Jump to content

Idea for the community: census of road cuts


matgerke

Recommended Posts

So, I have this idea -- maybe it's nuts.  What if we, as a community, started a census of sorts for road cuts.  

 

Every time I pass an attractive shale road cut, I think to myself, "I should really stop there and see what sorts of fossils are there."  Then I got to thinking, there ought to be some way to share standardized information on what is in any given site.  So here's what I propose:

 

Every time I stop by a road cut, I will rummage around in the scree for exactly 30 minutes.  Then I will post an exact location (drop a Google maps pin, maybe), and precisely what I find.  That way, the next time a Forum member goes down that road, he can know what sorts of fossils are to be found.  Because I will look for exactly 30 minutes, it will also give some estimate of fossil density.  (Sites where I find ten fossils in 30 minutes are likely more fossiliferous than sites where I find only one.) Over time, this road cut census will give clues about where to look for new, undiscovered sites. 

 

Any thoughts on this approach?  Would this be useful to other amateurs?  Are there improvements to be made in my standardized approach?  Would anyone else like to join me in this endeavor?  Just think how useful it would be to know before your road trip which areas have fossils in nearby road cuts...

 

Cheers, 

Matt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One has to keep in mind that members are not the only ones which will read this topic.  Thousands of people visit this site weekly.  Any productive road cuts could soon be rendered unproductive, destroyed, or off limits once they are published.  Members have many examples of this happening before...and it should be considered before telling the 'world'.  ;)   Keeping a record of these for the areas you travel might be better shared privately unless they are very well known road cut sites.  :) 

The human mind has the ability to believe anything is true.  -  JJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Matt,

 

I see several issues with this. :unsure:  

 

Stopping on roadways can be illegal in some states. Also, it can be dangerous.  Without knowing any of the laws in other states, we can't just accept that someone says OK.  There are also issues of land ownership and legality of collecting on state owned property.


The sharing of sites online is also something that I am against to a degree.  Yes, there are many well known sites listed online. However - having done the hard work of researching, prospecting, and bushwhacking to find good sites, I am reluctant to give that information to any one of the thousands of anonymous visitors to this site.  This is a recipe for having sites stripped bare at least, and having the site closed down or marked no trespassing  or patrolled by private security, which helps no one.

 

All in all, I would be against this kiind of an idea.

Regards, 

 

 

EDIT: Ooops . Looks like JohnJ summed it up more eloquently than I was able to . :P  

    Tim    -  VETERAN SHALE SPLITTER

   MOTM.png.61350469b02f439fd4d5d77c2c69da85.png      PaleoPartner.png.30c01982e09b0cc0b7d9d6a7a21f56c6.png.a600039856933851eeea617ca3f2d15f.png     Postmaster1.jpg.900efa599049929531fa81981f028e24.jpg    VFOTM.png.f1b09c78bf88298b009b0da14ef44cf0.png  VFOTM  --- APRIL - 2015  

__________________________________________________
"In every walk with nature one receives far more than he seeks."

John Muir ~ ~ ~ ~   ><))))( *>  About Me      

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, that's true.  But I sort of think of this as a contribution to science.  Even if others clean out a road cut, we still have a record of what was once available there.  It's less about any one site; over time, we will be able to predict what some new site will yield by looking at nearby sites.  This is the sort of thing that would be wroth publishing, if we could get a few hundred in a particular area.

 

Matt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm for the census.  I'm not saying you have to give up your honey holes.  But I think at least give the sites that are already well known.  I've got a few in Illinois and Missouri near St. Louis that I'm willing to share. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please do not post any sites from NC in this way. There are so few left we can actually hunt at. Making them public knowledge would lose them to all and to science.

 

Science will benefit more from donations of rare or new species directly to museums or institutions with the collecting info given to them privately.

