Author Topic: Cave Bear Teeth  (Read 2299 times)

Offline Pipster

  • stalker
  • ***
  • Posts: 294
  • OCC
Cave Bear Teeth
« on: January 31, 2007, 12:57:09 pm »
I was recently in Thailand where I spent three days volunteering in an elephant sanctuary - where I met a guy from Germany who collects teeth from now extinct species. Among his collection he has several Cave Bear teeth which have been retrieved from caves in Romania. Now its not my cup of tea, but his knowledge of teeth was unbelievable; I'd never realised just how much science was involved.

cave bear: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cave_Bear
cave bear teeth: http://www.arizonaskiesmeteorites.com/AZ_Skies_Links/Cave_Bear/index.html

I realise this is different to the collection and sales of stal [also debatable!], but my question is, what do people think about the collection and sales of Cave Bear Teeth? Removal for scientific studies I agree with. But should they be removed from caves for profit? Any comments anyone?

::PIPSTER::

Offline Peter Burgess

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 9118
  • Left ukcaving by this name
Re: Cave Bear Teeth
« Reply #1 on: January 31, 2007, 01:04:24 pm »
Interesting. People buy and sell fossil specimens, and on the whole I don't have a huge problem with that, provided important geological sites aren't being vandalised - specimens from quarries or from the beach are fair game, aren't they? But where is the line drawn between fossils, and relics of extinct animals found in an archaeological context? I'm sure bones and teeth taken out of caves to be sold is not a good idea, if our understanding of that cave is thereby reduced as a result. Personally, I derive satisfaction from finding things by my own efforts, rather than obtaining them because I can afford to buy them.


Dep

  • Guest
Re: Cave Bear Teeth
« Reply #2 on: January 31, 2007, 01:57:33 pm »
Interesting. People buy and sell fossil specimens, and on the whole I don't have a huge problem with that, provided important geological sites aren't being vandalised - specimens from quarries or from the beach are fair game, aren't they? But where is the line drawn between fossils, and relics of extinct animals found in an archaeological context? I'm sure bones and teeth taken out of caves to be sold is not a good idea, if our understanding of that cave is thereby reduced as a result. Personally, I derive satisfaction from finding things by my own efforts, rather than obtaining them because I can afford to buy them.



ditto

Offline Elaine

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 2213
  • Axbridge Caving Group
Re: Cave Bear Teeth
« Reply #3 on: January 31, 2007, 03:16:41 pm »
Yes, I suppose the argument is that cliff faces (albeit it coastal or quarry) are unprotected from the elements, and any fossils therein are not going to last very much longer. It is a different thing for caves. But, where indeed do you draw the line?
I agree with you Peter. Where is the satisfaction in owning something you bought when money can buy pretty much anything (except love according to The Beatles).

 
Wot tiny writing!

Offline AndyF

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 2893
    • http://www.keyhole.org.uk
Re: Cave Bear Teeth
« Reply #4 on: January 31, 2007, 04:49:22 pm »
I went in a cave in the Jura, and it had literally hundreds of claws and teeth scattered in the silt in the streamway. These would work their way down into the sumps and disappear forever. In such a case I can't see an issue with removal if there is some study associated with it.

I draw a distinction between that and hammering off fixed stall etc.
"Life's a pitch, then you fall down one..."

 

Main Menu

Forum Home Help Search