Ethics of Fossil Collecting

[jdp]

17 hours ago, RuMert said:

I hope privately collected specimens are not simply lost (no idea of percentage, but I assume most people wont just destroy collections they for example inherit (not counting a couple of dusty rocks|ammo fragments that can end up in the trashbin). So even if they were collected with ruining a site and smuggled out of the country and someone was killed in the process, they are still not completely lost for science. I'm sure somebody evaluates specimens in private collections and there should be some development on that track with maybe  fossil lists, encouragement for conscientious collectors to register their specimens and take at least a 3-D mode/CT scanl if needed (if they wont donate). 

I know there's a big issue with the need to actually donate specimens to make them available for research at any time, but with people unwilling to do so maybe modern technologies can help.

These are just abstract general thought on the subject, but we know even old museum collections provide lots of stunning discoveries, so actually digging into existing private collections could save lots of time and field work

Example: http://www.app.pan.pl/article/item/app007242020.html a sauropod has just been discovered in the Moscow region (99.99% marine environment) by cleaning a couple of verts prevoiusly believed pliosaur

It really depends on the research question. I know people whose research questions are so specific that they spend years looking at quarry photos and maps trying to identify where exactly a 100+ year old quarry is. On the other hand, I also know people whose research really doesn't depend on this sort of data. Work that exists at a comparative anatomy or evolutionary biology level might not require detailed geological notes, whereas work that focuses on paleoecology might not have much use for fossils without locality data. So absolutely, in many cases the value of a fossil is not lost just because not all the context exists.

 

With respect to 3D models and CT scans; there have been a few workers who have tried to move this forward, but the general thinking is that the original object needs to be preserved, not just a digital image or set of images. There are a whole range of reasons for this, including improvements in imaging technologies and need for validation. Additionally, as with photographs, CT data can be misleading at times, and we are beginning to reach a point where raw CT data can possibly even be manipulated. Maintaining original specimens in repositories is a check on this sort of thing.

 

[jdp]

19 hours ago, Ruger9a said:

This seems to be a situation similar to what happened in the Ancient and Roman coin collecting hobbies a few years back.  Many, many common coins, if not all in several countries; were classified as Cultural Heritage, confiscated and forbidden from export or sales.  As a result it drove many collectors out of the hobby.  I've often wondered what happens to the thousands upon thousands of duplicate coins they have confiscated/collected and if they will ever be seen by anyone again.  Now it appears a similar effort may be happening to my hobby - fossils.  I've heard the UK has come up with a solution that has made both the Ancient coin collectors and the government happy.  Any chance the UK collector/government program can be adopted for fossils?  

Worth keeping in mind that the issue is not simply the coins themselves, but that the act of going out and searching for coins and other "treasure" led a lot of people to disturb cultural heritage sites. Coins do have some archaeological value in and of themselves, but in many cases the primary concern is the destruction of archaeological sites.

[musicnfossils]

19 hours ago, Ruger9a said:

This seems to be a situation similar to what happened in the Ancient and Roman coin collecting hobbies a few years back.  Many, many common coins, if not all in several countries; were classified as Cultural Heritage, confiscated and forbidden from export or sales.  As a result it drove many collectors out of the hobby.  I've often wondered what happens to the thousands upon thousands of duplicate coins they have confiscated/collected and if they will ever be seen by anyone again.  Now it appears a similar effort may be happening to my hobby - fossils.  I've heard the UK has come up with a solution that has made both the Ancient coin collectors and the government happy.  Any chance the UK collector/government program can be adopted for fossils?  

 

This reminds me of Alberta. Some folks here have completely gotten out of the fossil hobby because buying decent specimens costs crazy amounts of money and finding them & excavating them can carry penalties of up to $100,000 in fines and up to a year in prison. So they’ve decided it simply isn’t worth it. 

