[meteorite-list] Beware of meteorite hunters

From: Adam Hupe <raremeteorites_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Mon Jul 10 05:05:05 2006
Message-ID: <007f01c6a400$16327a80$6401a8c0_at_c1720188a>

Dear List,

I do not understand why Ali al Kathiri is commenting on something he is not
directly involved with. This permit was issued before Royal Decree No.
27/2003, which apparently prohibits the mining of "rocks" without a permit.
He seems to think it is ok to include meteorites under "rocks" when quoting
this decree but when it comes to a permit not issued to somebody he is not
involved with, it must specifically state meteorite. I agree that a
meteorite is a rock and using the same semantics, most would agree that
meteorites are covered under the removal of rocks. In legal terms it is
best to use general terms that are far more reaching than being too
specific. It is also a great idea to leave documents short and to the point.
The more complicated an agreement is, the more loopholes that later can be
exploited. There can be many interpretations so the term "rock" was used to
cover mineral combinations of any sort including meteorites. This is not
misleading, rather a good move in order to cover everything at a time when
it was not necessary. It also shows honesty on the searchers' part by
entering the country stating their actual activities.

Meteorites have very little or no commercial value until studied so these
"rocks" were unconditionally released under the permit in question. Once
they left Oman, no claim exists. We never asserted that we obtained this
permit first-hand but were very careful about its existence since there now
may be laws on the books. These laws do not date to the time of these
recoveries but steps were taken at that time to insure full disclosure. The
country was entered on good faith or these documents would not exist at a
time when they were not required if somebody where trying to be misleading.

If new laws that specifically cover meteorites exist, it would do the world
some good if they were translated by a non-biased party and made public.
This is where I feel, Ali, that you are derelict in your duties as an agent
of Oman. Instead you comment on rocks that were legally removed from Oman
with permission. These documents are real not a fabrication, as you seem to
imply.

Here is a direct quote from an official article on the subject:

"The mining law issued by Royal Decree No. 27/2003 prohibited the practice
of all rock and mineral mining and exploratory activities and trading in the
same without obtaining permissions from the Directorate-General of
Minerals."

I wouldn't call picking up a meteorite mining but trying to pigeonhole this
law for meteorites, they must be called rocks and this is what the permit
covers.

Please clarify any new laws for the rest of us.

Adam



----- Original Message -----
From: "stan ." <laser_maniac_at_hotmail.com>
To: <raremeteorites_at_comcast.net>; <meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com>
Sent: Monday, July 10, 2006 1:59 AM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Beware of meteorite hunters


>
> >I legal terms, a meteorite is a rock in the most general sense.
>
> Adam,
> Export documents typically require SPECIFIC itimization, not
> generalizations. Try to export a bunch of plutonium described as 'lump of
> metal' and see how far it gets you. diamonds, fossils, and some
antiquities
> could too be described as 'rocks' but I'm sure you would agree that it
isnt
> an intellectually honest description for such items.
>
> Even if you think generalization isnt an issue, IF the translation this
guy
> provided is true then listing the 'rocks' as having no value is pretty
hard
> to defend when just 0.13% of that 150kg has a 'special 20% off sale price'
> of $178358.00
>
> Now you might be thinking that this is an attempt by me to goad you into a
> fight given our online history on the list. Quite the contrary. I'd like
to
> see you adresse this AlKathiri's point directly instead of just
questioning
> his intentions.
>
> does it matter if one has export documentation for 'rocks' of this era
taken
> out of oman? were there any laws on the books at the time these meteorites
> were taken out of oman that would prohibit such exportation?
>
> As far as I know the answer to both these questions is a most resounding
NO.
> from what i have been able to dig up foriegn commerical activity in oman
> requires a permit, but lack of one doesnt mean meteorites without an
export
> permit were removed illegaly.
>
> I personally feel that guys who are trying to 'protect' meteroites from
> commerical intrests are doing the greatest disservice to both collectors
AND
> science that can possibly be done. Look at all of the meteorites that
> science has gotten to examine as a direct result of the commerical side of
> meteorites. Not only do meteorite hunters/dealers go out and find this
> material type specimins are provided at no cost to the researchers and in
> some cases labs actually charge a small fee to look at the material
meaning
> they get cash revenue AND free samples to study. what possibly could be a
> better deal than that? As Martin Altman is fond to point out - look at the
> huge expense of the antartic meteorite recovery effort, and compare that
to
> all of the free material that science has had from commerical sources.
seems
> like a no brainer to me.
>
> given the fact that it seems inarguable that the current status quo works,
I
> say it's the duty of everyone involved in this hobby to correct any public
> misconceptions before politicians start pushing for campos to be
> repatirated.
>
>
Received on Mon 10 Jul 2006 05:05:20 AM PDT