Fossil Collecting Ruin: Worsening Collecting Potential for Posterity

[digit]

5 hours ago, FranzBernhard said:

Its all about the type of fossils - the fossils I am talking about are just uggly snails and rudists .

Agreed that the types of fossils available likely is key to the hunting pressure once revealed. If your site was filled with megalodon teeth or ammonites or trilobites in the same density as your gastropods or rudists then I would expect those sites to have been fully exploited by now. Newbie hunters go for things that look impressive in a display case to show their friends. Only those who continue to fossil hunt past the initial introductory phase start to appreciate the wider diversity of fossil taxa. In Florida (Peace River) newbies generally rate their success on how close they've come to joining the "Meg Club". It is the most prized entry-level fossil here. It may take several hunts with tantalizing broken megs (fraglodons) before they score a nicely complete megalodon tooth. Along the way they may be finding horse teeth, alligator osteoderms, turtle shell fragments, etc. but those are all secondary to joining the club. Once a newbie has found a meg or two and feels secure that they've joined the Meg Club and have huge shark teeth for their friends to marvel at then they either get distracted and lose interest in fossil hunting (having succeeded in having some impressive shark teeth to wow their non-fossil-hunting friends or they progress to the next stages. When I've had the opportunity to join forum members on a hunt in the Peace and am asked if I want to go to one of their sites that is producing megs or a "mammal" site where mammal material seems more plentiful, the answer is always for the latter.

 

 

Cheers.

 

-Ken

[FranzBernhard]

10 minutes ago, digit said:

When I've had the opportunity to join forum members on a hunt in the Peace and am asked if I want to go to one of their sites that is producing megs or a "mammal" site where mammal material seems more plentiful, the answer is always for the latter.

I would clearly choose a Meg site when coming for a singular visit to Florida. So, your hypothesis is correct.

 

11 minutes ago, digit said:

If your site was filled with megalodon teeth or ammonites or trilobites

LOL!!

I am planning to beginn prospecting for ammonite sites in the southern Kainach Gosau this year. Eight sites are already known there, more or less precisely. I have not visited any, but maybe will visit one of them. Its behind a house, but a friend knows the owner and has already collected there. This is not my style of collecting, but for a first step into new land, why not?

If I find any new site, I will keep it secret .

Franz Bernhard

[digit]

52 minutes ago, FranzBernhard said:

If I find any new site, I will keep it secret .

Likely a wise move.

 

 

Cheers.

 

-Ken

[RuMert]

My two cents: this is a very complex subject with lots of particular cases, but overall I'm optimistic.

1. Even in the worst case scenario, sites are not eliminated, they just become inaccessible and can be brought back in the future.  Sometimes a site can be literally depleted due to it's small size, but such cases are very rare (IMHO. I've never seen a site like this but heard it happens. Then again, what do we consider "a site"? A small outcrop can be easily lost, but the formation with exact same fossils persists and can be accessed, for example, 500m nearby).

2.  Sites usually have some degree of productivity and a time to replenish. An outcrop might look depleted or gravely deteriorated, but it just needs some time to get back in form. Basically any site can sustain a certain number of collectors, and if there are more of them, finds become worse and scarcer. In this case we can either accept this or limit their number one way or another -  or maybe try inventing a smart method of collecting (1st after a storm waiting in the parking lot/ visiting unpopular places/using UV light etc)

3. If a site becomes inaccessible, it's 99% not due to overcollecting or ignorant hobbyists. Quarries go out of operation, river banks become covered in concrete for "development", locals dump their waste in the outcrop, etc. If an owner closes their land for collectors it can be due to bad collectors' behavior or equally to owner's paranoia or maybe the fact the land is just theirs and no visitors are needed anyway?

In short, I don't believe in diabolic hobbyists and that everything is getting worse. There is always possibility for collecting and helping science

[Wrangellian]

On 1/6/2023 at 6:31 PM, grandpa said:

Serious (scientific) fossil sites should be reserved for serious collectors (both amateur and professional).  Recreational fossil sites with ample supply of common fossils should be shared and used to encourage youth to become involved in the interest/enjoyment of science.   My simple thoughts on the matter.

There's always someone to boil it down to a simple maxim! (thankfully)

Edited January 8, 2023 by Wrangellian
sp.

