To all who commented on my previous message,
 
I am sorry not to have replied more promptly, but our computer went
down and we have only just come back on line.  There were 164
messages piled up, a number of which pertained to my comments on
shell purchasers.
 
I did not say, or even mean to imply, that persons who build their
collections by the purchase of specimens from dealers drive rare
species to extinction while those who collect their own specimens do
not.  I doubt that any kind of shell collecting is a prime factor in
species loss when compared to the kinds of habitat destruction
occurring in marine, freshwater and terrestrial environments.  What
I said was that those who purchase shells are buffered from the
details of the actual collecting and exportation and show little
concern for the way these are accomplished.
 
To clarify my previous comments, I will describe the situation in
Ecuador,  the kind of small, tropical, developing country in which
exotic mollusk species are found.   Anyone who has purchased
Ecuadorian specimens  in recent years will probably think that these
were legally collected and exported.  But this is not necessarily
so; in fact, it is almost certain that they were illegally collected
and exported especially if they came from the Galapagos Islands.
 
In Ecuador, only scientific collecting permits are available (for
shells and other fauna and flora).  There are no permits for amateur
collectors.  Commercial permits are theoretically required for those
engaged in harvesting edible mollusk species (chiefly Anadara) but,
in fact, the artisanal fishermen engaged in this work do not really
have permits and the law is not enforced.   A scientific collecting
permit costs $300 and a good deal of red tape.  With a valid
collecting permit, one may apply for an export permit for scientific
specimens; each shipment requires a separate permit which costs $200.
One cannot use a scientific permit to export shells for commercial
purposes.
 
These laws are difficult to enforce and, indeed, there are many ways
around them including smuggling, bribery, or simply bypassing the
agency charged with protection of natural resources and getting an
export permit from the Commerce Ministry for some sort of "finished
product."  How many shells may leave Ecuador in these ways, I could
not say.  However, it is certain that millions of dollars worth of
sea cucumbers are illegally harvested and exported from the Galapagos
Marine Reserve every year.  The government simply does not have the
capacity (and, let's face it, the will) to enforce the law. This is
especially so when the collectors are artisanal fishermen who are
considered poor people not required to strictly follow the laws.
Middlemen and other wealthy persons simply bribe their way around
the laws.
 
The Ecuadorian laws strike me as unreasonably strict and, since they
are largely unenforced, completely ineffective in protecting the
country's wildlife.  The intent is to prevent anyone, especially
foreigners, from exploiting Ecuadorian wildlife for a profit.  For
example, my own permit allows me to take photos but not videos, on
the theory that a colorful wildlife video could be sold.  A special
permit is required for videos.  While the intent is to control
profiteers (especially those who might take "genetic resources"),
the real result is that the government comes down hard only on those
who cannot risk running afoul of the law - namely, scientific
collectors.
 
I doubt that Ecuador is unique in the kinds of laws that regulate the
collecting and exportation of animal and plant species (though the
restrictions here are extreme).  All countries want some control
over their natural resources and some way to extract money from
exporters.  And I don't think it is unique in the problems it has
enforcing its laws; there's a lot of corruption around and it's not
all in Salt Lake City.  Do you believe, for example, that 1000
shells, worth from $10-100,000 and obtained from Russian fishing
trawlers working South African waters, really flowed through
legal channels?  Not likely.  And we are told that the fishermen like
that extra profit so they'll probably be going back to the same area
for more.
 
Should shell collectors out there in the real world be concerned
about the circumstances in which shells are gathered in places like
Ecuador?  I think so, even though the final purchaser is several
steps removed from the actual collecting.   In the first place, the
fees for collecting and export permits are part of the budget of the
under-financed agency charged with protection of the flora and fauna.
Should fishermen, middlemen, dealers, and ultimately shell
collectors not pay something for the protection of the marine
environment?  If shell dealers are willing to purchase from local
operators who slip through the cracks in the law then marine
protection is not being supported and the burden falls exclusively on
not-for-profit scientific collectors who cannot escape the law.  If,
as in Ecuador, the law does not permit commercial export, then
dealers will have to go elsewhere.  Secondly, if shell dealers work
only with licensed shell fishermen, then local governments have some
chance of regulating the species harvested, the methods used, and the
places where this activity is permitted because they can keep track
of those who do operate with valid permits.  Finally, shells in
private collections which may eventually find their way to a museum
collection should be supported by evidence that they were legally
collected and exported.  There are many people who are attempting to
force the repatriation of museum specimens that, in earlier times,
may have been collected and removed from their home country in
some irregular way.  Museums have the obligation to show that at
least their recent accessions were honestly acquired.
 
 
kate
~        ~         ~         ~
Howard L. Clark or Kate Clark /
[log in to unmask]  /
tel. (593-2) 224897 or 541215 /
cellular tel. (593-9) 496593  /
P.O. Box 17-12-379, Quito, Ecuador
~        ~           ~           ~