Bulldozers and dirt Bulldozers and dirt
behind the trailer, my desert
Them red clay piles are heaven on earth
I get my rocks off, bulldozers and dirt

Patterson Hood; Drive-By Truckers

 

image.png.0c956e87cee523facebb6947cb34e842.png May 2016  MOTM.png.61350469b02f439fd4d5d77c2c69da85.png.a47e14d65deb3f8b242019b3a81d8160.png.b42a25e3438348310ba19ce6852f50c1.png May 2012 IPFOTM5.png.fb4f2a268e315c58c5980ed865b39e1f.png.1721b8912c45105152ac70b0ae8303c3.png.2b6263683ee32421d97e7fa481bd418a.pngAug 2013, May 2016, Apr 2020 VFOTM.png.f1b09c78bf88298b009b0da14ef44cf0.png.af5065d0585e85f4accd8b291bf0cc2e.png.72a83362710033c9bdc8510be7454b66.png.9171036128e7f95de57b6a0f03c491da.png Oct 2022

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is illegal to collect at road cuts in Colorado.

Some people still do it, but by posting locations here, if any authority figures started asking questions one could wind up in jail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Matt,

 

That still doesn't broach the legality of stopping at or collecting from roadcuts in all states. :unsure: 

Publishing that information here could conceivably open the Forum to lawsuits, if it is seen as advertising misleading or incorrect information involving legal concerns. :( 


Paleontological surveys have been performed since the 1800's. Many of them were written up in scientific papers. 

For those willing to do the research, the information is, in all likelihood, already available online or in these papers. 


To the motivated go the spoils. As far as well known sites are concerned - most are already posted if they are "well known" , and therefore gives newbies plenty of options for fossil hunting. 

Fossil/Rock/Gem/Mineral clubs also have plenty to offer in as much as giving collecting information and making field trips available to club members. 


Regards, 

 

 

    Tim    -  VETERAN SHALE SPLITTER

   MOTM.png.61350469b02f439fd4d5d77c2c69da85.png      PaleoPartner.png.30c01982e09b0cc0b7d9d6a7a21f56c6.png.a600039856933851eeea617ca3f2d15f.png     Postmaster1.jpg.900efa599049929531fa81981f028e24.jpg    VFOTM.png.f1b09c78bf88298b009b0da14ef44cf0.png  VFOTM  --- APRIL - 2015  

__________________________________________________
"In every walk with nature one receives far more than he seeks."

John Muir ~ ~ ~ ~   ><))))( *>  About Me      

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not much "science" can be accomplished if lesser known road cuts become unproductive or destroyed due to publishing.  Along with increased activity (because of an online location list) comes the downside of less responsible collectors.  Thus, the unintended consequences of publishing a list could extend to other sites being shut down or covered. 

The human mind has the ability to believe anything is true.  -  JJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with fossildude... I have found a few good roadcuts, but I will be darned if I am going to publish them to the teeming millions.  As for a contribution to science,the science of paleontology generally likes to have scientifically significant specimens, (such as those reported on in scientific papers) be housed at a museum.  Your idea, while not a bad idea, would not be very scientific if all the fossils are in a hundred different collections and there are no records of where they might be.  

 

If you read the intro to Jasper Burns' "Fossils of the Mid-Atlantic States" in which he has numerous roadcuts listed, he also states that he did not want to give away his best sites and invites the reader to go find their own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I'm less interested in well-known sites, or anyone's honey hole.  My goal would be to be able to predict areas that are good hunting grounds for NEW honey holes.

 

Certainly agree that this shouldn't be done where it is illegal!

 

However, seems like the consensus is that there is some value to keeping fossils hard to find, to ensure that only serious collectors can find them.  I guess there's some sense to that.  Just seems like a pity that I can't collect and share this sort of information with other collectors.  There's no way to limit access to certain posts only to members of a certain rank, is there?

 

Matt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the mid 80s I led a collecting trip for a local rock club to an unknown site for crystal digging. Now the site looks like a WW1 battlefield, and there are no more crystals to be found easily there.

If You have a good site to collect, keep it to Yourself and maybe a few trusted friends or it will be ravaged or closed, and no more fossils.

 

Tony

 

Darwin said: " Man sprang from monkeys."

