[meteorite-list] A Curator Replies

From: Martin Altmann <altmann_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2009 18:49:19 +0200
Message-ID: <000e01ca00b5$34b57bf0$177f2a59_at_name86d88d87e2>

Hi Peter,

me again...

>Using the data that Martin gives in his email, it is clear that there is a
>clear correlation between the increase in the number of finds coming onto
>the market and the imposition of the restrictive law.

There are even more impressive figures.

You remember Libya, the DaGs, HaHs ect.

In 6 years there are recorded 1048 finds.
Then the hunters stayed away.
In the following 7 last years in Libya not more than
45 meteorites were still found.


A similar decline we would face in Oman, if the authorities there would
enforce in a stronger way the new regulations there,
perhaps not to that extend, cause the Suisse-Omani-teams are there at work,
but of course they can't find that much as before was found.
I gave here once the comparison of the figures of Lunars and Martian found
in the same time between "private" & "official" hunts in Oman.
I don't want to repeat them here, for not being misunderstood, that I would
have something against the Suisse-Oman-teams,
on contrary.


On the NWA sector we face already the beginning decline since Algeria had
introduced new regularities.

And currently a group of scientists is eager to introduce similar laws in
Morocco.
NWA- has a larger dimension, as there a multiple more of meteorites are
found than in Antarctica, Australia and Oman together.

If such laws will come in force, then it's easy to predict, that we will
have then soon a situation like in Australia.
And that all in all the short period with the amazing find rates and the
most important finds will be definetely history.

That's why I asked yesterday, what the goals should be.
Getting meteorites for research
or preserve the meteorites as national heritage.

If one introduce protectionist laws in the desert countries,
Then there won't be almost no finds anymore, there won't be any thousands
finds per year anymore, and almost all of the few dozens finds still made
then will be weathered chondrites.
In turn, this very few finds could be saved better as national heritages.

So I wanted to know, what is more desirable for the "official" side.

Cheers!
Martin



-----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht-----
Von: meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com
[mailto:meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com] Im Auftrag von Peter
Davidson
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 9. Juli 2009 13:41
An: James Baxter
Cc: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
Betreff: Re: [meteorite-list] A Curator Replies

James

Thanks for the welcome and for the message of support.

In list such as this, it is often difficult to get a balanced view because
there are obviously many, many more collectors and dealers than there are
curators. But that does not mean our voices should not be heard.

I agree that I did not answer some of Martin's points, and in particular his
analysis of the Australian and American finds. Using the data that Martin
gives in his email, it is clear that there is a clear correlation between
the increase in the number of finds coming onto the market and the
imposition of the restrictive law. This is a perfectly valid argument. I did
not raise any counter-argument because I accept the figures are true and I
therefore cannot dispute these with a different set of figures that show a
different position. This situation exists in many areas of life and is no
less true of the mineral market, than it is of the meteorite market.
The price of minerals or meteorites is rising all the time, and as prices
rise, so the number of collectors and dealers that are active rises. The
result is a steep rise in the material coming onto the market. This is fine
as long as the market can support this situation, but as everyone knows, the
property market upon which our banks build up their empires eventually
collapsed and thus we have arrived at the current financial crisis
(simplistic I know).

Peter Davidson
Curator of Minerals
 
National Museums Collection Centre
National Museums Scotland
242 West Granton Road
Edinburgh
EH5 1JA
Phone: +44 131 247 4283
p.davidson at nms.ac.uk
www.nms.ac.uk
 
 

-----Original Message-----
From: James Baxter [mailto:jbaxter112 at pol.net]
Sent: 08 July 2009 17:09
To: Peter Davidson
Cc: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] A Curator Replies

Hello Peter,

Welcome to the list. Thanks for your contribution.

It is nice to get a curator's perspective. I'm sure most if not all list
members are envious of your job and support your work.

I do feel you have not answered Martin's central argument that if laws
prohibiting export were not in place your Australian colleagues would have
far more material to study through dealer and collector contributions and
trades.

As a humble private collector I like to think I am supporting (or at least
not depriving) the public institutions' collections. I know many of the
dealers I support with my purchases have donated or traded large amounts of
material to public institutions. This may be simple rationalization, but I
do feel Martin's numbers regarding finds in the US compared to Australia
imply that we collectors are likely increasing rather than decreasing the
amount of material available to these institutions. I would love to hear
your thoughts about whether you feel this argument is valid.

Best Wishes,
Jim Baxter


----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Davidson" <P.Davidson at nms.ac.uk>
To: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
Sent: Wednesday, July 8, 2009 4:02:08 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific
Subject: [meteorite-list] A Curator Replies

This is my first posting on this list - please be gentle with me. I have
only been on the list a matter of a week or so and I seemed to have walked
into a veritable storm. I would like to share my views with you as a
curator. Please forgive this rather long mail.

 

Taking a posting from Martin Altmann dated 7th July as my starting point,
here goes.

 

I have never heard a law being described as "exotic". Do you mean idiotic?

 

I can in no way speak on behalf of all curators, far less Australian ones. I
can only give you my own viewpoint but I do know many curators from
Australia, mostly mineralogists, and please believe me when I tell you they
are fine people and not the narrow-minded, nationalistic people hinted at in
a number of e-mails. I also noted that Martin Altmann stated that everybody
on the list was a "lousy layman" which is not only patently untrue but just
a little sexist. But I digress.

