AW: AW: AW: [meteorite-list] Empty quarter expedition

From: Martin Altmann <altmann_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Fri Mar 17 13:26:22 2006
Message-ID: <00db01c64969$007996c0$936cfea9_at_name86d88d87e2>

Hi Stan and list,

I couldn't see my reply on the list - there were some problems obviously...

I copy it again.
Martin

.......
My compliments too,

that you answered to my email.

In my eyes you are missing some essential points.
In the metioned article your assertion was made concerning solely the Oman.
May I quote again?
" Drawing on his experience with meteor fragments in Oman where he set up a
program to recover fragments from the desert, he (Pfof.Matter) said that the
program had recovered meteorite fragments from the moon and even one from
Mars. Collectors though, he said, had robbed the desert of its heritage
simply for money and not for scientific research."

With this statement and this word choice ("robbed") you are not only
implying that those collectors acted unethically, but also that they acted
illegally.

I have here right on my desk a paper issued by the ministry of industry and
commerce, Muscat, giving the permit for export of the stones, which were
presented and inspected there before.
I simply won't accept, that you spuriously accuse the finder of those
meteorites, who cared for the legal export, to be a criminal.
That is completely unbearable.

Your specialization in sedimentology and geochemistry, the fact, that you
never took part in a meteorite expedition in Oman and your response now is a
portent for me, that you supposedly don't have the insight, what exactly was
taking place in Oman concerning meteorites.
But I gladly will contribute some explanations for you.

Until 2 years ago export permits were issued for the finds of the collectors
by the authorities of Oman. So you might not be surprised anylonger, that
meteorites from Oman were available on the collectors market, if I remember
right e.g. Dhofar 001 was found in 1999 by a Russian expedition. This
partially explains your point (1) You may not approve to the fact, that the
Omani didn't percieve their meteorites to be a natural heritage worthy of
protection, but to deduce from this lack of awareness, that the hunters or
collectors, call them like you want, would be criminals is inadmissible.
That meteorites are no subject to national laws (e.g. to mining laws etc) is
the normal case, as meteorites are a so exceedingly rare, that in general
they didn't attract interest at all, nor was cared for a special legal
reglementation for them, most probably because of the small volume of the
finds (we are talking about a few tons worldwide in the last 10 years) and
the monetary neglibility of that, what you may imagine to be the private
meteorite market.
(Remember e.g. the discussions risen about the legal status of the recent
Neuschwanstein fall).

Funny enough it were the activities of the private hunters, mainly in the
Mahgreb countries and the appearance of the NWA meteorites on the market
during the last 4 years, which rose the awareness in several nations, that
meteorites do exist at all and that they have to be protected by
corresponding laws.
Exceptions here were Australia and Canada, Namibia (because of Gibeon too, I
guess, since 2001 the export is forbidden).

I ask myself, why the Suisse universities with there good cooperations with
Oman since 30 years, failed through this long period to advise the
authorities of Oman to protect their meteorites from being brought out from
the country.

So again. Call the teams which are collecting nowadays not respecting the
new situation or those individuals, who never cared before for export
permits, looters, but avoid such polemic simplifications.

Secondly:
We have a fundamentally different situation with the meteorites from Oman
compared to the NWA-meteorites.
The Omani meteorites are collected by persons, who perform an excellent
field work. Each stone is photographed in situ, the coordinates are taken by
GPS, the number of the fragments is noted (some note also details about the
geology around the find site), the date of find is recorded as well as the
exact weight of all stones, and a provisional field number for further
processing is conferred.
Thus exactly the modus operandi which the Swiss-Omani teams are applying
and, if you want, which are analoguos to the proceeding of the Antarctic
teams.
A huge volume of data was consequently assembled and was made accessible to
research. Strewnfields could be reconstructed, leading to further finds
(like e.g. the Martian of the Suisse team). All in all an effort, which the
Suisse team alone couln't have accomplished.
By the way the most successful team in Oman ever, was lead by skilled
geologists, employed by the Vernadsky institute, one of the leading
institutions in meteoritics.

Furthermore by no means are the finds from Oman lost for research.
It is of vital concern for the commercial oriented teams, that they get
there stones classified, as it increases the value of the material
remarkably. So you'll find, that grosso modo all Omani finds were properly
classified (or are under classification), even the most weathered ordinary
equilibrated chondrites and we have here a much more transparent situation
as e.g. in highly developed countries like the USA, if I'm looking e.g. at
the Nevada finds, which are partially sold without coordinates and
unclassified.

And if I'm allowed to remark, each classification requires a deposit of
material reserved for further research.
Thus the field work of the commercial collectors was nothing less than a
remarkable contribution to science.

Thirdly).