[RuMert]

We have sites closed not out of pillaging problem but because nobody cares. When a site is lost all that people do is shrug and express pity. Right now a leading regional quarrymentioned in numerous publications is ready to be turned into dump. Guess what those world-famous academicians are doing? (answer: see above)

[Kane]

35 minutes ago, RuMert said:

We have sites closed not out of pillaging problem but because nobody cares. When a site is lost all that people do is shrug and express pity. Right now a leading regional quarrymentioned in numerous publications is ready to be turned into dump. Guess what those world-famous academicians of paleontology are doing? (answer: see above)

Well, to be fair, what can they do if that is a government decision? Maybe write a letter urging officials not to approve zoning for a dump? I don't think we can overestimate the political influence of paleontologists if there are a number of competing or more pressing priorities as perceived by elected officials. A number of us here are academics. As a subject matter expert, I can advise on issues that pertain to my area of specialization, but I can't dictate policy. Perhaps it is the case that these paleontologists recognize there is not much they can do to prevent this particular situation rather than assume none of them care, as that may be risking generalization.

[Bonehunter]

On 5/22/2020 at 12:00 AM, musicnfossils said:

So I briefly spoke to a palaeontologist during a Q&A session he held a while ago on his Instagram page, and I asked him what his favourite fossil was that he had or currently owned. His responses were essentially that he believes that fossil collecting is unethical because it can hinder science by hiding important finds away in private collections and prevent the public from seeing some specimens because museums sometimes cannot pay the exorbitant prices that the market creates. 

 

I’d like to hear your opinions on this issue, since this forum is essentially full of collectors. As a collector, I’m somewhere in the middle of, “nothing for anyone but scientists” and, “it’s fair game”. Especially when you factor in things like private land, should the government be able to rip Dino bones out of someone’s property that someone essentially unknowingly paid for when obtaining said land? 

 

Did you ask him how he got started? Ive never met someone who didn't start by collecting-it is the way to get started, I could see pulling back and just taking good photos nowadays and I think there are inherent ethics when collecting, but its inspired us all...…  Bone

[erose]

13 hours ago, siteseer said:

 

I'm wondering if the situation with the Rotterdam museum was that curators realized they were running out of storage space and they also recognized they were storing a lot of 19th-20th century-collected fossils that had scientifically-insufficient labels or the labels were lost/illegible.  They just didn't see the point of keeping bones like that when they were running out of room for specimens that are well-labelled.  I would think some of that North Sea material falls into that category.

 

Jess

When I was with a small children's museum in New York City we needed to clear out some storage space that was full of donated items. The museum wasn't really a collections based institution but gifts had been accepted and there we were. We looked at everything we wanted to get rid of and then the protocols for doing so. For the art we contacted all of the artists or donors and gave them first right of refusal.  I think we sent a few things back to the original owners and then the majority agreed to let us sell it off.  There was one item that gave me pause: a human skeleton.  That needed to go to another museum which accepted it with caution since no one was sure where it originally came from. 

[RuMert]

6 hours ago, Kane said:

what can they do if that is a government decision? 

You are certainly right, the influence is limited. We can also add that not only paleontologists, but the hobbyist community including myself could take part. But iin practice it's overall passivity that matters. The decisions that lead to most sites' loss were not taken at the government's level (and even if so ppl could at least try). In one case somebody decided to suddenly lengthen shore protection facilities, in another a creek was covered in concrete for no reason (I'm sure in both cases low-ranking local infrastracture companies' managers were responsible), with private quarries we could maybe negociate with the owners to provide a small band of land for digging. But in all cases nobody even tried to interfere. The reaction was along the lines of "we are small people, we can do nothing, it's inevitable". We all know those books and movies where a motivated enthousiast or a group can make a difference. But alas not today

[Kane]

23 minutes ago, RuMert said:

You are certainly right, the influence is limited. We can also add that not only paleontologists, but the hobbyist community including myself could take part. But iin practice it's overall passivity that matters. The decisions that lead to most sites's loss were not taken at the government's level (and even if so ppl could at least try). In one case somebody decided to suddenly lengthen shore protection facilities, in another a creek was covered in concrete for no reason (I'm sure in both cases low-ranking local infrastracture companies' managers were responsible), with private quarries we could maybe negociate with the owners to provide a small band of land for digging. But in all cases nobody even tried to interfere. The reaction was along the lines of "we are small people, we can do nothing, it's inevitable". We all know those books and movies where a motivated enthousiast or a group can make a difference. But alas not today

And, you know, it never hurts to try/ask! If people assume a landowner is not amenable, that could be a missed opportunity for negotiating that deal that makes everyone happy! Sometimes it does pay to expect the worst, but always hope for the best.  

