[meteorite-list] [IMCA] Update 2 - Wilbur Wash (correction)

From: Ted Bunch <tbear1_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2010 14:09:56 -0700
Message-ID: <4D0E74A4.5020103_at_cableone.net>

Dear Greg and Eric--Your stones were classified and submitted and we
have discussed this problem. Greg your stone is NWA 5511; Eric, your
stones are NWA 5440 and 5441, this you already know. These are part of
MIA III or missing in action. As an example of the problems classifiers
have had and to some degree still have, I give below the MIA II list
(names of individuals are deleted). Most of these were finally cleaned
up by the present Editor, Mike Weisberg, whose efforts in this matter
are greatly appreciated. With respect to the N. American
classifications, those in question, in addition to at least 10 others,
were sent off to the Editor in charge a long time ago. Inquires were
made several times with no response. After significant time has pasted,
I no longer inquire or re-submit.

We do not get paid for classifications, any monies received go to the
University for instrument time. You, Greg and Eric, were never charged.
I do not submit an invoice until official approvals are received. The
Editor, members of the NOM COM, and most classifiers that I know do not
receive compensation either. We have rather thankless jobs and put up
with inefficiencies and abuses.

Because of these problems, we posted on our NAU web site that we do not
classify any more for the general public. Many of you,
  make money from classifier's efforts, It costs me about $3K per year
to classify meteorites.


>
> November 12, 2008

>
> Some ?missing? submissions that have occurred over the last couple of years and are still MIA and I am NOT HAPPY! I have addressed these issues several times.
>
> 1. Originally submitted in Nov. 2006, then again in Jan. 2007: NWA 2682, 2683, 2684, 2685, 2686, 2687, 2688, 2689, 2691, 2692, 2693, 2694, 2695, 2696, 2095. Our original submission in Nov. was not put into the ?proper? format that was posted on Oct. 26.
>
> 2. April 2007 submissions: NWA 4650 through NWA 4664
>
> 3. Others: NWA 4551, 4541, 4284, 4448, 4544, 4545, 4549. 4409, 4410, 4411, 4412,
> 4413, 4414, 4284, 2909.
>
> 5. Submitted in Nov. 2006, again in Jan. 2007: Dhofar 1127, 1128, 1130,
> 1131, 1136, 1139, 1144, 1148, 1154, 1156, 1168, 1170, 1176, 1178, 1181, 1226, 1232,
> 1243, 1250, 1251, 1261, 1272, 1429, 1430, 1431. 1432. Same as for #1. Now official.
>
> 6. And most amazing of all ? I submitted an EXCEL sheet of those listed below, some are on Jeff?s web site (blue),

  others are not (red) and only some are on the tracking list (blue).
>
> Jeff?s & tracking sites: NWA 4429, 4431, 4432, 4433, 4434, 4436, 4437, 4440, 4443.
>
> Missing everywhere: NWA 4430, 4435, 4438, 4439, 4441, 4442, 4444,
> 4445, 4446.
>
> 7. One lunar, Jiddat al Harasis (#1004) ? now official as 348.
>
> 8. And, 12 submitted for N. America a couple of years ago and one NEA submitted long ago before your tenure.
>
> These were sent directly to either BLANK. BLANK or to you at the and copied to at least one other.

The N. American items went to BLANK, several times.
>
> Ted

>
Eric and Greg, if you want to continue discussion about your stones,
please do it off line. I have seen enough pissing contests on the LIST
and do not want to be part of one. My apology to you and others who are
in a "neglected" position, we are not perfect and have made mistakes,
but I do not apologize for issues out of my control. FYI, I have
prepared another MIA list and will send it to Mike after critical
classifications for LPSC abstracts have been handled by Mike and the NOM
COM, i. e., after 1-10-11. These classifications have priority over the
general public requests at this time and I do not want to clog up Mike
any more than he already is.

You might inquire to Tony Irving, Allan Rubin, Randy Korotev, among
other classifiers, about problems they had/have. The system is not
perfect and improvements have been made, more should and can be made.