[Shellseeker]

7 hours ago, RuMert said:

In short, I don't believe in diabolic hobbyists and that everything is getting worse. There is always possibility for collecting and helping science

A reoccurring nightmare of mine is that our politicians and bureaucrats, who would not recognize a fossil if they stepped on it, will "fix" this for all of us... 

[Trevor]

On 1/6/2023 at 5:22 PM, Tidgy's Dad said:

I have seen some of those same members complain that 'their' site isn't what it used to be. 

There are sites here in Morocco that have been stripped bare by commercial mining, others that prevent your access without paying and some that have gone literally underground. 

But there's always somewhere new to explore, try something different.

 

I agree with this take strongly, but think the situation is somewhat more complicated.

 

I fall into this bin to a fair degree - I have posted trip reports and spread knowledge of sites that, while I've never felt they were mine, could have benefitted from a reduced amount of information spread.

 

There are many places yet unexplored, unappreciated, and uncollected.

 

Yet, I do think there is a strong argument for focusing on site conversation.

 

I also think that even if someone has, themselves, performed actions that have been deleterious to the longevity of a site, their promotion of fossil site conversation should not be punished socially.

 

It is easy to point and utter "hypocrite!", but I think this detracts from the discussion that there is a real and growing issue with how some collectors treat their collecting environments and also fail to take into account the enjoyment and prospects of other collectors, both those already born and those yet to be born.

[minnbuckeye]

On 1/6/2023 at 2:24 PM, Uncle Siphuncle said:

Part of the problem with posting online is that so many in today's narcissistic society crave attention and mindlessly compromise fossil sites simply to get the dopamine rush of the pat on the head and "you're special" compliments they get when they spill their guts online.  I implore these attention seekers to post Tik Tok dance videos online (which I'll never see) to get their rush, and leave finite resources out of it.

 

In their moment of bragging, they do not comprehend the permanent damage they do.  The reality is that they not only shoot themselves in the foot, but also the foot or feet of the wisely silent collectors they are standing on.  "To the motivated go the spoils" was a good tagline I coined sometime around the inception of this forum.  If I may update that adage with a corollary, it would be something along the lines of "To the silent goes sustainability."

 

I, for one, post my fossil hunting excursions and have to admit a pat on the head occasionally feels good!!!  But to infer that those who "spill their guts" on line are narcissistic  is categorically wrong. "Having an excessive or erotic interest in oneself" is the opposite of those who usually post their trip reports. Most of us post to bring pleasure to OTHERS!!!! 

When I enter the fossil forum daily, I gravitate to trip reports and am thankful I can live out other member's experiences through this site. So please, forum members, do not believe in "To the silent goes sustainability." Just be careful in what is posted to provide sustainability!!!!!! 

 

Mike

[Tales From the Shale]

Everyone has an opportunity to find and collect at any site that's public land. This "my private honey hole" business is just greed under the guise that "I worked hard". There's too much personal ownership touted in this hobby. That being said, safeguard your sites, but maybe understand that you can take a limited share, and allow others the opportunity to prove themselves and collect as well. Unfortunately as long as a fossil has monetary value, there will always be poachers and people who scalp the land in search of sought after material. I see far too often at sites, fossils that are more common that get destroyed and terrain that's dug out and obliterated. What needs to happen is stronger regulations, and licensing just like every other interaction with the natural environment. We need a universal effort to teach and enforce more safeguards to ensure that sites can be sustainably collected. Instead of having sites like Tibbs Bridge and the like, where I see contempt held by collectors. There needs to be policy and legislature that universally structures the way in which sites are collected.

[digit]

31 minutes ago, Tales From the Shale said:

Everyone has an opportunity to find and collect at any site that's public land. This "my private honey hole" business is just greed under the guise that "I worked hard".

I think you'll get a lot of pushback on that argument.

 

Yes, where allowed by local laws, fossils on public lands are fair game to those who find them. That being said, when research and prospecting involving time, effort and cost are needed to locate a spot that has a higher abundance or diversity or quality of fossil material, that effort should be rewarded. I don't think the word "greed" should come into play here. After a lot of effort to locate a productive spot is it greedy to finally be rewarded by being able to work that spot over time and retrieve some nice specimens (often ones of scientific interest which may be turned over to the professionals)? Does it make sense that if I find a "honey hole" that I should advertise that far and wide so that within days every fossil hunter in the area has an equal opportunity (if they are quick) to strip the site till it is bare? That is exactly what would happen. People are inherently lazy and why would they bother to put in the effort to find a productive site if they can take over a known site and strip it clean? The "greed" you speak about is most often demonstrated by newbie fossil hunters with minimal collections who, in their enthusiasm, can over-collect a site--especially if they have no clue how rare or ephemeral these sites can be.

