plate. How can they be in traffic watching for drunk (or cell phone using) drivers if they are perched on the lip of a quarry watching for fossil hounds? "Gee Sarge, we didn't get that serial rapist or the bank robber, but we got some real hard core fossil hunters!"

This especially considering our few numbers and our lack of violent proclivity. It seems a wiser use of LEO to let them address serious crimes against the health and lives of our citizens.

[Nicholas]

I've donated tangible fossils and information of localities to local and provincial fossil experts, I am definitely in agreement of the philosophy of donating fossils/information which is significant and keep what isn't. I base my scientific relevance on the the sheer enormous size of museum and scientific collections of the same type and species of fossil. I had a wonderful discussion about this with a paleontologist who urged me not to get a collecting license because this will require that ALL fossils I find significant or not be handed over to the nearest authority.

I have a symbiotic relationship with science, I throw them a bone, and they turn a blind eye to my collecting. As a someone who advocates science I would never withhold a potentially earth shattering specimen or something that a student may want to wright their thesis on, these fossils would go to a greater purpose.

All common fossils are fair game though!

[fig rocks]

All common fossils are fair game though!

I agree Nic, there's so many laying around on the ground out here, if somebody doesn't pick them up they'll just go the way of the Dodo bird! :notfair: At least this way they'll be safe in somebody's collection! :zoro:

[Nicholas]

At least this way they'll be safe in somebody's collection! :zoro:

Yeah... Mine

[Frank Menser]

I don't know if I am completely on the boat with only all common fossils being fair game-at least when it comes to collecting in the field. I will admit to being a bit of a 'trophy hunter' and my collection reflects this (and not in an Ebay way ). There is an added pleasure in having that special item or two.

I have seen again, too many sites that were very temporary, and frankly was granted access to collect by developers because they knew I would be quiet about what I found and so would not delay their work. In S. Florida for example, the discovery of the "Miami Circle" an ancient N.A. construction stopped a major project. Every developer down there is keenly aware of the consequence of a 'discovery' on their building site.

If I had not agreed to those terms, I would never have been allowed to explore those properties and what I found would have been lost forever.

Edited October 22, 2009 by Frank Menser

[ashcraft]

If something is scientifically valuable, I certainly would donate, and would expect to be listed as a co-author on the paper describing it. I did the initial research by finding it, so I would consider that just compensation.

The problem with construction and collecting sites is that if something the government wants is on it, they in effect take over the property, without proper compensation to the owner/developer. I know a Dalton campsite that the archaeological society wants me to register, but the landowner won't let me. His reasoning is that even though the listing has no legal restrictions associated with it at this point, all it takes is a small bit of legislature to stop his farming practices and essentially render his property worthless. How can you argue with that in light of the endangered species act? I have no problem with the government procuring property for the good of the public domain, but by reducing a landowners rights, they totally devalue the property without compensation. That is just wrong.

Done with the soap box now, Next?

Brent Ashcraft

[silverphoenix]

Finally back...still in pain from the last 10 mile hike in Big Bend...

Anyways, I will address everything tomorrow, but a couple points I would like to throw out there are that I believe in the strongest private property rights possible and I am against eminent domain and the restriction of fossil hunting on public land. I am also not advocating that everyone give up what they have--I'm just saying that at least for myself, I don't look at my fossils as "cool rocks", but rather as remains of ancient organisms that we can learn from. Everyone has their motives and I admit that part of my collecting is "cool rock syndrome" and that's fine; but at the same time, I know that what I find has meaning and if it can add to the knowledge we have of the ancient past, it would be selfish of me to not share it with the world. I'm of course advocating working with a paleontologist/paleobiologist you feel comfortable with and getting credit for being the finder. Also, most of what I'm talking about as being scientifically valuable is probably not going to be the most exciting thing to a collector and worth very little $$$ at the same time. Lastly, I want to point out that our state collections for many sites here in Texas could fit in the palm of your hand. I know this about the Stone City vertebrate fossils especially.

Jumping around here, it is also always better for a fossil to be collecting rather than left to weather away. At the same time, I think more collectors need to make sure their finds are safe in their collection/won't get lost, broken, or waste away from oxidation.

We are all human as well and no one is better than another--we all need each other and it would be ridiculous to deny the symbiotic relationship between "professional" and collector and even collector and collector. We all learn from each other and in one way or another we help each other to advance. Also, it is the collectors who get the younger generations interested in fossils of course and who nurture the minds of future paleontologists.

Also, as for the "business" approach to donating fossils, I want to point out that prestige and acknowledgment is all that should be looked for. Museums buy fossils, sure--but what I am talking about are the actual paleontologists/paleobiologists and they cannot and will not buy specimens. Idealistically, they see the scientific value in fossils and not the monetary value. They can't use grant/university money to buy fossils either.

"If you are taking the chance to covertly sell fossils, why not throw in some decent firearms or illicit drugs along with those?"