[jdp]

1 hour ago, musicnfossils said:

 

This reminds me of Alberta. Some folks here have completely gotten out of the fossil hobby because buying decent specimens costs crazy amounts of money and finding them & excavating them can carry penalties of up to $100,000 in fines and up to a year in prison. So they’ve decided it simply isn’t worth it. 

 

I think this is a really unfair characterization of Alberta. The laws are strict about ownership, but there are provisions permitting picking things up off the ground so long as you don't transport the fossils outside the province. You obviously cannot collect fossils from within national or provincial parks, but there is something of a grey area if you want to have a small personal collection of things you surface collected from your own land or undesignated crown land. There is a relatively active amateur community, particularly the APS, which primarily focuses on education, but which also does some fieldwork with local researchers.

 

There are also plenty of fossil shops in Alberta, with the same general assortment of fossils you find anywhere else for the same general assortment of prices. 

 

I'm sorry you feel like you can't enjoy fossils in this province, but there are actually many opportunities to get involved with fossils as an amateur and as a hobbyist.

[Ruger9a]

2 hours ago, jdp said:

Worth keeping in mind that the issue is not simply the coins themselves, but that the act of going out and searching for coins and other "treasure" led a lot of people to disturb cultural heritage sites. Coins do have some archaeological value in and of themselves, but in many cases the primary concern is the destruction of archaeological sites.

Hence the statement "I've heard the UK has come up with a solution that has made both the Ancient coin collectors and the government happy.  Any chance the UK collector/government program can be adopted for fossils?  "

[jdp]

2 hours ago, Kane said:

Well, to be fair, what can they do if that is a government decision? Maybe write a letter urging officials not to approve zoning for a dump? I don't think we can overestimate the political influence of paleontologists if there are a number of competing or more pressing priorities as perceived by elected officials. A number of us here are academics. As a subject matter expert, I can advise on issues that pertain to my area of specialization, but I can't dictate policy. Perhaps it is the case that these paleontologists recognize there is not much they can do to prevent this particular situation rather than assume none of them care, as that may be risking generalization.

This, with the additional caveat that private land or private leases of public lands are even more complex than simple public policy. Even public policy decisions do not necessarily prioritize preservation of fossil sites, and often do not require consultation with paleontologists before such decisions are made. Efforts by professional paleontologists to preserve fossil sites are often not successful unless there is substantial and clear scientific value in a locality and only marginal economic value in any proposed development, and these efforts may take hundreds of hours of work to assemble reports and participate in hearings, and still not be successful.

[musicnfossils]

23 minutes ago, jdp said:

 

I think this is a really unfair characterization of Alberta. The laws are strict about ownership, but there are provisions permitting picking things up off the ground so long as you don't transport the fossils outside the province. You obviously cannot collect fossils from within national or provincial parks, but there is something of a grey area if you want to have a small personal collection of things you surface collected from your own land or undesignated crown land. There is a relatively active amateur community, particularly the APS, which primarily focuses on education, but which also does some fieldwork with local researchers.

 

There are also plenty of fossil shops in Alberta, with the same general assortment of fossils you find anywhere else for the same general assortment of prices. 

 

I'm sorry you feel like you can't enjoy fossils in this province, but there are actually many opportunities to get involved with fossils as an amateur and as a hobbyist.

 

Yes I’m well aware of the minor provisions. I call them minor because that’s what they are. On certain sections of land, you are permitted to take whatever is simply lying there that doesn’t require digging. If you wish to sell them, as many other folks on this forum do with fossils they have found, you cannot without disposition. If you move to any other province, you cannot take them without a disposition. Kane alerted me to the fact that the law even touches on resto; 

 

“

Alberta Historical Resources Act (RSA 2000) does explicitly mention repair and restoration in Sec,. 20 subsec. 9(1a):

 

(9) Notwithstanding any other Act, no person shall

1. (a)  destroy, disturb, alter, restore or repair any historic resource

   or land that has been designated under this section”

 