 

1 hour ago, Tales From the Shale said:

There's too much personal ownership touted in this hobby.

I've never had that feeling. I respect those who take the time and effort to find the best places to hunt for fossils. On the occasions that I've been invited along to hunt with someone at their special spot I will make the most of the time there and be thankful for opportunity. I would never even think about returning to the site uninvited nor do anything to reveal the location to others. Yes, public sites (say the Peace River) are loaded with fossils. Let the public hunt wherever they wish to and find the fossils they can. Virtually any spot along the river with a gravel deposit will yield fossils and I have no problem at all with many fossil hunters removing fossils and saving them from being lost or destroyed. I do not believe the entirety of the fossil hunting public has any claim or right to a productive spot that I've found UNLESS they have likewise discovered it while putting in effort of their own.

 

Personal ownership of a productive spot is the direct result of effort expended and I see absolutely nothing wrong with this. Wanting free public access to all regardless of effort expended to me is "entitlement" and that is something I cannot abide by in the fossil hunting hobby.

 

 

Cheers.

 

-Ken

[JohnJ]

I think it is rare that any legislative action improves fossil hunting, collection, or research.  I think the situational circumstances of fossil bearing sites are far too varied to be governed by the 'broad brushed' enforcement of 'fossil laws' enacted by agenda driven politicians. 

 

At the same time, wise, respectful, and sustainable site stewardship will likely afford the best outcomes for most that are interested in the enjoyment and knowledge fossils can provide.  Fossil sites are not like restaurants when it comes to online notoriety.  What may be great for one can unintentionally destroy the other.  So I'd rather err on the side of discretion rather than destruction while sharing as many enjoyable images as possible.

 

[Uncle Siphuncle]

18 hours ago, digit said:

I think you'll get a lot of pushback on that argument.

 

Yes, where allowed by local laws, fossils on public lands are fair game to those who find them. That being said, when research and prospecting involving time, effort and cost are needed to locate a spot that has a higher abundance or diversity or quality of fossil material, that effort should be rewarded. I don't think the word "greed" should come into play here. After a lot of effort to locate a productive spot is it greedy to finally be rewarded by being able to work that spot over time and retrieve some nice specimens (often ones of scientific interest which may be turned over to the professionals)? Does it make sense that if I find a "honey hole" that I should advertise that far and wide so that within days every fossil hunter in the area has an equal opportunity (if they are quick) to strip the site till it is bare? That is exactly what would happen. People are inherently lazy and why would they bother to put in the effort to find a productive site if they can take over a known site and strip it clean? The "greed" you speak about is most often demonstrated by newbie fossil hunters with minimal collections who, in their enthusiasm, can over-collect a site--especially if they have no clue how rare or ephemeral these sites can be.

 

I've never had that feeling. I respect those who take the time and effort to find the best places to hunt for fossils. On the occasions that I've been invited along to hunt with someone at their special spot I will make the most of the time there and be thankful for opportunity. I would never even think about returning to the site uninvited nor do anything to reveal the location to others. Yes, public sites (say the Peace River) are loaded with fossils. Let the public hunt wherever they wish to and find the fossils they can. Virtually any spot along the river with a gravel deposit will yield fossils and I have no problem at all with many fossil hunters removing fossils and saving them from being lost or destroyed. I do not believe the entirety of the fossil hunting public has any claim or right to a productive spot that I've found UNLESS they have likewise discovered it while putting in effort of their own.

 

Personal ownership of a productive spot is the direct result of effort expended and I see absolutely nothing wrong with this. Wanting free public access to all regardless of effort expended to me is "entitlement" and that is something I cannot abide by in the fossil hunting hobby.

 

 

Cheers.

 

-Ken

Agreed.  Site prospecting successfully is a microcosm of meritocracy.  None of us own the sites (unless we are deeded landowners), but we do own the self earned info in our own heads and site logs, and we are free to manage that info as we see fit, usually involving other people we've grown to trust over time, as well as academic institutions.  There is no obligation to share best sites with people considered wild cards regarding the future of said sites.  