You write "More important however to me is the quality of the research
carried out on the material."
Exactely! Because of the brilliant work of those robbers, who convey all
their finds to the institutions for classifications with all field data, a
flood of papers and articles about the Omani meteorites resulted and is
still in progress and in contrast to the Sahara finds, practically no Omani
find is lost for science and your esteemed colleagues and luminaries from
the best renowned institutes, do have munitions for decades!
Please check the Bulletins and the article databases, who and where all-over
published about Dhofar finds. I don't have to go further in details here,
nor do I believe, that you as a sedimentologist would doubt the skills of
the leading specialists in the field of meteorites worldwide.
And as we know of the limited personnel resources of universities, you don't
have to forget, that with the distribution of the Dhofar meteorites to
several institutes, the progress of retrieving results and the cognitions
are enormously accelerated. (well, I know that in the world of universities
the cornucopia of time is inexhaustible, but imagine how long it would take,
if only the university of Z?rich and Bern would have to analyse let's say
4000 different meteorites).

Some remarks to Wabar, which you brought up.
I don't know the situation in Saudi Arabia, your accusation in that
interview was concerning the situation in Oman.
If it's illegal to search or to export meteorites from Saudi Arabia and
someone tried it, then it was a criminal act, no question, though I see no
coherence with your incorrect statement concerning Oman.
That samples of Wabar are available is not a reason for perturbation.
You have to know that meteorites were always traded and sold, namely from
the middle of the 19th century, when it was a matter of national reputation
to amass a collection with as much different localities as possible.
And also today professional meteorite dealers are in touch with museums and
institutional collections trading their material versus historical finds and
falls (and even donating specimens) and additionally they acquire specimens
from old private collections, from those times, when these admonished
localities were dealt without any restrictions.
So you will find e.g. Gibeon everywhere offered, although it is forbidden
since years to export it, you will find the Canadian meteorites like
Bruderheim or Springwater and those Australian meteorites for which nowadays
no export permits won't be issued anylonger, like Karoonda, Barratta and so
on.
Those are not robbed, they simply stem from times, where nobody had an idea,
that it could be a kind of a natural heritage.
Wabar is said to be firstly recovered long before Philby (1933) in 1863.
Fits well together with the luminescence dating, recently carried out, which
suggests an terrestrial age of 289 ? 46 years. Pieces of Wabar were offered
for sale already in 1885.
So just ask the offeror, where he got his specimen from.

To point 4)
..and there are still a large number waiting to be recovered. I don't have
to iterate my thoughts from above.
Personally I never read or heard about, that any of those countries with the
strictest regimentations for meteorites ever postulated to give their
meteorites back. Omani meteorites are meanwhile spread over many different
institutional collections, but to demonstrate a sign of goodwill, you may
encourage the museum in Bern to repatriate those samples from Oman, which
were not found by the Suisse expeditions.

And we could discuss about the status of meteorites in general.
They aren't essential natural resources like treasures of the soil, they
have no economical significance and no inherent monetary value.
Nor are they comparable to archeological artifacts, which are a cultural
heritage. Nor do they impart a region or a place a special uniqueness like
natural monuments. In fact they are so unimpressive, that one has to search
a long time until one comes up against one and only a few specialists are
able to identify them in the field. And if not some of those hunters once
decided to look in the arid deserts for them, nobody, including the Suisse
universities would even know, that the desert are larded with them; they
simply would rot and weather to pieces as they did the aeons before too. Nor
are they useful for the local people (and the removing wouldn't mean a loss
comparable to the bio-piracy, you mentioned). Nor do they have any practical
avail.
They tend to fall from the sky, equally distributed all over the globe.
The only quality they own is, that they have a scientific value.

To point 5)
I am not a lawyer, but the legal status of the Antarctic meteorites is until
now is not straight or clarified.
" Why do you think this action was necessary??".
Simply because of the Antarctic Treaty System of 1959, which attests, that
no signer has any territorial claims and which prohibit any activities to
exploit the resources there and the special imperative to avoid any
encroachment into the Antarctic ecosystem.
As the hunting - the term "hunting", to tick off the point with the ungood
connotation, I quote from the ANSMET homepage -, the removal of meteorites
and the activities necessary for the recovery programs violated the
Antarctic Treaty System, thus a special regularisation for the Antarctic
meteorites was necessary.
(To avoid any shock experiences: Before coming into force a little material
of a few Antarctic meteorites were swapped with private persons and
sometimes you'll find them available for sale).

The danger, that private spoilers would foray meteorites in Antarctica was
at those time certainly not a decisive factor. In the 70ies the number of
meteorite aficionados was very limited and meteorites were very cheap.
And still today the immense costs it would take to finance a private
expedition to the blue ice fields, is out of all proportions to the
commercial returns.
(Btw. With a minute fraction of the means spent fort he Antarctic programs,
the institutes could have bought all Sahara and Omani finds, which were ever
brought to light and they would have got it delivered right to the door.
That's why I regard those permanent statements about preserving the
meteorites for research, the urgence to do so and insinuations of that kind,
which you expressed in that article, as, pardon me the harsh expression, but
I can't find a more accurately one, as highly bigoted).