Will Rogers said: " Some of them didn't spring far enough."

 

My Fossil collection - My Mineral collection

My favorite thread on TFF.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's no one saying you can't do that. No one is stopping you. :) 

 

You could start your own blog, Facebook Group, (Closed group with only invited or approved members.) or Google Docs site, or Dropbox shared folder,  and invite other members to collaborate on it.

 I just wouldn't do it here on the Forum. ;)  

 

I just question the wisdom of publicly sharing all of that information with thousands of anonymous people per week. 

 

See this POST, for some more on the subject of posting sites online.


It seems like one bad apple can spoil the bushel for everyone. Many of us here, unfortunately, have seen that happen firsthand.  :( 

Regards,

 

    Tim    -  VETERAN SHALE SPLITTER

   MOTM.png.61350469b02f439fd4d5d77c2c69da85.png      PaleoPartner.png.30c01982e09b0cc0b7d9d6a7a21f56c6.png.a600039856933851eeea617ca3f2d15f.png     Postmaster1.jpg.900efa599049929531fa81981f028e24.jpg    VFOTM.png.f1b09c78bf88298b009b0da14ef44cf0.png  VFOTM  --- APRIL - 2015  

__________________________________________________
"In every walk with nature one receives far more than he seeks."

John Muir ~ ~ ~ ~   ><))))( *>  About Me      

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Matt.  I had similar ideas until I shared hard earned site info with someone who didn't respect it.  I guess I was a bit green at the time.  Essentially I unwittingly cultivated disrespectful competition. These days I find sites, survey them alone (at least until I've collected my "finder's fee"), then communicate salient info directly with academia.  End result:  site sustainability.

Grüße,

Daniel A. Wöhr aus Südtexas

"To the motivated go the spoils."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Uncle Siphuncle said:

Matt.  I had similar ideas until I shared hard earned site info with someone who didn't respect it.  I guess I was a bit green at the time.  Essentially I unwittingly cultivated disrespectful competition. These days I find sites, survey them alone (at least until I've collected my "finder's fee"), then communicate salient info directly with academia.  End result:  site sustainability.

 

Very well said Dan.

Bulldozers and dirt Bulldozers and dirt
behind the trailer, my desert
Them red clay piles are heaven on earth
I get my rocks off, bulldozers and dirt

Patterson Hood; Drive-By Truckers

 

image.png.0c956e87cee523facebb6947cb34e842.png May 2016  MOTM.png.61350469b02f439fd4d5d77c2c69da85.png.a47e14d65deb3f8b242019b3a81d8160.png.b42a25e3438348310ba19ce6852f50c1.png May 2012 IPFOTM5.png.fb4f2a268e315c58c5980ed865b39e1f.png.1721b8912c45105152ac70b0ae8303c3.png.2b6263683ee32421d97e7fa481bd418a.pngAug 2013, May 2016, Apr 2020 VFOTM.png.f1b09c78bf88298b009b0da14ef44cf0.png.af5065d0585e85f4accd8b291bf0cc2e.png.72a83362710033c9bdc8510be7454b66.png.9171036128e7f95de57b6a0f03c491da.png Oct 2022

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would keep my sites to myself. 

 

"Without fossils, no one would have ever dreamed that there were successive epochs in the formation of the earth" - Georges Cuvier

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Often times there are fossil sites available online. For the DC area specifically there's the excellent book "Fossil Collecting in the Mid Atlantic States" by Jasper Burns. The book is pretty old, and most of the sites are now either defunct or over collected for one reason or another.

 

For the DMV I can give you some tips. One is that it's illegal to stop along interstates, highways, and entrance and exit ramps (and not to mention incredibly dangerous. No fossil is worth it in my opinion). The second is that many of the sites you'll read about in the area have all suffered from the kind of activity that comes with making once productive sites public knowledge. Swatara Gap, St. Clair, and the cliffs at Calvert Cliffs are examples of how collectors' lust lead to unsafe conditions for others, low productivity, or any other host of problems. Many other sites are now private property or government owned, and I would not suggest just showing up out of the blue at these.