[FranzBernhard]

2 hours ago, Uncle Siphuncle said:

None of own the sites (unless we are deeded landowners), but we do own the self earned info in our own heads and site logs, and we are free to manage that info as we see fit, usually involving other people we've grown to trust over time, as well as academic institutions.

On occasion, some detailed info about sites I don´t know were offered to me. I always rejected that info. Because I really don´t like to collect at sites I am not allowed to distribute info about it as I wish. It just makes me fell bad. What should I do with this fossils? Its also lacking the thrill of discovery . Nothing better than finding sites yourself (preferred) or at least via accessible literature (less preferred).

 

Visited such a published site yesterday, some fossil leaves in miocene fresh water limestone, quite well published sedimentologically, also with a fossil sign on an older map, but interestingly unknown to my "rock friends". "Discovered" a few weeks ago by pure chance googling for other things and indeed found a few leaves yesterday. But will not visit it again. Plenty of big outcrops and talus, but everything covered by patina or moss. The editor of "Der Steirische Mineralog", which I also visited yesterday, encouraged me to write a small article about it. Probably I will to. I don´t think, the area (very easy access, below a farm house and around the access road) will be completely overturned after that publication.

 

Franz Bernhard

[TSCannon]

I know this is an older thread, but I’m relatively new here and wanted to get some advice. Does the forum automatically remove location metadata from photos when they are posted? What about Facebook/Instagram? If not, what’s the easiest way to do it on an iPhone? Just take a screenshot of the photo and post that? 

Edited January 20, 2023 by TSCannon

[digit]

This forum does not scrub GPS data and I suspect other sites like FB/Instagram likely do not either.

 

I could not say how to do it on a smart phone. I scrub files with GPS data by saving them for the web (an option in Photoshop).

 

 

Cheers.

 

-Ken

[hadrosauridae]

9 hours ago, digit said:

This forum does not scrub GPS data and I suspect other sites like FB/Instagram likely do not either.

 

I could not say how to do it on a smart phone. I scrub files with GPS data by saving them for the web (an option in Photoshop).

 

 

Cheers.

 

-Ken

Faacebook DOES automatically scrub all exif data from uploaded images.

[hadrosauridae]

On 1/8/2023 at 10:20 AM, Tales From the Shale said:

Everyone has an opportunity to find and collect at any site that's public land. This "my private honey hole" business is just greed under the guise that "I worked hard". There's too much personal ownership touted in this hobby. That being said, safeguard your sites, but maybe understand that you can take a limited share, and allow others the opportunity to prove themselves and collect as well. Unfortunately as long as a fossil has monetary value, there will always be poachers and people who scalp the land in search of sought after material. I see far too often at sites, fossils that are more common that get destroyed and terrain that's dug out and obliterated. What needs to happen is stronger regulations, and licensing just like every other interaction with the natural environment. We need a universal effort to teach and enforce more safeguards to ensure that sites can be sustainably collected. Instead of having sites like Tibbs Bridge and the like, where I see contempt held by collectors. There needs to be policy and legislature that universally structures the way in which sites are collected.

 

You are 100% wrong, in every aspect of what you wrote.

[JohnJ]

4 minutes ago, hadrosauridae said:

 

You are 100% wrong, in every aspect of what you wrote.

Then, it should be easy for you to explain why.  

[Notidanodon]

29 minutes ago, hadrosauridae said:

 

You are 100% wrong, in every aspect of what you wrote.

No one can ever be 100 % wrong in a subjective matter  try and at least reason out an argument as to why you disagree (not saying I agree 100% with @Tales From the Shale)

[hadrosauridae]

 

On 1/8/2023 at 10:20 AM, Tales From the Shale said:

Everyone has an opportunity to find and collect at any site that's public land. This "my private honey hole" business is just greed under the guise that "I worked hard". There's too much personal ownership touted in this hobby. That being said, safeguard your sites, but maybe understand that you can take a limited share, and allow others the opportunity to prove themselves and collect as well. Unfortunately as long as a fossil has monetary value, there will always be poachers and people who scalp the land in search of sought after material. I see far too often at sites, fossils that are more common that get destroyed and terrain that's dug out and obliterated. What needs to happen is stronger regulations, and licensing just like every other interaction with the natural environment. We need a universal effort to teach and enforce more safeguards to ensure that sites can be sustainably collected. Instead of having sites like Tibbs Bridge and the like, where I see contempt held by collectors. There needs to be policy and legislature that universally structures the way in which sites are collected.