That you have a totally wrong impression about the commercial market of
meteorites, be that as it may, many collectors have similar imaginations.
We are talking about 1000 meteorite collectors worldwide and a handful of
institutional collections, most with a very limited budget, being able to
purchase only small samples of a few grams.
The overall amount of recovered material in Oman and in Sahara during the
times of the desert rush of the last 6-7 years doesn't exceed a few tonnes.
If one has had the idea to buy up ALL desert finds at once, I estimate, that
one wouldn't have had to spend more than 2-4 mio USD.
(Btw to resell those finds again, one would need more than 100 years, so
small is the collector's scene).
That's what you talking about. Any comparison to other fields like raw
materials, precious stones, artifacts, minerals, fossils is ridiculous and
that's the main reason, why many countries were not aware of protecting
their meteorites.
(I have to remark, that the private team illegally collecting meteorite,
which was arrested in Oman last year, was released again without a trail, as
the issue was decided to be a case of exiguity).


"The unprofessional statement concerning publishing in GeoArabia.."
was exactly the trap I planned you to step in - Many thanks that you did so
- for you to see how it feels, if one is attacked in public by unqualified
statements.
(Although for me it's still highly strange, that a person is talking about
ethics and morality, but has published in a place, where the mentioned
corporations are highlighted a "platinum sponsors", if I think to the
horrible devastations some of those firms cause in the Niger delta,
depriving the local population completely of their life resource, even not
flinching from murder or the refusal to employ double-walled oil-tankers,
wherever it still isn't mandatory, which was in past the reason for the most
impressive environmental disaters. All in all more grave crimes, than to
legally export some stones from desert, in which nobody is interested in.
I wouldn't be so bold...)

To find back to a conciliable end.
" You measure the success of collecting in grams"
Not at all, reread my mail.
I chose , because the Suisse teams were so rightly proud of their
Shergottite and Lunar find, Moon and Mars as example for the skills and
efficiency of the other teams. Explicitly I geared to the number of
different Marses and Moons they recovered, supposed that with the number of
rare types similar ratios will to be lined out and finally complimented them
for the quality of their finds.
All I did to demonstrate that they are well trained and skilled, also to
identify uncommon types (and if e.g. a lunaite hasn't any crust anymore
left, it is extremely difficult also for experts, who handled similar
material before in the lab, to tell it apart from terrestrial stones), that
all in all they were more successful and efficient than the Suisse teams - I
heard about other official expeditions from scientists e.g. in Sahara, which
had to be cancelled, simply because they found no meteorites, why afterwards
the commercial hunters had in the very same fields remarkable finds - with
the aim to animate you instead of disavow those hunters to invite them to
join the Suisse team. With an adequate payment for them, it would be a
perfect win/win situation, cause the expeditions most probably would have
better results and those greedy depredators wouldn't have to sell their
finds at the doubled kg-price of Emmentaler cheese anylonger.

Sorry for my remarks being somewhat longish, for most members of this forum
those issues are known, obvious and evident (and I presume that e.g. Beda
Hofmann wouldn't share the perspective of Prof.Matter neither), but as here
on this list are also several new collectors, I thought it was necessary to
avoid them getting wrong impressions.

Regards,
Martin Altmann


-----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht-----
Von: stan . [mailto:laser_maniac_at_hotmail.com]
Gesendet: Freitag, 17. M?rz 2006 03:05
An: altmann_at_meteorite-martin.de; amatter@geo.unibe.ch;
meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
Betreff: RE: AW: AW: [meteorite-list] Empty quarter expedition



> 5) Collecting of meteorites and of any other samples in Antarctica
>falls under the Antarctic Treaty and has to be approved by the mission
>leader. All samples must be listed and recorded. Despite of this the US
>legislators saw the need to pass a bill which declares unauthorized
>possession and trading of meteorites as illegal. Why do you think this
>action was necessary??


if you look at the legislation in question you will see that the ban was
passed because the us had signed but not yet ratified the antarctic treaty,
so it was not in legal force. furthermore the legislation does not "declares

unauthorized possession and trading of meteorites as illegal" in any way
shape or form. it simply states that minerlogic activities must be for
research, not commerical. there is no prohibitation of private ownership of
antarctic meteorites, not any body that 'authorizes' collection. should a
private party wish to collect metoeirtes from antarctica they are free do do

so per the previously mentioned conditions.
Received on Thu 16 Mar 2006 09:17:54 PM PST