Ted Bunch


>


On 12/19/10 10:47 AM, Greg Catterton wrote:
> Seeing as how this was mentioned... Ted has also lost 2 samples of mine.
> A very unusual black chondrite? and another LL5/6 Polymict breccia.
> Its been over 18 months. I was told the thin sections were lost... I know of two others who have had issues with him losing material. I too have had little or no email replies.
>
> Greg Catterton
> www.wanderingstarmeteorites.com
> IMCA member 4682
> On Ebay: http://stores.shop.ebay.com/wanderingstarmeteorites
> On Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/WanderingStarMeteorites
>
>
> --- On Sun, 12/19/10, Eric Twelker<twelker at alaska.net> wrote:
> 551
>> From: Eric Twelker<twelker at alaska.net>
>> Subject: Re: [IMCA] Update 2 - Wilbur Wash (correction)
>> To: impactika at aol.com
>> Cc: star_wars_collector at yahoo.com, imca at imcamail.de
>> Date: Sunday, December 19, 2010, 12:41 PM
>> Hi IMCA
>>
>> This reply will divert a bit from the
>> Wilber Wash issue, but I think it is related. Lamesa,
>> Tahoka, and Wellman (f) have all been mentioned in this
>> thread and their lack of publication may be related to
>> Wilbur Wash. A large number of meteorites (including
>> the prior three) that were classified by Ted Bunch have
>> "gone missing." This includes some of mine and a much
>> larger number of other meteorites--perhaps approaching a
>> hundred--from other dealers. The inclination in the
>> dealer community has been to blame Ted Bunch. Because
>> Ted has been mostly unresponsive or erratic in replies to
>> inquiries, he seems a likely party to blame.
>>
>> That said, McCartney did manage to get
>> one response out of Ted. He blamed a researcher from
>> the University of New Mexico that used to sit on
>> NomCom. I asked Jeff Grossman about the accusation,
>> but he declined to answer. Something's going on here
>> and some people know about it but are unwilling to
>> share. Apparently a large number of classifications
>> and samples have been lost and this fact is being swept
>> under the rug or worse. It doesn't seem that anything
>> is being done. In the meantime collectors and others
>> are incorporating pieces into their collections. I
>> will add that this is the IMCA's business as at least some
>> of the people involved are IMCA members and may be acting in
>> ways that are questionable.
>>
>> Eric Twelker
>>
>>
>>
>> On Dec 18, 2010, at 10:54 PM, impactika at aol.com
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I agree.
>>>
>>> The lack of a proper find location is not enough to
>> prevent a meteorite from being classified. All the
>> SAHXXXXX meteorites, from the Labennes, lack complete
>> coordinates and they have been classified and published.
>>> So, what else?
>>> The expert who did the classification, Dr. Karner,
>> knows his job, he is not new at this and the Un. of New
>> Mexico has done classification for a very long time, so I
>> would not expect problems with the classification process
>> itself.
>>> So what else?
>>> Anne Black
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Greg Catterton<star_wars_collector at yahoo.com>
>>> To: IMCA Mail List<imca at imcamail.de>
>>> Sent: Sat, Dec 18, 2010 8:38 am
>>> Subject: Re: [IMCA] Update 2 - Wilbur Wash
>> (correction)
>>>
>>> That does not sound too proper, or correct from my
>> experience and sounds like the "story" provided by Joe about
>> his Mifflin find (which the facts there were not accurate
>> also)
>>>
>>> While it may just be a name, I dont personally like
>> the fact that data was lied about or corrupted by the
>> finder. To use the claim that it was to keep the location
>> secret is not a valid excuse, Jack and Whetstone clearly
>> showed that location is not needed to get approval. There is
>> no rule concerning "No exact location, no
>> classification" that I have been made aware of - again, see
>> Whetstone as the location has still not been made available
>> and its official.
>>>
>>> Most likely, the type deposit was not provided
>> therefor the material remains unofficial.
>>> Just my thoughts and opinions from my experience with
>> testing and classification... for the record, I had NWA 5799
>> tested, approved and published in less then 4 months and
>> know of many others whos material did not take the time
>> this, Tahoka or Zunhua has taken.
>>>
>>> Perhaps there is more going on, but to get an official
>> name, its not really that hard - even if it is just
>> provisional.
>>>
>>> Hope everyone is doing well!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Greg Catterton
>>> www.wanderingstarmeteorites.com
>>> IMCA member 4682
>>> On Ebay: http://stores.shop.ebay.com/wanderingstarmeteorites
>>> On Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/WanderingStarMeteorites
>>>
>>> --- On Sat, 12/18/10, Davio L. Ribeca<fishsealevel at comcast.net>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> From: Davio L. Ribeca<fishsealevel at comcast.net>
>>> Subject: [IMCA] Update 2 - Wilbur Wash (correction)
>>> To: "IMCA Mail List"<imca at imcamail.de>
>>> Date: Saturday, December 18, 2010, 6:18 AM
>>>
>>>
>>> *Posted w/ permission
>>>
>>> Hi Anne,
>>> That's pretty much all that I know. I can tell you
>> that after the analysis the meteorite laid around for a long
>> while because of personnel changes at the University. Also,
>> Wilbur Wash was first name given because the discoverer did
>> not want to reveal the exact location of the find. It took
>> some time (after the discoverer thoroughly searched the true
>> location area) before the true find location (ranchland in
>> Lochiel) was given to the University. No exact location, no
>> classification procedures is the rule, I guess. The exact
>> coordinates were eventually given to the University.
>>>
>>> The return of the paper work to the University, and
>> whatever else the University sends to the name givers
>> (naming committee), and the new name may occur
>> simultaneously, I don't know. Anyway, I'm somewhat satisfied
>> with the update. I'll keep my eyes wide open to see if all
>> this comes to pass. I plan on contacting Dr. Karner after
>> the holidays to secure more information. I'm an old retired
>> mathematics/science admin. educator, maybe he'll take the
>> time to help me. The finder is Carl Esparza, who was very
>> helpful and kind. He sold the meteorite main mass to Michael
>> Cottingham. The main mass now resides with a person named
>> Jason Utas, who I also plan on contacting. If you find out
>> more please share. This was an interesting investigation.
>>>
>>> Thank you for all your help and concern. I'm hoping my
>> wife, Frances, and I can meet you in person someday, soon.
>>>
>>> Ciao,
>>> Davio R.
>>> IMCA Member 4050
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Inline Attachment Follows-----
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> IMCA mailing list
>>> IMCA at imcamail.de
>>> http://lists.imcamail.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/imca
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> IMCA mailing list
>>>
>>> IMCA at imcamail.de
>>> http://lists.imcamail.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/imca
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> IMCA mailing list
>>> IMCA at imcamail.de
>>> http://lists.imcamail.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/imca
>>
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> IMCA mailing list
> IMCA at imcamail.de
> http://lists.imcamail.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/imca
>
Received on Sun 19 Dec 2010 04:09:56 PM PST