4 minutes ago, JohnJ said:

Then, it should be easy for you to explain why.  

 

Too easy! 

 

1) not everyone has the "ability" (the word opportunity is equally bad here, because even with knowledge, not everyone lives close enough to access, hence no opportunity) because most people cant even figure out where public lands are to begin with.  They dont know how to research or read maps or even spend a few days digging through the googles to find the resources they need to begin.  

2)  Too much personal ownership?  That doesnt even make sense.  I don't own the items I legally search for and recover?  The gov't wouldnt even agree with that statement.

3) Who defines what my "share" of a site is.  Is it xx% of total fossils?  xx% of specimens at least XX% complete?  xx% of complete specimens?  Only "common" specimens but not including anything with monetary value?  Do YOU get to decide what I get to keep?  I think not.

4) The vast, VAST majority of fossils have so little value they are not worth the time to go collect them, let alone any prep or repairs that follow.  Of the items that typically do have large monetary worth, you can't even touch those on public land.  As for poachers, those exist everywhere and always have.  But the bigger concern is WHY are you lumping legal hunters in with poachers in your condemnation?

5) Wait, what are you complaining about?  Poachers stealing expensive fossils, or general people collecting worthless fossils?  You also contradict yourself here.  Earlier you complained that people shouldnt be keep their "honer holes" a secret, but here you clearly express what happens when a fossil bearing spot becomes common knowledge.  Which should I do?  Keep it secret, or let it be plundered?

6) Licenses and regulation are your solution? THATS INSANE!  Nothing has ever been made better by involving gov't bureaucracy.  There are already books of rules about exactly what you can and can not collect on gov't land, including how much you can collect.  Do you think licensing will change that?  And who decides who gets your special paper permission?  You?  A gov't emplyee who is going to be part of some larger bureau and doesnt care one bit about fossils?  MAybe private, university connected paleos should decide?  You know the end result of either is found in France.  Banning it all.  Nobody gets to collect anything unless you are part of the very tiny world of govt sanctioned univ groups.

7) universal effort? to teach safeguards?  Safeguards of what?  We are already extremely limited on what we get to touch on govt land.  Those gov't safeguards exist, it is universal, it is "do not touch any vertebrate fossil or face huge fines and jail time. Tell us, and we'll ignore it until turns to dust from nature"

8) I have zero clue what tibbs bridge is, but why are "collectors" holding contempt, and who are they contemptuous of, and how are they expres said contempt?  IS this just because they wont tell you where to hunt?

9) again with your universality of highly specific and individual sites.  This is like telling YOU how to build your house based on the weather of Alaska, and resource scarcity of Namibia, and the gov't rules of China. 

[Uncle Siphuncle]

For me, collecting and solitude go hand in hand, hence my lack of site blabbering.  I'm pretty open with site info with close friends and trusted academics, period.  That is a proven equation I feel no need to change.  For more social avocations, I stick to pursuits where information shared is not diminished through sharing, because the objective is not a finite resource.  I'll help buddies and strangers with any aspect of building, setting up or programming an RC plane for instance.  Everybody wins in that situation.  

[hadrosauridae]

On 1/1/2023 at 6:40 PM, Trevor said:

.....

 

Main Idea -->: I am interested in hearing about your stories and perspectives on this topic, i.e. fossil collecting grounds you've gone to that have become so miserable due to over-collecting, poor collecting practices, environmental degradation, human development, or other restrictions.

 

For me, I've found that Instagram (30%), YouTube (15%), the Fossil Forum (5%), and Facebook (50%) have all contributed in some way to the degradation of the common stream systems (I put % weights next to these corresponding to my estimates of their impact). This degradation takes the form of too many people collecting in the streams. Some of these people dig in areas they shouldn't, such as the stream embankments, and this increases the risk of certain areas having fossil collecting banned. Many of these people litter the gravel bars with their sifted spoils, which prevents other collectors who want to surface scan from reaping the benefits of a good rain, which is the only reliable form of natural erosion for the NJ Cretaceous stream beds.