I’m also well aware of the fossil shops, I’ve been a patron at virtually all of them. And buying decent specimens is expensive, there’s no way around this. I’m not opposed to some of the high prices, I understand the reasoning behind them, and as I’m fairly financially well off I can afford such things. Most new collectors cannot, especially young folk like myself. The park thing I am fine with, don’t touch Dino park’s fossils. But if I buy land and find a Dino skull, it is my opinion that I should be able to own that. If they wanted to make a law that it had to be properly excavated by professionals and the bill falls on you to pay for such, I would be okay with that. Still cheaper than buying such a specimen. I went into an antique shop in Drumheller that had a couple tyrannosaur teeth that the owner found on his land, he said it was illegal for him to sell them. As much as I’m sure he would like to, they’d fetch a pretty penny, they have to sit there. We are virtually the strictest place in the world regarding fossils and while some of the restrictions are reasonable, I think much of it is ludicrous. There are certainly specimens that WILL weather away, I’ve seen them myself, and as I previously stated, I’ve even reported some to the Tyrrell who got back to me saying they won’t dig it up. So that specimen is as good as dust. 

 

I apologize if any of this sounds like it has a hint of hostility. I essentially started this thread out of growing frustration around the fact that it IS so strict here, and I wanted to see what fellow collectors had to say about it. Not to make this terribly political but I generally distrust government and Canada in general is a good example of very much government overreach. This particular overreach just happened to dwell into something I’m passionate about and a lot of the passion stems from being able to do the hands on stuff that makes the fossil thing so enjoyable. I am unsatisfied with only literature and going to museums. It has to be more than that to me. Just my opinion of course. 

2 hours ago, Bonehunter said:

 

Did you ask him how he got started? Ive never met someone who didn't start by collecting-it is the way to get started, I could see pulling back and just taking good photos nowadays and I think there are inherent ethics when collecting, but its inspired us all...…  Bone

 

I didn’t but others did. The palaeontologist in question, who I won’t name because that’s probably against the rules, started their career through volunteer work at local natural history museums and eventually was offered a job. I don’t know if they got started through personally collecting, but I doubt it considering their strong opinions against collecting. 

[jdp]

7 minutes ago, Ruger9a said:

Hence the statement "I've heard the UK has come up with a solution that has made both the Ancient coin collectors and the government happy.  Any chance the UK collector/government program can be adopted for fossils?  "

The UK solution is that ALL finds considered "treasure" must be reported to the government and have a value assessed by a government commission. Those objects must be offered for sale to museums at the assessed value. They can be kept or sold to private individuals only after museums decline to purchase them at the assessed value. For fossils, the equivalent would be if we had a law that said all finds (lets assume here vertebrate finds) must be reported to a government agency and made available to museums at a price assessed by the agency, and would be held by the government until it was determined that no museum was willing to pay the assessed price for it. This works in the UK because the sorts of unique finds that are considered "treasures" are relatively rare. It would seem to me that applying this sort of framework to fossils would be substantially more restrictive than the current system, and would create massive amounts of red tape for any hobbyist while not necessarily improving the amateur-professional relationships necessary to really improve the current situation.

 

 

[Ruger9a]

I give, I'm fresh out of suggestions.

[jdp]

9 minutes ago, musicnfossils said:

 

Yes I’m well aware of the minor provisions. I call them minor because that’s what they are. On certain sections of land, you are permitted to take whatever is simply lying there that doesn’t require digging. If you wish to sell them, as many other folks on this forum do with fossils they have found, you cannot without disposition.

It seems to me your big concern here is that you can't sell fossils you've collected here?

 

9 minutes ago, musicnfossils said:

But if I buy land and find a Dino skull, it is my opinion that I should be able to own that.

 

I hate to say it, but Alberta is part of Canada and Canadian land ownership laws are not the same as American land ownership laws. Canadian land ownership is technically land tenureship; 'your' land actually belongs to the British Crown. As a result, any heritage objects across the entirety of Canada technically belong to the crown (this is federal law across Canada) though they can be held in trust by individuals. Alberta law explicitly codifies this into provincial law as well, but this idea that you should be able to own a heritage object here in Canada just because it was on your land isn't really how Canadian law works. 

 

9 minutes ago, musicnfossils said:

We are virtually the strictest place in the world regarding fossils and while some of the restrictions are reasonable, I think much of it is ludicrous. There are certainly specimens that WILL weather away, I’ve seen them myself, and as I previously stated, I’ve even reported some to the Tyrrell who got back to me saying they won’t dig it up. So that specimen is as good as dust. 

