[meteorite-list] Meteorite hunting (LAWS) by Country

From: Martin Altmann <altmann_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2011 14:47:48 +0200
Message-ID: <001e01cbf77d$7f768ec0$7e63ac40$_at_de>

Hi Roman,

meteorites are so scarce, that it is very unlikely that in many states a
special legislation does exist for them at all.
Currently you have more than 200 nations on the globe. Most of them are
subdivided into smaller administrative units with own legal regulations.
So you would have to check, which laws do exist, you would have to interpret
existing laws, which weren?t made for meteorites, whether they can be
overstretched to cover meteorites and you would have to prove, whether
different laws override each other.

Simple examples:
Analog.. in my little home state, the free state of Bavaria, it is forbidden
to remove any artifact from the soil. So normally you'd say, anyone praising
an artifact for sale, telling he found it in Bavaria, would act illegally. -
Well, but we have another law, that despite the act of removing the artifact
from the soil is illegal, nevertheless the finder becomes legal owner of the
artifact.
Drive 50 miles into another federal state, there you have a different
legislation, there the state is owner of such a find.
HUhuhu, the dimensions, because some try to lump meteorites together with a
artifacts under one law: Per year the chief of the archeological office
estimates, that more than 1 million of artifacts are lost due to this
regulation in Bavaraia. Meteorites found per year in Bavaria: 0.02.
Therefore we don't have a law for meteorites, the constitution interdicts to
create laws for single cases.

Other example - Neuschwanstein III, there the court decided not only about
the question about the ownership landowner versus finder - which concerns
whole Austria, but also whether the finder was legally allowed to pick up
that stone. That was another, an environmental law, only valuable for the
federal state of Tyrol. And there he was allowed to do so, cause the stone
had a certain size only and he didn't use heavy equipment to remove it from
the soil. So if the stone would have been larger, who knows...
And anyway it was a court of first instance, a court of the next instance
could have come to a different sentence. (But finder and landowner came to
an agreement outside of court).
Austria is as small as Indiana, but has 9 federal states.

So you see Roman, where the problem is (if one can call it so, cause we're
talking with meteorites still about weird trivia). You would have to check
Himalayas of regulations and laws, whether there are some, whether there are
none, you would have to interpret laws, which is at best and in case the job
of a court, you would have to do that for different questions: Landowner
vs. Finder. Hunting, Trespassing, Removal, Export. State versus individuals,
ect. pp. - and that for thousands and thousands of regulations of thousands
of administrative territories and that all considering different legal
systems, you have some which work with precedences, others which make
decisions on a case base...and so on. Also in some cases you will have laws,
which are in contradiction to the constitution of the respective country,
hence in the case of application not valuable....

And in the end you wouldn't despite all that not be able to give legally
binding information.
It's everything else than trivial.
You saw it that even Schmitt&Barristers, lawyers, failed to give correct
information about relatively simple looking regulations.

And all in all, Roman - we shouldn't exaggerate!!

On whole world and in all history, there exist almost no court cases about
meteorites.
And those few we have, were almost all between private parties, about who is
the owner or about simple theft.

And why do we have so few court decisions?
Because meteorites are so rare and because quite all involved are mature and
reasonable people living in reality, who come to agreements outside of any
court. And involved are in fact only a couple of individuals worldwide -
quite all the World give a fig for meteorites. It's a non-problem.
But those involved:
For all of them a new find of a meteorite is an exciting and joyful thing.

So I think, we all shouldn't be too much influenced by the very few persons,
who are not mature enough to welcome the great development meteoritics took,
and who are of destructive nature acting with egoistic motivations and
that's how these laws are made at all, by instigation of single individuals,
as easily can be proved by the historical sources -

because in the end, soberly checking the data it's evident, that they act
contrary to the common welfare and the interest of their nations.

Look Roman, although I feel sometimes so oooold, I'm not. But when I started
- all these laws issues were absolutely no topic at all, and I count myself
very lucky, to live exactly in these times!
Because that what we have seen in meteoritics during the last two decades
only,
it was all the centuries before beyond any imagination.
It's simply wonderful.

And if there are really a few, who take umbrage to that enormous boost of
earthly and planetary science by means of all these new finds made in the
cold and hot deserts,

sorry, can't express it else, then these are either no experts or sick in
brain.

Or is here anyone present on the list, who thinks, that the find of a
meteorite is a salacity?

Solution? You have to integrate these few fen fires. You have to teach them
about history, you have to explain to them, what intensions former meteorite
laws had. You have to show them the data, what had happened in countries,
where laws were introduced and especially in comparison with countries,
which stayed free.
The data speak a crystal-clear language.
Only like that, I guess, one can get them back to reason again and could
avert further damage from meteoritics and science in the affected countries.
Well, but if they refuse the communication - I wouldn't know, what to do. I
guess thenonly the way to the appropriate ministry would remain left. To
cause to become known there, what for disastrous results improper
legislation brought along in many countries and how that most efficient, but
cheapest form of space research and - if exists - the university structures
- are or will be without need abandoned.
Or - I mean, if it's possible that so unfunded articles are published in
such highly renown media like BBC, NYT, New Scientist ect. - one could bring
the facts, data, history there, well simply, how that science works and
always worked - and what was lost already and what will be lost, if such
kind of legislation will be applied.

But better would be a resocialization of the "protectionists".

I don't know. Why do we e.g. don't share that vision?:
One easily could make out of Australia a second Oman!
Immediately! Without no costs. And with the advantage, that other than in
Oman,
there are the old institutional collections still in place, in Big Sleep,
but they still exist, one has only to wipe the cobwebs away - and still some
rudiments of the former research and university structures still have
survived. And I think, it would be welcomed there. Read the bi-annual
reports of the Perth museum, they do want more meteorites.

