US Paleontologists Call For a Worldwide Halt To the Sale of Vertebrate Dinosaur Fossils (theguardian.com)

Leading US paleontologists are calling for a worldwide halt to the sale of vertebrate dinosaur fossils. The booming market for specimens, driven by their popularity with wealthy private collectors, including Hollywood stars, is pushing up prices and putting them out of reach of museums and scientists, they say. From a report: While the art market is organized around brand-name artists, dinosaur sales are all about celebrity species, with a tyrannosaurus rex skeleton fetching up to $10m, although the velociraptor is the most prized. The price tag for a triceratops's skull is $170,000 to $400,000, and a diplodocus is $570,000 to $1.1m. Last year a complete egg of an aepyornis maximus, otherwise known as an elephant bird, sold for $130,000 -- roughly five times what it would have gone for a decade earlier.

Last year the US Society of Vertebrate Palaeontology (SVP) called on the Parisian auction house Aguttes to cancel a sale inside the Eiffel tower that contained just one lot: a 29-foot-long dinosaur of a yet-to-be identified species. The winning bidder paid $2.3m for the piece. Executive members of the society drew attention to the claim that the winning bidder could name the species, calling that assertion "misleading because the naming of new species is governed by the rules of the International Code of Nomenclature." "The sale of all fossils is inappropriate," says Catherine Badgley, former president of the SVP, which represents more than 2,200 international palaeontologists. "Many, particularly vertebrate fossils, are rarely common, and it's certainly not the case for dinosaurs. The commodification is in principle inappropriate because it motivates unscrupulous people."

Comments

Work WITH collectors, not against them

[Echoez]

It seems to me that bringing in vast dollar amounts for collecting fossils should be a good thing for paleontology. More money should mean more resources to dig them up, increasing the overall supply of fossils available to humans to study.

Rich folks are incented to protect their new (expensive) investments. Rich folks might want to donate them to museums for display in exchange for having their name next to the display. Sufficiently rich folks might want to create their own research center for paleontologists to work in exchange for recognition and as a status symbol.

I'm just spitballing, but the above comments from paleontologists sound a bit like whining: If no one cared about dinosaurs, rich folks wouldn't collect them AND no one would care about paleontology.

Re: Work WITH collectors, not against them

[Anonymous Coward]

Fantasy. Rich people want to own rare items for themselves, not on display. Private digs prevent proper time for study, identification and even proper removal practices. Worse, without the context of the nearby rocks, revelant knowledge about the ecosystem is made impossible.

Re: Work WITH collectors, not against them

[ranton]

Fantasy. Rich people want to own rare items for themselves, not on display. Private digs prevent proper time for study, identification and even proper removal practices. Worse, without the context of the nearby rocks, revelant knowledge about the ecosystem is made impossible.

I doubt museums are primarily interested in these fossils for display; they want them for research purposes. If there was more collaboration then perhaps more paleontologists would be informed early enough in the dig process to gather the relevant information from the dig site. Or be involved in the dig in the first place.

Re:Work WITH collectors, not against them

[Ol Olsoc]

Rich folks are incented to protect their new (expensive) investments. Rich folks might want to donate them to museums for display in exchange for having their name next to the display.

After Mr or Ms Wealthypants passes on, or earlier even, the dino is almost certain to be given or permanently loaned to a museum somewhere.

In the meantime, new species are still being "discovered" in the warehouses stocked with fossils dug up by Edward Drinker Cope and Othniel Charles Marsh in the 1800's, like Tylosaurus kansasensis.

I'd suggest patience to the scientists. Dino has been sitting atound for millions of years, a few more decades won't matter too much.

Re:Work WITH collectors, not against them

[gtall]

Stop spitballing. Paleontology requires that fossils have their surrounding strata scientifically evaluated. The fossil also needs to be very carefully extracted so as not to damage it. Jethro going into them thar hills with a pick axe, hammer, and chisel is probably not going to end well for the fossil. Even Jed and Granny wouldn't be that stupid. Elie has better things to do.

