October 31, 2001

ALERT - Baucus Lives

Once again, your letters are urgently needed. A new bill reminiscent of the old Baucus bill has been introduced as HR 2974 by Congressman James P. McGovern (D - 3rd District MA).

I personally find a number of things objectionable in the bill as introduced. Firstly, it perpetuates a lie. Section 2 entitled "Findings" states: "(10) Some paleontological resources, including all vertebrate fossils, are rare and should only be collected under permit." My own personal experience in fossil collecting, although limited, belies that statement. As a teenager I collected bone fragments of Pleistocene mammals and Eocene shark teeth and an Arkansas, more recently, I have led youth groups along the shores of the Potomac collecting fossil whale bone and shark teeth. While all of the fossils I collected at these two sites are vertebrate, none would justify the expenditure of federal dollars for their curation. The most in-depth study to date on the subject of fossil collecting on public lands, undertaken by the National Research Counsel with public funding, resulted in the 1987 report "Paleontological Collecting" and is in agreement with the views expressed here. At page 18 the report stated "Finding another Pleistocene bison bone in Idaho or another Carboniferous fern leaf in Illinois adds little to paleontologic knowledge."

In any debate, the party who best frames the issue wins. At public hearings where the issue has been aired, spokespersons for the Society of Vertebrate Paleontologists (SVP) invariably attempt to frame the issue in terms of a more or less complete articulated dinosaur skeleton in situ. However, discovery of such an articulated skeleton is definitely not a typical collecting experience and, indeed, is a rarity. Such fossils can be better protected by regulations specific to sites where such fossils are known to occur, rather than lumping them with common sharks teeth and fragments of bones of Pleistocene mammals.

I have enjoyed watching youngsters pick up whale bone from the shores of the Potomac, treasure it, carry it to their school for show and tell, and experience an awakening of intellectual curiosity. If not picked up and treasured, these fossils disintegrate shortly after their exposure by erosion. At various sites along the Potomac shore, one can watch as wave action actively disintegrates the whale bone. The shores of the Potomac do not represent the only environment in which fossil bone disintegrates shortly after exposure. In his book "Tyrannosaurus Sue" Steve Fiffer quotes Sue Hendrickson regarding her discovery of the fossil Sue: "But I was thinking, Wow! It was so cool that the vertebrae were going mostly into the hill so it looked like the potential for more. Usually you find the last little bit of bone and there's nothing more [because it has eroded]." Fiffer also describes the stabilization of exposed dinosaur bone with glue prior to removal of the bone from its resting place. HR 2974 would make the vast expanse of public land a hunting preserve for a privileged few at the expense of permanent loss of most fossils to erosion.

My second objection to the bill has to do with the rather draconian penalties that would be imposed upon an individual for a violation of the act. "If the sum of the scientific or fair market value of the paleontological resources involved and the cost of restoration and repair of such resources exceeds the sum of $1000.00 this person shall, upon conviction, be guilty of a Class E felony." [My emphasis.] The bill would further provide for forfeiture of "all vehicles and equipment of any person that were used in connection with the violation." In view of the fact that each Land Manager would be empowered to close any area under their jurisdiction to the collection of all fossils, including invertebrates, an individual, with no knowledge as to whether or not a given area is so protected, would be prudent to avoid fossil collecting altogether. The net effect of the bill, should it become law, would be to cast a chill over fossil collecting in general, the direct opposite of the recommendations of the National Research Counsel in the aforementioned 1987 report entitled "Paleontological Collecting", which concluded:

"In general, the science of paleontology is best served by unimpeded access to fossils and fossil-bearing rocks in the field." and "The science of paleontology will be advanced by eliminating much of the unnecessary complexity of the present (and proposed) regulation of fossil collecting on public lands."

The Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP) dissented from that report and is still dissenting. Its most recent and vocal dissent being represented by this bill - HR 2974.

A third objection to the bill is that, while section 9(d) makes an exception for possession of a "paleontologic resource" (there's that word "resource"*) which dates from a time prior to enactment, it is less than clear as to where the burden of proof would lie in any attempt to invoke that exception as a defense.

The prohibition against "false labeling" found in section 9(b) is also objectionable (and laughable). It provides:

A person may not make or submit any false record, account, or label for or any false identification of, any paleontological resource excavated or removed from federal lands.

With regard to an almost identical "false labeling" provision in the 1994 Baucus Bill, in this column published in the May 1994 AFMS Newsletter I wrote:

"Pity the poor collector or curator, amateur or professional, who mistakes a Psittacosaurus bone for a Chasmosaurus bone. If the bone came from federal lands, the unfortunate misfeasor would be a criminal. Three wrong labels and you're out? Those with poor eyesight would be well advised to try a different hobby or profession. The bill in its present form has the potential to decimate the already thin ranks of vertebrate paleontologists."

My final objection relates to the prohibition against resale, even of fossils the amateur is allowed to collect without permit. What other collector can legally own items which cannot be sold? Why should fossils be different from minerals, gold nuggets, coins, etc. found on public lands? The amateur fossil collector should be free to dispose of his collection through the same channels and in the same manner in which other collectibles, including items legally collected from Federal lands, are marketed.

Paleontology is referred to as a "gateway science" because it is often the first hands on experience one has with any science. It was for me. Thomas Jefferson was an amateur paleontologist and had fossils collected from public lands on display in his home. This country needs more citizens with Jefferson's intellectual curiosity, not less. Unfortunately, the net effect of HR 2974 would be detrimental to the growth and development of scientific curiosity.
______________________________________

*At page 16 the 1987 report "Paleontological Collecting" stated "Fossils specimens cannot be called a "resource" in the usual sense of the word. Unlike some mineral resources, the supply of specimens of most fossils species is effectively inexhaustible."

George Loud
Chair, Conservation Legislation Committee
American Federation of Mineralogical Suppliers
LaRusso and Loud Attorneys at Law
3137 Mount Vernon Avenue
Alexandria, VA 22305

 - Fossil Facts FAQs - Answers to many of the frequently asked questions.

 - Law and Policy - A description of policy regarding collecting on 'public' lands.

 - Download Page - Downloadable material concerning collecting on 'public' lands.