Illegal items are often shipped with illegal items--though I don't see your point about firearms. Maybe illegal firearms would be a better description, though I do believe none except explosive devices should be banned. Again this points to private property/big brother staying out of my business. The main point is on fossils and no those should not be made illegal in the least bit as they cause no harm whatsoever except if made illegal and therefore sold by cartels along with drugs in exchange for cash with which to buy weapons. This goes around to "won't legalizing marijuana cut their funds?" where I say yes, but they'll still be selling crack and meth and should we just allow them to sell those too? It's a very slippery slope and people do and will still kill for money to buy those drugs even if they are legal, and there will be more drugs out there causing a skyrocket in crime and a plummet in per capita industriousness causing more unemployment, more dropouts, and inevitably the fall of society as a whole.

Now That is some ranting. To be continued tomorrow with more valid points on specifically fossils

[Bear]

I love these ethical conundrum discussions, myself.

While the Russians were in Afghanistan I did several jobs of work for this small company. They did business in Pakistan...trading surface - to - surface missiles to the Mujahadiin in exchange for quantities of Afghan gem rough. It was a CIA front organization run by a CIA employee who was actually a Mossad (Israeli Secret Service) agent. The above items were not the only things that he bought, sold and traded either. (Use your imagination) Do not forget - this fellow is one of the "good guys", not a criminal. After a while though, it felt very much like I was working for the mafia or something, so I cut them off after the last bad deal went south. I remain in touch with another of his subcontractors though, who trades in Pakistani gem rough and related items legally and above board, no connection to the spy game at all now. What she and I got out of the experience though, (besides some bad checks and a net loss) was how that 'in for dime in for a dollar' thing worked in real life.

Personally, I think that all drugs should be legal, government supervised and taxed just like the ones that are legal now, like alcohol and tobacco. I have put a lot of thought into this and it is the only path that makes real sense as far as I can see. Only when something is out in the open and subject to public scrutiny and debate can most of the ramifications be seen. At least we would have some idea how big a problem we actually have.

Same goes for fossicking - keep it legal, supervised and out in the open. Set some limits, charge some fees, hire a few government professionals and like that. Moderation.

[crinus]

I guess that my experience is a bit different than most have experienced. First, like someone mentioned, it is a two way street. Up here in Michigan we do have a two way street. Many years ago, a pro at the University of Michigan started a fossil club so that all the collectors could bring in their specimens. Obviously it was to his advantage to do so as he was able to find many new specimens for all the papers he wrote. Never was there a demand that the specimens be donated, but they always were. Even though that pro is long gone, other pros have continued and expanded on his interaction with collectors. We have a great working relationship with professionals. When something comes in that is obviously not in their field, they contact the other pros and let them know about the find. Always the specimen is donated as it should be. Specimens need to be stored in a proper facility for future work. The choice of the institution for donation and storage could be part of the problem others may have. Fortunately at the Unversity of Michigan we have a Paleo department and not just a Geology departmant. We also have a collection manager that takes care of the collection. I would only donate a specimen to such a place because there is a greater possibility that it will be taken care of.

My collection is destined for the university. They have expressed interest in acquiring it. There is no demand that it be donated. They understand that it is mine and I can do as I like. As for compensation, there will be none since it will only go to them once I am gone or there is no tax advantage for me to take a deduction. As for some of the comments concerning compensation/tax deduction, it is not the institutions responsibility. The institution should give you a receipt/letter that the donation was made. It is your responsibility to get a proper apprasial for the specimen and then take a tax donation. The institution cannot set a value for the specimen. It has to be a third party. And then it is up to you to take the deduction on your taxes. The law allows for it as long as it was a qualified institution. Recently our fossil club at the university became a qualified institution (501(3)C) and thus fossils donation to us are tax deductible.

I strongly believe that any "new" fossils that are being described needs to be in a proper storage facility and not in a private collection. There is too great of a probability that it will be lost in the private collection. However, fossils specimens are used in scientific papers for purposes other than description. Should those be donated to an institution? Up here the pro always gives the specimens back to the owners. They do not expect it to be donated, not that they would not accept it if it were. I have many specimens that have been used and referenced as part of a paper but are still in my collection. I probably would have donated them if asked, but that question never came up.

I am all for open collecting. No restrictions. Mother nature will just destroy it if someone does not pick it up. I have no use for any pro that thinks everything should be left for the pros. Most of them have no time for field work. It is us collectors that do all the field work. That is the reality. On the other hand, collectors should be very open to working with professionals. And in most cases that is the case. In a few cases, the dollars signs take over and that is when the collectors get the bad rap.

As others have, I have tried to avoid the use of the word "amatuer" to describe us collectors. In many cases we are amatuers but also in many cases we may know more about what we are collecting than the pros. There is nothing that say a collector cannot write a scientific paper and have it published. You need only get it past "peer" review. There are cases of collectors publishing. The Paleontological Society's award to an amatuer is named the Strimple Award for a reason. Mr. Strimple was a avid collector of crinoids and wrote many papers on the subjects. He was not a "pro".