Re: Work WITH collectors, not against them

[Spamalope]

Yep. You could meet the stated goal by requiring that digs allow paleontologists to extract the fossils, record and study the material surrounding the fossil and measure/study the fossil after removal. All limited to reasonable time spans.

i.e. Require allowing access by paleontologists at their expense provided that they work with reasonable speed (don't slow walk the process deliberately, or starve it for workers). The trade off being the paleontologists do the extraction promptly in exchange for study access. Once the fossils have been studied their scientific value has been extracted. (presumably important examples would be 3d scanned so the originals aren't needed for future comparisons) Time limit the process so that the private owners aren't unduly deprived of the fossils. That way the private owner gets free quality preparation of the fossils in exchange for a reasonable delay so that there isn't incentive to avoid the process.

Aren't Paleontologists Selling Them

[ranton]

If Paleontologists cannot even govern members of their own profession, what hope do they have convincing a far larger audience to stop selling and buying dinosaur bones? How many non-Paleontologists are finding and extracting dinosaur bones for private sale?

Museums aren't much better

[dbialac]

Never mind that many of these fossils sit in the archives of a museum lost and forgotten for years. Perhaps a better route is to give a paleontologist an opportunity to look at it first, then pass it on to the private market.

Re:Museums aren't much better

[kbonin]

This. Over 99% of all fossils are piled in boxes in storage rooms at universities and museums. Be nice if there was a way for scientists and collectors to coexist peacefully. Hoarding a cool skeleton in a mansion somewhere is less valuable than a museum display, but hiding it in boxes in a warehouse only accessible to one or two departments isn't much better.

Re:Museums aren't much better

[drinkypoo]

Never mind that many of these fossils sit in the archives of a museum lost and forgotten for years.

If they're sitting there, then they can be dug up (so to speak) later and research done on them. If they're in private collections, this is much harder, and they're more likely to be destroyed or damaged.

Re:Museums aren't much better

[Calydor]

I heard recently that one of the biggest museums in my country have serious problems with storage of art pieces not currently on display, to the point that valuable paintings are literally ROTTING UP in the basement.

A private collector who just bought a rarity for over a million dollars is very likely going to take GOOD CARE of his rarity.

Re:Museums aren't much better

[physicsphairy]

About 20 million artifacts were destroyed just this past September when the National Museum of Brazil went up in flames. I expect even more have been decimated in the museums and historical displays targeted by ISIS. Unless it's a nuclear bunker, collecting everything you want to save in a single spot is not necessarily a great idea for preserving it all. Not to mention that, in general, museums have to deal with a lot of theft and vandalism. Many hugely significant artifacts have simply disappeared. Maybe just because of bad bookkeeping, maybe something more nefarious.

Packing artifacts in creates might be better than handing them out as souvenirs to passing tourists, but I don't think it's better than letting people who can afford state-of-the-art security and fire suppressant systems make them their prized possessions. The real risk to these artifacts is being insufficiently valued by society in general. That's when they will be disposed, put in insufficiently safe storage (government funded or not), or even ground up to make "medicine." Historical artifacts selling for millions may not match with the socially enlightened future imagined by Star Trek, but it's an awful lot better than many more likely alternatives.

They can keep the fossils

[Khyber]

I just want the gemified/agatized bone. That shit is awesome looking when cut and polished.

How to stop dinosaur poachers

[fustakrakich]

Let's just put them on the endangered species list.

Re:We Need Less Billionaires

[GLMDesigns]

There is something worse than the concentration of capital - it's the concentration of political power.

Re:This is proposed periodically.

[Oligonicella]

And this:

The commodification is in principle inappropriate because it motivates unscrupulous people.

is particularly ironic. Paleontologists are themselves pretty unscrupulous people.

Data Point:

[ElizabethGreene]

I found it fascinating to learn that there are more, nearly an order of magnitude more, un-processed vertebrate fossils sitting wrapped in plaster and straw in wooden crates than there are cleaned and in the hands of collectors and museums.

Instead of choking the trade in these and driving it underground wouldn't it make more sense to work on the supply side issues?

No disrespect, but paleontologists are cheap. $200k for a skull will pay for a whole lot of science.

Top . . . men

[Latent Heat]

They have top men researching these fossils.

Who?

Top . . . men.