 

Yes, absolutely. And if you've ever been up to Burgess Shale, you'd know this applies to lots of protected areas. The issue is that the Canadian government, in general, believes that it is better to protect these sites from aggressive private collection than to lose a few fossils to weathering. In terms of how quickly these fossils weather away, I will point out that there are skeletons at the RTMP where parts were collected by the Sternbergs in the 19th century and where the remaining parts were collected in the past decade, so while weathering does exist, it is not tearing fossils apart nearly as fast as you seem to think. 

 

9 minutes ago, musicnfossils said:

I apologize if any of this sounds like it has a hint of hostility. I essentially started this thread out of growing frustration around the fact that it IS so strict here, and I wanted to see what fellow collectors had to say about it. Not to make this terribly political but I generally distrust government and Canada in general is a good example of very much government overreach. This particular overreach just happened to dwell into something I’m passionate about and a lot of the passion stems from being able to do the hands on stuff that makes the fossil thing so enjoyable. I am unsatisfied with only literature and going to museums. It has to be more than that to me. Just my opinion of course. 

 

There are volunteer and for-pay programs both through the local museums and through the APS that would allow you to have hands-on experience, either in the field or in the lab. The question, I suppose, is whether you need to own the fossils and be able to buy or sell them to be happy, or whether you would be happy doing museum work or field technician work.

 

As far as government overreach, I have lived in a few different countries and, present provincial government aside, I am generally happy with how Canada balances reasonable regulation with an overall tendency towards personal freedom. Even with respect to fossil collection, Alberta is quite reasonable and permissive compared to, say, Brazil, South Africa, Italy, or China.

[Fossildude19]

28 minutes ago, musicnfossils said:

I apologize if any of this sounds like it has a hint of hostility. I essentially started this thread out of growing frustration around the fact that it IS so strict here, and I wanted to see what fellow collectors had to say about it. Not to make this terribly political but I generally distrust government and Canada in general is a good example of very much government overreach. This particular overreach just happened to dwell into something I’m passionate about and a lot of the passion stems from being able to do the hands on stuff that makes the fossil thing so enjoyable. I am unsatisfied with only literature and going to museums. It has to be more than that to me. Just my opinion of course. 

Unless people become active petitioners of the Government, or involve themselves in the process, things won't change. 

 

And other countries have it just as bad, or even worse than Alberta.  Italy, Patagonia, Bolivia, South Africa, and Brazil all have very restrictive laws against amateur fossil collection. 

You walk a fine line, with the government overreach talk. Let's not let this devolve into an anti-government overreach bash session. 

 

 

 

It takes just one comment like this to start the need for intersession on the part of the Mods and Admins.   

You are entitled to your opinions, but let's keep our discussion objective, rather than subjective.   

[jdp]

20 minutes ago, Ruger9a said:

I give, I'm fresh out of suggestions.

Honestly, I generally worry about creating additional regulations for exactly this reason! I don't think any hobbyist wants to wait a year or two for a BLM representative to find time in their schedule to look at your finds and write up a report which will be sent to another agency for assessment. Personally, I think that's excessive. 

 

What we need is mutual respect and collaboration between hobbyists and professionals. Things were not always as bad as they are today. Growing up, my local museum would take hobbyists out to local fossil sites, teach us about the fossils there, and allow us to make personal collections. You'd be hard-pressed to find programs like that today. To some extent this is because the huge price tags associated with Sue and subsequent dinosaur auctions have allowed the profit motive to run rampant in some ways which I'd argue are destructive to the hobby. This not only causes rifts between professionals and hobbyists, but also between hobbyists and landowners, professionals and landowners, and so on.

 

That's not to say that scientific institutions shouldn't consider the financial situation that landowners or hobbyists might find themselves in, but everyone needs to have more reasonable expectations for what a dinosaur fossil might mean for their personal finances. The fear that everyone is trying to rip everyone else off is a huge part of the bad blood throughout this stuff.

[musicnfossils]

25 minutes ago, jdp said:

It seems to me your big concern here is that you can't sell fossils you've collected here?

 

 

I hate to say it, but Alberta is part of Canada and Canadian land ownership laws are not the same as American land ownership laws. Canadian land ownership is technically land tenureship; 'your' land actually belongs to the British Crown. As a result, any heritage objects across the entirety of Canada technically belong to the crown (this is federal law across Canada) though they can be held in trust by individuals. Alberta law explicitly codifies this into provincial law as well, but this idea that you should be able to own a heritage object here in Canada just because it was on your land isn't really how Canadian law works. 

