Dear All,

Thanks for the numerous (and sometimes humorous) messages on the
nomenclature of conchologists. I seem to have struck a nerve. Before
proceeding, let me explain that I have no interest in ranking collectors
into categories such as "beginner" and "advanced". "Shell collector" can
include professionals (paid conchologists) and amateurs (unpaid
conchologists, those who do it for the love of it: from the French word for
"lover"), so it won't do as a generic term for amateur collectors.

In fact, I wasn't thinking primarily of shell collectors, but of any
collectors who do it for the love of it. Shells, fossils, bugs, artefacts,
you name it.

So if I'm coming from an egalitarian viewpoint, why am I asking for words to
distinguish the Paid from the Unpaid, the Public from the Private? Because
it's a big issue in paleontology now. There are debates, for instance, over
whether serious researchers (i.e., those who publish articles in
peer-reviewed journals) should use data from private collections, or even
look at them. Some people fear that the original specimens will become
untraceable when they are traded, lost, or sold. Others say it's
unscientific to ignore data. And so on.

Paleontology is receiving a smaller share of the funding pie than before,
and older paleontologists are not being continuously replaced by younger
paleontologists, despite increased public interest in fossils. There is
great danger that knowledge will be lost as "professional" paleontologists
die without passing their techniques, collecting sites, etc. on to others.
Conversely, the role of the private collector has greatly increased; we see
more "amateurs" like Chris Garvie publishing work of "professional" quality
and also more trained young "professionals" who never find paid work in
paleontology due to lack of demand. And the Web makes it possible for anyone
to publish work whether it jumps through the hoop of peer review or not. The
distinction between "amateur" and "professional" is becoming impossibly
blurred, and I'd like to point this out at a geologic meeting in a couple of
years. But I need a vocabulary to do it, and I'd prefer to offend only a
minimum of the "advanced collectors" in the audience while talking about
their work! So I think I'll try "private collector" in private conversation
and see how that works.

As to registration (or certification) of collectors, as Sam Tuttle
suggested, that is an interesting idea that has already been put into
practice by the Geological Survey of Utah and the Denver Museum of Natural
History. These institutions have well-organized programs for enticing
private collectors to help build up public collections of fossil bones.
Private individuals are trained by the museum to collect these rare items
responsibly. Once certified, they train and direct others. The museum
provides expertise, tools, permits, and fossil sites. Because fossil bones
are rare and exciting, it is especially important to use these limited
resources without waste, so that is why we see this sort of organized
activity developing in this field first. But museums may be able to organize
such programs in other fields as well.

Thanks again for the ideas.

Andrew K. Rindsberg
Geological Survey of Alabama