Just my rambling thoughts on the subject.

crinus

[tracer]

and very good thoughts they were. thanks for posting them.

[Bear]

Bravo Crinus, well said.

My lovely wife is a UM grad, so I also can vouch for the school. I have a rep in Ann Arbor as well.

....I have tried to avoid the use of the word "amatuer" to describe us collectors.....

That is a good thing too. I have been at this since I was a sprat - more than 50 years now, and a lot of that has been field work. I have learned a thing or 2 in all that time, likely some stuff that a PhD has missed out on. I rank "amateur" in with "newbie" or "freshman", not synonymous with "self - taught".

I gotta throw the capitalists in there as a positive element too. If these items were not of value far fewer of them would have been dug up. It is the trade and profit in fossils that have help to create that valuation, and that goes back to the merchant.

Uh...stuff disappears from university collections too. If you are old enough, you may recall that one weekend some fellows with a truck backed up to the rear doors at MSU's art dept at Kresge Hall and emptied the place out of anything that was not bolted to the floor or too big to carry. Then there was the break - in and theft of most all of the ROM's gem collection a number of years ago in Toronto. None of that stuff was ever recovered, to my knowledge. Sometimes a private collection is a safer place for a valuable item...kinda depends on the item and the owner.

[silverphoenix]

Anything can be stolen from anywhere. The sad fact is that nothing is ever 100% safe, though in some places it is safer than in others. I think the main deal is that the knowledge gained from donated fossils can never be stolen. Often with rarer, more fragile specimens, collectors do not have the resources to properly preserve them. Sometimes preservation can be too much trouble and too expensive for it to be "worth it".

I myself steer away from the "amateur" word. Everyone has knowledge to share and no one knows everything! It's also often true that some collectors have a whole lot more "field experience" than the average "pro". We're not afraid to get our hands dirty and we don't have any lab work/papers to write/research to take up all our time

[Bill]

I believe that anything scientifically important should be donated. I have donated some ypresian mammal teeth, the latest does not appear to have been found at the site previously and the Dr studying it is, at this moment in time, not sure what it is from. He has described many mammals from the site, is in the process of describing another 47 sp. and the tooth in question is a bit of a mystery to him. I have also donated many Cretaceous insect wing impressions, with a couple of hundred still to go. Once I have photograped them they will be donated too.

I am happy to just have photographs of what I have donated, and in the case of the teeth, when not too fragile, they can produce a cast for me if I want.

[tracer]

i never refer to myself as an amatueeur, but it's just basically because i prefer to think of myself in adverbial terms rather than nominative. i always introduce myself as an "avocationally tracer", and then shout "you can't have them!!"

for whatever reason, people in grocery stores are disturbed by this...

[Bear]

Like the Dread Pirate Roberts, I tend to introduce myself as 'someone of no particular importance'.....

Gee, you need to hit the grocery stores that have lots of ethnic customers that speak foreign languages...nobody pays much attention to what you say in those places....(I know, I have tried it )

[tracer]

Like the Dread Pirate Roberts, I tend to introduce myself as 'someone of no particular importance'.....

Gee, you need to hit the grocery stores that have lots of ethnic customers that speak foreign languages...nobody pays much attention to what you say in those places....(I know, I have tried it )

not sure what you mean. maybe because *i'm* ethnic and speak foreign languages. hey wait, aren't we *all* ethnic in one way or another?

you should read Nathan der Weise, by G.E. Lessing. pay particular attention to the line, "Wenn ich einen mehr in Euch gefunden hätte, dem es genügt, ein Mensch zu heißen!"

[Tony Eaton]

I have yet to see anyone on this forum describe or show anything I would consider unethical. The act of posting a picture of a rare find could be meaningful to science in my opinion. A researcher can easily "google" your find and contact you if they so desire.

What would I consider unethical? Well general collecting with a high degree of ignorance and/or greed. Take the dinosaur prints on the news from Lake Grapevine, Texas. Within a week of being on TV they were all summarily destroyed by a combination of vandals, collectors, people trying to take plaster molds, etc. Of course the dino prints were not a new discovery, just new to the general public. I can forgive whomever tried to get plaster casts or whatever, but it seems rather greedy to start chiseling away at a dino print that has become part of the general "public".

[Bear]

I would have to say that destroying a fossil on public property while trying to "collect" it would be a tad unethical. IMHO, at least.

...aren't we *all* ethnic in one way or another?

Well, save perhaps for the few extraterrestrials in our midst, though they may well qualify as ethnic as well. I am a bit of Cherokee, Irish, Austrian, German and Bohemian (Czech) myself....I guess that makes me sorta ethnic.

Naw, where I shop every week there are perhaps a dozen or so major ethnic 'minorities' each going on in their native tongue as we hassle over fresh fruits and such. Nobody takes what anyone else is yelling in their native tongue too seriously unless they are standing right next to you or waving a weapon. The Detroit metro area is a real mix nowadays.

Edited October 28, 2009 by Bear