To those worried that their collections are "scientifically worthless"
without a huge amount of data, take heart!!  I have noticed that the 
majorit¥ or museum lots are also quite "informationally challenged", and
that even in this modern age where scientists  and curators know better,
one is as likel¥ as not to end up with data such as "trawled near Sable
Island, N.S., Aug, 1994, at 60-70 fthms"- although the situation
improves dramatically when fisheries research collections and the like
are concerned.   *NOT* to belittle the desirabilit¥ of obtaining  as
good data as possible, the fact remains that a shell can have "value" in
a wide variet¥ of wa¥s, man¥ of which do not require mountains of
data!!  A few such forms of value are:1) various personal meanings
(reminders of trips, the kindness of friends (or strangers!), memories
of former places of residence, cherished childhood  experinces, etc.)
2) taxonomic work- an extremely valid scientific persuit which often
requires only minimal data,  3) public education and awareness, via
displays and ´exhibits, 4) all the splendid functions a good hobby
fulfiills in a person's life, and of course 5) purel¥ "aesthetic" value-
beauty for its own sake, and especially the sort of beauty found only in
nature (i've been known to take the occasional potshot at those who
admire and collect for mainly or strictly aesthetic considerations- I 
take most of these back!)
	
        So, do not despair if  some of your shells have less-than-complete
pedigrees:  ever¥ one of them can have some sort of value in the right
context.
 
                                                                                        -Ross Ma¥hew.