 

 

Yes, absolutely. And if you've ever been up to Burgess Shale, you'd know this applies to lots of protected areas. The issue is that the Canadian government, in general, believes that it is better to protect these sites from aggressive private collection than to lose a few fossils to weathering. In terms of how quickly these fossils weather away, I will point out that there are skeletons at the RTMP where parts were collected by the Sternbergs in the 19th century and where the remaining parts were collected in the past decade, so while weathering does exist, it is not tearing fossils apart nearly as fast as you seem to think. 

 

 

There are volunteer and for-pay programs both through the local museums and through the APS that would allow you to have hands-on experience, either in the field or in the lab. The question, I suppose, is whether you need to own the fossils and be able to buy or sell them to be happy, or whether you would be happy doing museum work or field technician work.

 

As far as government overreach, I have lived in a few different countries and, present provincial government aside, I am generally happy with how Canada balances reasonable regulation with an overall tendency towards personal freedom. Even with respect to fossil collection, Alberta is quite reasonable and permissive compared to, say, Brazil, South Africa, Italy, or China.

 

No, that’s not my biggest concern there. That’s just an example of one more difference that certain areas allow that Alberta does not. I don’t actually want to sell my fossils at the moment, but if I do down the road out of necessity, a good portion of my collection will not be allowed to be sold. 

 

Yes I understand the difference between the two countries in terms of their land ownership. Regardless of how fast it is “tearing fossils apart”, the point still stands. Certain specimens here will be lost due to the lack of allowance to collect without the legal authority to do so. Though I understand your point that they want certain areas to be closed to private collecting because of the sheer amount of folks who will rip apart the site, like I said, I am in favour of certain areas being closed off to private collecting, like Dino park, Burgess Shale and other hotspots. My grievance is just with areas, especially private areas, that we are allowed to surface collect on but not excavate.  

 

32 minutes ago, Fossildude19 said:

It takes just one comment like this to start the need for intersession on the part of the Mods and Admins.   

You are entitled to your opinions, but let's keep our discussion objective, rather than subjective.   

 

I think it’s fair to say that most everyone here has been providing subjective AND objective arguments to make their case, myself included. If you don’t like my comment about the government, I won’t say stuff like that anymore and I apologize for doing so. I decided to refrain from responding to jdp’s rebuttal in my latest response so as to avoid the necessity for mod intervention. 

[Fossildude19]

19 minutes ago, musicnfossils said:

I think it’s fair to say that most everyone here has been providing subjective AND objective arguments to make their case, myself included. If you don’t like my comment about the government, I won’t say stuff like that anymore and I apologize for doing so. I decided to refrain from responding to jdp’s rebuttal in my latest response so as to avoid the necessity for mod intervention. 

 

Your comment in and of itself is not the issue - it is that one person with similar passions sees what you did, then takes it a step further - domino effect.  

 

[musicnfossils]

10 minutes ago, Fossildude19 said:

 

Your comment in an of itself is not the issue - it is that one person with similar passions sees what you did, then takes it a step further - domino effect.  

 

 

That’s fair. I hope it doesn’t come to that. If it does, I promise to stay out of it! 

[Bone Daddy]

Several years ago, a meteorite impact crater with associated iron meteorite shrapnel was discovered in the Egyptian desert by a team of Italian scientists. They documented the crater and strewnfield, collected some samples, and returned to Italy with the intention of revisiting the crater site in the next season to continue field work. In the meantime, local Egyptian traders started plundering the site of meteorites, word got out to global dealers, and soon there were dozens of foreign hunter/dealers stomping around the crater and destroying the scientific integrity of the site. Everybody loses.

 

Also, within the last several years, there have been new meteorite falls in remote areas of the world where institutions and universities did not have the budget or connections to send a field team to. Private hunters recovered pristine specimens in a timely manner (while observing proper protocols) and donated some to scientific institutions in exchange for classification services. Science had low-cost specimens to study and private collectors got authenticated specimens with a stamp of solid provenance on them. Everybody wins.

Paleontology could benefit from following the second example. Local results will vary of course, according to whatever local/state/federal laws and regulations that may apply. Getting those laws changed is often a monumental task that requires more resources than most amateur enthusiasts have, so finding a way to enjoy one's passion within those boundaries is the key. I feel lucky that Florida is rather permissive with vertebrate fossils. We don't have dinosaurs down here, but you can't win them all. 