 

Third is to branch out. Have fun! Part of this hobby is to get out in the field and explore for sites. There's a world of opportunity in this area that hasn't even begun to be touched upon because people just gravitate to popular sites like the Cliffs and Purse (I've never been a big fan of them though, so maybe that's affecting my judgement).

 

If you want any help I can point you in the right direction about which formations to look in for certain fossils, since I've collected in most of the local ones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing everyone has to keep in mind, there is a huge difference between people in this hobby who treat it like scientists would and those who treat it like graverobbers.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TNCollector said:

One thing everyone has to keep in mind, there is a huge difference between people in this hobby who treat it like scientists would and those who treat it like graverobbers.

 

 

 

Good observations,

However,  I've been in paleontology for four decades and don't see more than a couple people on this site collecting 'like scientists'.  Collectors on his site are searching for collectable specimens. When we sample an outcrop it is using different methodology. A fragment of a brachiopod or matrix with no observable macro fossils are as important as the dozen complete trilobites.  Collectors tend to high grade.  If there are a thousand brachiopods of a particular species, they collect the best fifty. In contrast we would collect a representative mix of what is found.

 

And, not to keep harping on this, but a specimen has no scientific value without collecting history. This usually includes the specific strata it was collected in at an outcrop. What member of the formation is it in? Above this layer is what? Below this layer is what?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that everybody, scientist or not, should include as much info (strat, etc.) as they can with each fossil they collect, but if, as you imply, scientists and collectors are looking for different things, that would seem to argue in favor of relaxing the rules for amateur collectors, not restricting them.

It is good to keep in mind what many of the professionals themselves say about us amateurs collecting: we make a sizable contribution by being more eyes/feet on the ground - we make many new discoveries because the pro's don't have the time/money. Should we not believe them?

(But I also agree with not revealing location of sensitive sites to the public via the internet!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Canadawest said:

Good observations,

However,  I've been in paleontology for four decades and don't see more than a couple people on this site collecting 'like scientists'.  Collectors on his site are searching for collectable specimens. When we sample an outcrop it is using different methodology. A fragment of a brachiopod or matrix with no observable macro fossils are as important as the dozen complete trilobites.  Collectors tend to high grade.  If there are a thousand brachiopods of a particular species, they collect the best fifty. In contrast we would collect a representative mix of what is found.

 

And, not to keep harping on this, but a specimen has no scientific value without collecting history. This usually includes the specific strata it was collected in at an outcrop. What member of the formation is it in? Above this layer is what? Below this layer is what?

Oh I agree 100%, I am speaking mostly to the notion that a scientist would not trash a site, they would treat it with respect and try their best to keep the site in a study-worthy state.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Canadawest said:

Good observations,

However,  I've been in paleontology for four decades and don't see more than a couple people on this site collecting 'like scientists'.  Collectors on his site are searching for collectable specimens. When we sample an outcrop it is using different methodology. A fragment of a brachiopod or matrix with no observable macro fossils are as important as the dozen complete trilobites.  Collectors tend to high grade.  If there are a thousand brachiopods of a particular species, they collect the best fifty. In contrast we would collect a representative mix of what is found.

 

And, not to keep harping on this, but a specimen has no scientific value without collecting history. This usually includes the specific strata it was collected in at an outcrop. What member of the formation is it in? Above this layer is what? Below this layer is what?

