CONCH-L Archives

Conchologists List

CONCH-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Tom Eichhorst <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Conchologists of America List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 24 Jan 1999 10:40:35 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (43 lines)
Marlo,
 
Use overstatement much??
 
I should probably stay way out of this and let Lynn have a go but I
wanted to make just a couple of points without picking apart your
statements and blowing them up a bit out of context.  First Helmut's
answer is right on.  It all comes down to the environment.  I think it
is naive to think any government will pass laws affecting the "low
hanging fruit" (us shell collectors) and then continue with
environmental policies that prevent development, urbanization, sewage,
or any other big money aspects of human existence from destroying these
same environments.  Get real!
 
Sadly, I agree we may indeed see the end of shell collecting.  I also
admit to excesses committed in this hobby (and here I include craft
shells but I do not exclude specimen shell collecting).  A positive
approach to this would be regulations and collecting limits.  Let me
repeat, a POSITIVE approach.  What I see proposed instead are collecting
bans and they will solve nothing.  No, the frantic, loud, concerned
folks will look good, spout off against collecting, pass a law and then
allow the new development or the city sewage to eventually destroy the
environment.  And as for the museum/zoo experience passing somehow for
actually investigating nature, grubbing in the mud discovering a
beautifully shaped angel wing shell, or bringing home a scallop -- I
don't think so.  The more we are removed from contact with nature, the
more we separate ourselves, the easier it is to bulldoze it under in the
name of progress, human need, development, etc.  This is the real
pressure and by pointing a finger at shell collecting your are only
muddying the issue at best and ignoring the real culprits (who unlike
shell collectors are tough to identify) who continue to eat away at what
you say you want to preserve.  Shelling bans are the easy course of
action, shouldn't that spark a note of caution?  According to Kate,
Ecuador has just such bans and they haven't and they won't stop the
insidious environmental damage caused by population growth and
development.  A ban on collecting shells makes a few misguided folks
feel really good.  A short sighted, short term answer tied with a pretty
bow that allows the silt to continue covering coral heads or sewage
driven algae blooms to kill off entire areas, etc.  But by gosh, we sure
stopped those evil shell collectors.  It is all a bit sad.
 
Tom Eichhorst in New Mexico, USA

ATOM RSS1 RSS2