[meteorite-list] Fwd: Giving credit where (official) credit is due

From: JKGwilliam <h3chondrite_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2007 10:30:36 -0700
Message-ID: <20070412173047.BWJJ1257.fed1rmmtao107.cox.net_at_fed1rmimpo02.cox.net>

To Bob, Sonny and List,
I know I'm going to open a can of worms with this reply, but I'm
having a hard time keeping quiet. I know it is List policy to not
post personal emails and it appears that Sonny has done just
that. However, I stand in support of Sonny on this issue and find it
offensive that Bob V. would insinuate or speculate that "someone
else" has irritated or offended the Smithsonian Institute to the
point that they are "clamping down" on meteorite hunters.

Bob Verish wrote: (quoted from below)

"...I don't have any of the details but rumor has it that
>somebody who found a bunch of meteorites on public
>lands has offended the hardliners at the Smithsonian
>by claiming that they all belong to the finder, which
>challenges the S.I.s claim of ownership of all finds
>on public lands. As a result, the status quo that we
>in California have been trying so hard to preserve is
>now out the window. The S.I. has up'd the ante. They
>have reacted by requesting a separate type specimen be
>delivered to the S.I. for any find made on public
>lands!
>
>But I don't know how much of this is true, and I don't
>want to spread a false rumor."

If anyone has " offended the hardliners" at the SI, I think we need
to look no farther that Bob Verish's side yard. Claiming that LA001
and LA002 were found in an old crate of agates and jaspers ( see
Meteorite Magazine August 2000) in his side yard is more than likely
the real cause of any rancor or animosity expressed by the
SI. Shorty after Bob's "rediscovery" of his valuable twins, I had a
long talk, in person, with Roy Clark Jr. He was of the very strong
opinion that not only did the two Martian meteorites come from public
lands, but that Bob also knew exactly where they came from. Now,
that's just his opinion, and may or may not be mine as well, but I
can see where that particular incident could possibly be the REAL
issue that could create problems between meteorite hunters and the SI.

Let's pin the tail on the right donkey. Let's give credit where credit is due.

In closing, I will say the following. Any other time I've crossed
swords with Bob V. he's bombarded me with condescending and
derogatory emails. So, to keep the dog at bay, I forewarn Mr. Verish
that I reserve the right to forward to this Meteorite List any emails
he sends to me personally.

Regards,

John Gwilliam





At 08:16 AM 4/12/2007, wahlperry at aol.com wrote:
>Bob ,
>
>Please stop emailing me. I would appreciate it in the future if you
>would share any of your concerns with Met List and not me. If anyone
>in this hobby is going to ruin it for the rest of us it will be you.
>With the rumored phone calls to the BLM and various Universities
>snooping for information I am sure this hobby will suffer.
>
>Sonny
>
>
>
>
>
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>-------
>See what's free at AOL.com.
>Attached Message
>From: bolidechaser at yahoo.com
>To: WAHLPERRY at aol.com
>Subject: Re: Giving credit where (official) credit is due
>Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2007 10:56 PM
>
>Hi Sonny,
>
>That's a very good point.
>
>So good, in fact, that when I brought it up with the
>NomComm (several years ago) that's when they
>instituted having to supply specific data along with a
>request for a provisional number. But if you're still
>not comfortable with that, then by all means, don't
>get provisional numbers for that locality.
>
>But all of this is moot, because there are bigger
>issues, at hand, which require looking at the bigger
>picture. There appears to be some changes in the
>works. I may have to post to the List in order to
>address these broader issues.
>
>I don't have any of the details but rumor has it that
>somebody who found a bunch of meteorites on public
>lands has offended the hardliners at the Smithsonian
>by claiming that they all belong to the finder, which
>challenges the S.I.s claim of ownership of all finds
>on public lands. As a result, the status quo that we
>in California have been trying so hard to preserve is
>now out the window. The S.I. has up'd the ante. They
>have reacted by requesting a separate type specimen be
>delivered to the S.I. for any find made on public
>lands!
>
>But I don't know how much of this is true, and I don't
>want to spread a false rumor.
>
>Bob V.
>
>--- WAHLPERRY at aol.com wrote:
>
>>
>>In a message dated 4/11/2007 12:34:22 P.M. Pacific
>>Daylight Time,
>>bolidechaser at yahoo.com writes:
>>
>>But that's all I'm asking of
>>Sonny; to get the "credit" he deserves by securing
>>it
>>with provisional names and numbers.
>>
>>Otherwise, some other person could make another
>>find
>>from his "study area" unknowingly, and go ahead of
>>him
>>with getting that area named and 001 number
>>approved,
>>and worse, get published before Sonny could get
>>proper
>>credit.
>>
>>That's only one of many good reasons,
>>Bob V.
>>
>>
>>
>>Hi Bob,
>>
>>I appreciate your concern. But lets try this one
>>more time! The reason I do
>>not wish to get a provisional number or name until
>>all of the of the field
>>work is complete is for this reason. Because of the
>>loop hole you figured out
>>many years ago! Not to say you that would do this.
>>Example; Lets say a
>>meteorite hunter has been working an area for a few
>>years with many finds and
>>received provisional numbers on all of his finds.
>>Another is curious about this
>>location. All he would have to do is say he found a
>>couple meteorites from that
>>location and request provisional numbers. The
>>Nomenclature may reply " Ok
>>Bob,your provisional numbers will be 35 and 36"! Bob
>>never hunted this
>>location, has just found out that 34 meteorites
>>were recovered from this location.
>>What a better resource for gaining information
>>regarding a new location.
>>
>>This is a problem we have to address as a meteorite
>>hunting community. I do
>>not know the answer. We should come up with an idea
>>on how to solve this
>>problem. What the current system in place does is
>>give confirmation of first
>>meteorite found and credit to the finder.
>>Unfortunately it can also be a source
>>of information to someone digging for data. It is
>>not the fault of the
>>Nomenclature but a system that is in place. This is
>>the reason I choose to wait on
>>submitting information.
>>
>>Sonny
>>
>>
>>
>>************************************** See what's
>>free at http://www.aol.com.
>
>
>
>
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's
>free from AOL at AOL.com.
>______________________________________________
>Meteorite-list mailing list
>Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Received on Thu 12 Apr 2007 01:30:36 PM PDT