I would hope that everyone who spends any time here is aware of the importance of keeping good locality data.  However you should be aware that most collectors do not have the situation you do, where vast thicknesses of strata are laid out like a layer cake on mountainsides and precise records of the exact layer a specimen originated from is both possible and essential.  On the US gulf coast, much collecting is done by screening river gravel for ex situ specimens eroded from "outcrops" that often are all but invisible in the river bed or banks.  At Greens Mill Run, a popular site in North Carolina, one can find a mix of Cretaceous, Miocene, Pliocene, and Pleistocene fossils in the same screen-load of gravel.  From the point of view of the stratigrapher, such "float" would be a complete waste of time.  Does that mean that people are wasting their time collecting from such a deposit?  I would not see it that way.  Along the same line, many exposures are quarries or construction sites, where fossils from different layers are frequently mixed.  The famous SMR Aggregates shell pit in Sarasota, Florida was like that.  Literally tons of over a thousand species of beautifully preserved shells from the Pliocene Tamiami Formation were dug up and, except for the few that were collected, used for road and construction fill.  There were several layers or "units" exposed in the quarry, but generally one could not access the quarry walls and collecting was done from the massive piles of shells that had been dug up, dumped in huge mounds, and were awaiting transport to the crusher.  I can say that my specimens came from a specific location and formation, but I cannot say if they came from unit 5 or unit 7.  I don't think that makes them worthless.  

 

Regarding "high-grading", I think that also has to be taken in context.  At the Hungry Hollow site in Ontario, I can pick up literally hundreds of specimens of Mucrospirifer arkonensis (from the Arkona Shale) and Mucrospirifer thedfordensis (from the Widder Member of the Hungry Hollow Formation) in an hour or two.  Most are damaged, lacking the extreme tips of the hinge.  Is one to be faulted for choosing the more intact specimens?  Collecting every specimen or at least a large representative sample makes sense if you are collecting a new location, or doing research related to biostratigraphy.  Several species could be masquerading under a similar external appearance for example.  However it is not reasonable to expect every collector to have the resources to make a detailed analysis of every specimen from every location, including grinding serial sections, as one would do in a well funded research project.  I think it is entirely appropriate and admirable that amateurs would have the interest to try to learn about the fossils they collect, and assemble a well curated representative collection, especially considering that this is (for them) a hobby driven by interest, not a full-time profession supported by grant funding.

 

I also think it could be a mistake to assume people are not recording detailed locality data just because they don't post that data together with their photos on this forum.  I think it's prudent to be somewhat vague about the locality in a public internet forum, as I have seen sites get decimated or closed following publication of specific information.  I see more and more paper in journals such as the Journal of Paleontology that state "detailed locality data available on request to qualified researchers", unlike times past when very detailed locality data was the norm.

 

Don

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, FossilDAWG said:

I would hope that everyone who spends any time here is aware of the importance of keeping good locality data.  However you should be aware that most collectors do not have the situation you do, where vast thicknesses of strata are laid out like a layer cake on mountainsides and precise records of the exact layer a specimen originated from is both possible and essential.  On the US gulf coast, much collecting is done by screening river gravel for ex situ specimens eroded from "outcrops" that often are all but invisible in the river bed or banks.  At Greens Mill Run, a popular site in North Carolina, one can find a mix of Cretaceous, Miocene, Pliocene, and Pleistocene fossils in the same screen-load of gravel.  From the point of view of the stratigrapher, such "float" would be a complete waste of time.  Does that mean that people are wasting their time collecting from such a deposit?  I would not see it that way.  Along the same line, many exposures are quarries or construction sites, where fossils from different layers are frequently mixed.  The famous SMR Aggregates shell pit in Sarasota, Florida was like that.  Literally tons of over a thousand species of beautifully preserved shells from the Pliocene Tamiami Formation were dug up and, except for the few that were collected, used for road and construction fill.  There were several layers or "units" exposed in the quarry, but generally one could not access the quarry walls and collecting was done from the massive piles of shells that had been dug up, dumped in huge mounds, and were awaiting transport to the crusher.  I can say that my specimens came from a specific location and formation, but I cannot say if they came from unit 5 or unit 7.  I don't think that makes them worthless.  