 

 

[jdp]

18 hours ago, musicnfossils said:

 

No, that’s not my biggest concern there. That’s just an example of one more difference that certain areas allow that Alberta does not. I don’t actually want to sell my fossils at the moment, but if I do down the road out of necessity, a good portion of my collection will not be allowed to be sold. 

 

But, flip side, you never paid for those fossils and you have them because Alberta allows you to hold onto these heritage items, which really belong to all of us, in the public trust so long as you don't take them away from Alberta.

 

18 hours ago, musicnfossils said:

 

Yes I understand the difference between the two countries in terms of their land ownership. Regardless of how fast it is “tearing fossils apart”, the point still stands. Certain specimens here will be lost due to the lack of allowance to collect without the legal authority to do so. Though I understand your point that they want certain areas to be closed to private collecting because of the sheer amount of folks who will rip apart the site, like I said, I am in favour of certain areas being closed off to private collecting, like Dino park, Burgess Shale and other hotspots. My grievance is just with areas, especially private areas, that we are allowed to surface collect on but not excavate.  

 

This gets into problems experienced by US geoparks. For example, Petrified Forest National Park has had problems with petrified wood being poached out of some parts of the park. That wood is extremely difficult to trace because sellers can claim, true or not, that the wood was collected outside of the park. Similar problems are experienced in Badlands NP, where there has been poaching of fossil mammals but, again, it is difficult to prove unless you catch someone in the act. So, if someone poached, say, a dinosaur skull out of DPP, it would be very difficult to prove that it hadn't been collected outside of the park. That sort of uncertainty then creates a strong incentive for people to poach, which means we will lose a lot of what makes Alberta paleo so great.

 

Additionally, a lot of the important fossils in Alberta in recent years were not found in protected park areas. Examples include Borealopelta  (found in the SunCor mine) and Regaliceratops, found on otherwise undesignated crown land. My guess is that Borealopelta would have fetched upwards of $10m on the open market (maybe much more) had the laws permitted selling it abroad. I hope it would have ended up in a museum, but I'm honestly not certain it would have. That alone is reason to give serious pause to any consideration of expanding private sale of crown-owned fossils in Alberta. Given that these fossils currently belong collectively to the people of Alberta, it seems like it would be stealing from the people of Alberta to simply allow, say, SunCor to have sold that to the highest bidder. Furthermore, I can't see a profit motive being anything but a wedge between scientists in the province and some landowners, including landowners and commercial mine owners who currently have very positive relationships with science staff.

 

I could see an argument for making the dispensation program a little more permissive, but honestly I don't see an argument for just simply removing any sort of oversight of fossil resources in the province. That seems like a recipe for disaster.

[FossilDAWG]

It is legal to surface collect fossils in Alberta, as long as you don't remove those fossils from the province without a permit.  In practice this bars anyone who isn't a resident from collecting, of course.  However, if the law was to change to allow people to sell such fossils, as musicnfossils suggests, I'm quite confident that it would not take long before it would be almost impossible for anyone to find anything.  People with no interest in fossils except for money would scour every square foot of productive ground, plus I am sure quite a bit of illegal excavation would occur.

 

We also have to keep in mind that Alberta's laws were at least I'm part a response to commercial collectors (such as the Sternbergs in their early days)  and various American and European museums coming to Alberta to strip mine articulated dinosaurs with no consideration for cultural heritage.  To an extent the laws represent locking the barn doors while there are still some horses that haven't been stolen, so to speak.

 

It does seem excessive to me that the laws are so strict that I (as a non-resident) can't even legally collect the most common ammonites or even brachiopods in Alberta but I understand the problems they are trying to avoid.

 

Don

[RuMert]

Alberta law sounds strict, but how is it enforced? Do they actually inspect personal belongings while leaving the province: search cars, x-ray bags? Every cop has an esperise to tell a valuable fossil from a rock kids picked up? One can say about almost anything it was surface collected, do they appoint an expertise? Sue people who then say their specimens were not taken from Alberta, but found in Quebec? Invite paleontology experts in court who then say that those fossils could not be found in the latter, but the defendant says it was a remote location deep in the woods and they send cops to investigate?  Just kidding, but curious:)