 

Kind Regards,

Trevor

 

Trevor, in my last replies, I failed to even address you question. Sorry for the sidetrack.  Here is my take on this;

 

Fossil collecting has been popular for a very long time, even going back to Mary Anning.  The popularity and interest in paleontology has ebbed and waned many times sice, and will continue.  Social media sites are not really driving any additional hunting pressure on known fossil grounds. Pop culture like Jurassic Park, Prehistoric Planet, Walking with Dinosaurs, etc do far more to drive interest in ancient life, but those are transient in nature as well.  

You specifically mention "hunting in streams".  On thing to bear in mind here is those fossils are no longer part of their native matrix strata.  Lots of scientific data is already lost once become part of the detritus of the fluvial system.   They also begin to immediately erode and become part of the vast amounts of sands the the rivers pushes.  Nothing in the river is safe.  If those fossils are not recovered, they WILL be lost forever.   Digging in the river banks is already illegal in most areas.  I think the biggest problem there, is that most people don't realize they arent allowed to do it.  Its not an inherent concept.  People go looking for fossils, and see some in the bank, so they want to push that tiny little bit of exposure back for more fossils.  Its not greed, its just not understanding the nature of riparian systems.

As for the gravel bars, those are an ever shifting and changing location.  If you feel the gravels are "littered" with spoils, wait for that rain you jus mentioned, The river will wash away those piles and redistribute the gravels anyway.  

 

One last thought here.  You worry about too many people seeing fossils and becoming interested in collecting.  That is exactly how every one of us got to be right here.  We have an entire generation of paleontologists who grew up with, and were inspired by that pop culture and social media to want to study the past.  The truth is that we need more people to be interested, not less.  We need to inspire those future scientists.

 

Edit to add - be thankful that you have public fossil sites.  Where I live, those are extremely rare. 99% of the lands are private, and most of the land owned by govt bodies forbid any form of collecting of anything.  When I say "Oklahoma" do you immediately think of a state rich in fossils, that span the times from Cambrian through today?  Most don't. I have lived here my entire life, and didnt realize what we have.  I live in the middle of a vast Permian deposit!  Dimetrodon and others have been found just a short drive from my door.  I NEVER looked in my own back yard, because as I grew up, everyone said "theres no fossils around here".  People arent interested, so they dont understand, so they don't know whats under their feet. 

Edited January 21, 2023 by hadrosauridae

[Crusty_Crab]

On 1/20/2023 at 3:18 PM, hadrosauridae said:

6) Licenses and regulation are your solution? THATS INSANE!  Nothing has ever been made better by involving gov't bureaucracy.  There are already books of rules about exactly what you can and can not collect on gov't land, including how much you can collect.  Do you think licensing will change that?  And who decides who gets your special paper permission?  You?  A gov't emplyee who is going to be part of some larger bureau and doesnt care one bit about fossils?  MAybe private, university connected paleos should decide?  You know the end result of either is found in France.  Banning it all.  Nobody gets to collect anything unless you are part of the very tiny world of govt sanctioned univ groups.

 

I agree with most of what you've said, but I feel I need to respond to this point. I am a government employee in the US. I can say that most of us are dedicated to public service. I graduated from an elite university but based on my naïve (at the time) notions of serving the public good, I entered civil service. My management's mantra, of which there have been many, due to the frequent changes of political leadership, has always been, what can government do to serve the people. I think you are conflating elected officials with the career civil servants that have been tasked with implementing the latest social media friendly initiatives that their electeds have tasked us to implement. Please don't disparage government as a whole. Most of us are dedicated civil servants, and we are here to serve the people. 

[Crusty_Crab]

On 1/20/2023 at 3:18 PM, hadrosauridae said:

 Nothing has ever been made better by involving gov't bureaucracy. 

Really? 

https://www.fda.gov/about-fda/fda-leadership-1907-today/harvey-w-wiley-pioneer-consumer-activist#:~:text=Wiley%2C M.D.%2C was the original,with poor%2C often harmful products.

Dr. Wiley was a government employee, one of the founders of the FDA. He advocated for more government intervention regarding food safety. Do you get your food from the market or a restaurant? Do you trust that the food you eat is free of formaldehyde? If so, you can thank Dr. Wiley and government regulations.  

[jpc]

I would also add that many forms of gov't bureaucracy have done great amounts of good.  We have clean water and air here in the US because of gov't regulations as one of many examples.  (Flint, Michigan being the exception that proves the rule, but that is a whole different tale).