 

Regarding "high-grading", I think that also has to be taken in context.  At the Hungry Hollow site in Ontario, I can pick up literally hundreds of specimens of Mucrospirifer arkonensis (from the Arkona Shale) and Mucrospirifer thedfordensis (from the Widder Member of the Hungry Hollow Formation) in an hour or two.  Most are damaged, lacking the extreme tips of the hinge.  Is one to be faulted for choosing the more intact specimens?  Collecting every specimen or at least a large representative sample makes sense if you are collecting a new location, or doing research related to biostratigraphy.  Several species could be masquerading under a similar external appearance for example.  However it is not reasonable to expect every collector to have the resources to make a detailed analysis of every specimen from every location, including grinding serial sections, as one would do in a well funded research project.  I think it is entirely appropriate and admirable that amateurs would have the interest to try to learn about the fossils they collect, and assemble a well curated representative collection, especially considering that this is (for them) a hobby driven by interest, not a full-time profession supported by grant funding.

 

I also think it could be a mistake to assume people are not recording detailed locality data just because they don't post that data together with their photos on this forum.  I think it's prudent to be somewhat vague about the locality in a public internet forum, as I have seen sites get decimated or closed following publication of specific information.  I see more and more paper in journals such as the Journal of Paleontology that state "detailed locality data available on request to qualified researchers", unlike times past when very detailed locality data was the norm.

 

Don

Hence my reference to "Gulf of Mexico watershed, Texas" being suitable for public consumption.

Grüße,

Daniel A. Wöhr aus Südtexas

"To the motivated go the spoils."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, FossilDAWG said:

I would hope that everyone who spends any time here is aware of the importance of keeping good locality data.  However you should be aware that most collectors do not have the situation you do, where vast thicknesses of strata are laid out like a layer cake on mountainsides and precise records of the exact layer a specimen originated from is both possible and essential.  On the US gulf coast, much collecting is done by screening river gravel for ex situ specimens eroded from "outcrops" that often are all but invisible in the river bed or banks.  At Greens Mill Run, a popular site in North Carolina, one can find a mix of Cretaceous, Miocene, Pliocene, and Pleistocene fossils in the same screen-load of gravel.  From the point of view of the stratigrapher, such "float" would be a complete waste of time.  Does that mean that people are wasting their time collecting from such a deposit?  I would not see it that way.  Along the same line, many exposures are quarries or construction sites, where fossils from different layers are frequently mixed.  The famous SMR Aggregates shell pit in Sarasota, Florida was like that.  Literally tons of over a thousand species of beautifully preserved shells from the Pliocene Tamiami Formation were dug up and, except for the few that were collected, used for road and construction fill.  There were several layers or "units" exposed in the quarry, but generally one could not access the quarry walls and collecting was done from the massive piles of shells that had been dug up, dumped in huge mounds, and were awaiting transport to the crusher.  I can say that my specimens came from a specific location and formation, but I cannot say if they came from unit 5 or unit 7.  I don't think that makes them worthless.  

 

Regarding "high-grading", I think that also has to be taken in context.  At the Hungry Hollow site in Ontario, I can pick up literally hundreds of specimens of Mucrospirifer arkonensis (from the Arkona Shale) and Mucrospirifer thedfordensis (from the Widder Member of the Hungry Hollow Formation) in an hour or two.  Most are damaged, lacking the extreme tips of the hinge.  Is one to be faulted for choosing the more intact specimens?  Collecting every specimen or at least a large representative sample makes sense if you are collecting a new location, or doing research related to biostratigraphy.  Several species could be masquerading under a similar external appearance for example.  However it is not reasonable to expect every collector to have the resources to make a detailed analysis of every specimen from every location, including grinding serial sections, as one would do in a well funded research project.  I think it is entirely appropriate and admirable that amateurs would have the interest to try to learn about the fossils they collect, and assemble a well curated representative collection, especially considering that this is (for them) a hobby driven by interest, not a full-time profession supported by grant funding.

 

I also think it could be a mistake to assume people are not recording detailed locality data just because they don't post that data together with their photos on this forum.  I think it's prudent to be somewhat vague about the locality in a public internet forum, as I have seen sites get decimated or closed following publication of specific information.  I see more and more paper in journals such as the Journal of Paleontology that state "detailed locality data available on request to qualified researchers", unlike times past when very detailed locality data was the norm.

 

Don

 

Well thought out and very well said, Don. 

The human mind has the ability to believe anything is true.  -  JJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...