 

Curators are every bit as dedicated to their collections as private
collectors are. We are not faceless bureaucrats (or similar) existing in
some Kafkaesque nightmare world hidebound by rules, and seeking to restrict
everyone else by creating a spider's web of red tape to trap the unwary.
That notion is as ridiculous to me as the presumption that all dealers
(minerals or meteorites) are shady and unscrupulous. As a curator at a
National Museum, I am obligated by law (yes, I know!) to preserve and
protect the collections of the museum and by extension, the nation. I choose
to do this. I work in the museum because I want to. Every curator I have met
shares with me a love of the specimens that they curate. We also share a
passionate believe that it is our duty to bring our collections to the
notice and attention of the public, and to make them available to
researchers and other curators. Believe me when I tell you that museum
curators/conservators are not well paid. We do it for love - well mostly.
When I joined the museum in 1975, I also had to undertake never to start and
build up my own collection. The collections of the museum ARE my
collections.

 

I also feel that Martin overstates the influence scientist have at
governmental level. Yes, some scientists are asked to advise on certain
matters, but in the end it is the politician that decides. My observations
of this hated group, politicians that is, leads me to surmise that if some
short term political advantage can be gained by appealing to the masses, fed
to satedness by a largely right-wing populist press (the tabloids in the
UK), then they will always take that course of action, no matter what the
consequences are. This very often goes against the advice of
scientists/curators and negates many decades of good interaction between the
public and private sectors. As I mineralogist, I am painfully aware that the
market for display quality specimens has now passed beyond the reach of
publicly-funded museums. The meteorite market is no different.

 

Nonetheless, as a curator at a National Museum, and I hope you can
understand this point of view, there is a duty to collect for the Nation
everything we can in order that we can research, interpret and explain to
the people of Scotland, its historical, sociological, artistic and
scientific heritage. The question raised by many contributors to the list
is: should meteorites fall into that category? Clearly the Australian
Government thought so, and so did the UK Government in the 1960's when
legislation was introduced to Parliament but never passed into law.

 

We already do our utmost to protect other geological sites. This policy is
well intentioned and it can be argued that "fixed" geological outcrops,
either mineralogical or palaeontological are a finite resource. If
unscrupulous collectors plunder the site and remove all the material, then
it is lost forever. Meteorites are different in that they are not "fixed"
but are random in the sense that they can fall at any time, in any place.
However, from my point of view as a curator, ought I to have the desire to
possess in the National Collection, a sample of each of the four Scottish
falls? I do have that desire and the fact that the museum doesn't possess
all Scottish meteorites leads to a feeling of both consternation and
frustration. But it is a situation I accept

 

Why don't you go and collect them yourself I hear you asking. Well, the
short answer is - we would love to. We do go on collecting trips, but these
are limited by budgetary constraints primarily, but also by the general
workload faced by all curators. This is why we have tried to build a network
of private collectors across the country that will work with is to the
benefit of both parties. But the inescapable fact is that the market in
geological specimens has moved onto a level which museums find it difficult
to operate in. We rely to a large extent on donations or possibly exchange.
Private collectors know that they can sell their specimens on the open
market and receive a much better price than a museum can offer.

 

I was heartened to hear that some private collectors and dealers are in
favour of a greater collaboration with scientists and museums. All of us who
love meteorites need to continue to work closely. We require the raw
material to undertake research, and this gets fed back to the public through
our publications. Scientists do find new information in old specimens; we
would not be scientists if we did not constantly search for new data. But I
would just like to finish with this thought. Many young people are familiar
with meteorites through the media and the internet, but for many, the only
opportunity they get to see and touch them is through museums and their
curators. Many indeed of the list members may have been inspired to go and
collect by seeing meteorites in a museum.

 

Martin. Please do not take this as a personal attack. I find your e-mails
well agued and thoughtful. Indeed it was your email that inspired me to pen
this message. I have spoken about this in other lists, in other places. The
meteorites will continue to fall, long after we are all gone. There should
be enough for everyone.

 

Don't forget us!

 

All donations gratefully accepted.

Peter Davidson
Curator of Minerals
?
National Museums Collection Centre
National Museums Scotland
242 West Granton Road
Edinburgh
EH5 1JA
Phone: +44?131 247 4283
p.davidson at nms.ac.uk
www.nms.ac.uk
?
?


Garden Detectives. Unearthing nature's little secrets. 26 Jun - 27 Sep.
Admission free: www.nms.ac.uk/garden

National Museums Scotland, Scottish Charity, No. SC 011130

This communication is intended for the addressee(s) only. If you are not the
addressee please inform the sender and delete the email from your system.
The statements and opinions expressed in this message are those of the
author and do not necessarily reflect those of National Museums Scotland.
This message is subject to the Data Protection Act 1998 and Freedom of
Information (Scotland) Act 2002. No liability is accepted for any harm that
may be caused to your systems or data by this message.
______________________________________________
http://www.meteoritecentral.com
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list


Garden Detectives. Unearthing nature?s little secrets. 26 Jun ? 27 Sep.
Admission free: www.nms.ac.uk/garden

National Museums Scotland, Scottish Charity, No. SC 011130

This communication is intended for the addressee(s) only. If you are not the
addressee please inform the sender and delete the email from your system.
The statements and opinions expressed in this message are those of the
author and do not necessarily reflect those of National Museums Scotland.
This message is subject to the Data Protection Act 1998 and Freedom of
Information (Scotland) Act 2002. No liability is accepted for any harm that
may be caused to your systems or data by this message.
______________________________________________
http://www.meteoritecentral.com
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Received on Thu 09 Jul 2009 12:49:19 PM PDT