All what it costs would be to put aside some petty personal vanities, the
cancellation of three (or how many they are) sentences of stone-old federal
laws and a really reliable and constant appliance of the heritage act.
Model: Canada.
And it would cost some afternoons of work - but seen the meteoritical output
in Australia, I guess the meteoricists in charge could spare that time for
that important task.

Well and soon one would have Aussie Martians, Lods, Acaps, Rs, HEDs, BRAs,
Lunars and tons of new OCs in the Bulletins and much of them sampled and
housed in the Aussie collections. Meteoritics would flourish again. New
posts at universities would be created, more funds would sputter - and who
knows, if you let the professional hunters in, perhaps we will have in
future there a kg-pairing of Calcalong in the museum and the old hatchet,
which anyway only the dodderers remember, could be buried once and for all.

Why we don't want that!?!
It's easy! And so endlessly more productive than to call names forth and
back and to lose over that sight of the great scheme to that extent that
laws are requested with aftermaths for meteoritics, which let Herostratus
look like a school boy.


Best!
Martin
   
 

-----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht-----
Von: meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com
[mailto:meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com] Im Auftrag von Roman
Jirasek
Gesendet: Sonntag, 10. April 2011 03:41
An: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
Betreff: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite hunting (LAWS) by Country

Hi Greg & James

Just got around to reading your posts.

Too bad no one wants to talk about this further, as we all need to know this

stuff.
James makes some good points, obviously there is no easy answer to this
problem.

And it seems like there is no one tackling this huge project.
Not only do the written laws of many countries need to be addressed, but the

actual knowledge on
how to properly incorporate them on your visit to these different cultures.

I can see more trouble in the future if this keeps getting ignored.

Cheers,
Roman Jirasek


-----------------------------------------------------------
From: James Beauchamp falcon99 at sbcglobal.net
Subject: [meteorite-list] Meteorite hunting (LAWS) by Country
To: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
Date: Wed Apr 6 14:53:25 EDT 2011

Hi all,

I'm totally a newby on this particular list - and am a very new person to
the study of meteorites, and of course finding them. So please understand
that if anyone doesn't have a dog in the hunting debate, it's me.

However, I do want to make a comment regarding the international
discussions. Mike, you definitely have a dog in the legal discussion. You've

lived it. I'm glad you made it home OK.

Over the past 15 years, I've spent a considerable amount of military time in

the middle east. 5 tours worth, including three combat ones. Many of those
were working directly with government leaders of multiple levels, of at
least 6 different nations and many more tribal backgrounds - Kurdish, to
Bedouin, Sunni to Iraqi Christian and so on.

We "westerners" tend to make some serious mistakes regarding interpretations

of laws and customs. We are programmed by our culture to concentrate on the
letters of the law, procedures and fine print, and discount the more human
factors involved.

This is not how most middle eastern countries work. It is a well proven fact

that there are many levels of "citizenry" in soutwest asia, with wide
variations therein. One of the first things I learned in Saudi Arabia is
that you are always at the mercy of your sponsor (or sponsor organization),
and for every level of removal from the cultural rule of law you are, you
must compensate accordingly with deliberate diligence to stay out of even
the hint of trouble. In Saudi Arabia, I was obviously not a citizen, not
Muslim, not directly contracted by an industrial sponsor, and did not have
an established personal relationship with relevant government officials.
Many of our military members were arrested and detained for infractions a
Saudi citizen would have been given nothing more than a verbal warning. A
minor fine to a Saudi citizen could be a prison sentence for you. You MUST
be careful.

Be very careful in statements like "the law does not specifically state
meteorites". That's a very western point of view that can get you into
trouble. Regardless of what the law states in writing, the interpretation by

judges will wildly vary. The definition of artifact is whatever they define
it as. That could be a rock, arrow, meteorite, or teacup.

My experience in Saudi was very good. I took the time to understand, accept,

and appreciate the culture, and it fostered some wonderful friendships. But
I also made serious effort to avoid trouble.

Some countries are more liberal than others (Jordan Vs. Saudi, UAE Vs.
Qatar), but be careful and be informed.

Just saying that you need to fully understand the laws, customs, and
cultural rules before leaping into assumptions - especially when you intend
to leave with more than you came with.

James



--- On Wed, 4/6/11, Thunder Stone <stanleygregr at hotmail.com> wrote:


> From: Thunder Stone <stanleygregr at hotmail.com>

> Subject: [meteorite-list] Meteorite hunting (LAWS) by Country

> To: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com

> Date: Wednesday, April 6, 2011, 12:16 PM

>

> List:

> This got me thinking:

> Is there any documented source (that's reliable and up to

> date) regarding the official laws for meteorite

> hunting, collecting, and selling for each country? I

> have read a lot of views on this matter on the list and

> elsewhere, and it seems so silly not to have the correct

> information available somewhere. It would be very helpful

> for meteorite collectors to have this information available

> and documented in one place; perhaps in a publication

> somewhere. Knowing which countries require permits and

> how to obtain them... etc.

> Much Thanks,

> Greg S.

>

>

>

> ______________________________________________

> Visit the Archives at
> http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html

> Meteorite-list mailing list

> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com

> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

>

Previous message: [meteorite-list] Meteorite hunting (LAWS) by Country
Next message: [meteorite-list] Chicxulub Impact Crater focus for ocean
drilling plans
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Meteorite-list mailing list

______________________________________________
Visit the Archives at
http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Received on Sun 10 Apr 2011 08:47:48 AM PDT